That’s how we like to think of ourselves, isn’t it? Wonderful Canada, a towering bastion of the Championing Of Human Rights® and a shining example for the other nations of the world. Gives us all a warm, fuzzy, self-satisfied kind of feeling, doesn’t it? We just love to think of ourselves and being the ones to whom others look to for guidance; that we set a great example for others to follow.
Well, it turns out that we’re setting an example, all right; just not in the way that we’d like to think we are. It seems that there’s a lot of talk across dinner tables in the Cayman Islands about us. It seems some bunch down there calling themselves that “People’s Progressive Movement” (always beware of any cadre with the word “progressive” in their name) is proposing some changes to their constitution and, just the way we like it, plenty of people in the Islands are pointing to our example.
The problem is, they’re pointing to us as an example of what NOT to do (emphasis and commentary are mine, of course)…
More than a dozen members of Cayman’s clergy attended a meeting organised by the United Democratic Party concerning the constitutional changes proposed by the People’s Progressive Movement.
Of particular concern to the clergy in the proposed changes is having a Bill of Rights enshrined in the new Constitution and the constitutional establishment of a Human Rights Commission. […]
Mr. Glidden said there were two ways Cayman could codify the UN Conventions on Human Rights; either through local legislation or by enshrining a Bill of Rights in the new Constitution. He pointed out that the Constitution would be much more difficult to change if the people of the Cayman Islands ever decided they wanted to change some aspect of the Bill of Rights.
Reverend Nicholas Sykes spoke about his concerns about the formation of a Human Rights Commission, the provision for which is proposed by the PPM to be included in the new constitution.
Mr. Sykes said the proposed Bill of Rights and its related quasi–legal structures “are likely to affect us at the deepest levels of our lives†[you have NO idea how much, Nick -D].
Referring to page 13 of the PPM’s Explanatory Notes to the Summary of Proposals with regard to the constitution changes, Mr, Sykes noted document states the new Human Rights Commission would, in addition to seeking to ensure that human rights are respected, “also help individuals with credible complaints about breaches of human rights by mediating those disputes or, if necessary, help them bring their complaints to the courts or other appropriate bodies [sound familiar? -D].â€
Mr. Sykes drew attention to the “other appropriate bodies†part of the statement and said he would give examples of the workings of other appropriate bodies and particular Human Rights Commission elsewhere in the western world.
“I can assure you that justice in the eyes of these newly–conceived bodies has been quite unlike the justice to which we are accustomed,†he said. “I suspect, though we are not told, that chief among the other appropriate bodies being referred to in the [Explanatory] Notes would be an arm of the new Human Rights Commission itself. That is the way it works elsewhere.â€
In addition to calling the stated proposed purpose of the Human Rights Commission – “to ensure that human rights are being respectedâ€â€“ a utopian measure that seeks to conform to international treaties and to the Bill of Rights, Mr. Sykes said the system would be one–sided.
“The function of the commission and any related appropriate bodies is to assist the complainant, to assist the bringing of complaints, to help individuals with credible complaints about breaches of human rights,†he said. “What about the other side of the issue? The literature given to us does not dignify the one being complained against with a description. Let me call him the defendant. All the assistance goes to the complainant, but where is the assistance given to the defendant?
“The system is one–sided, and in this matter alone, is offensive to a reasonable person’s sense of justice.†[…]
“Personally, I would go further and say that the social experiment in human rights that Britain and the European countries have engaged in has been an unparalleled disaster for them.â€
Mr. Sykes detailed several cases taken on by the Canadian Human Rights Commissions.
“In [Human Rights Commission] the defendant’s right to due process is withdrawn. They reach judgments on the basis of no fixed law and by simply agreeing to hear a case, they tie up the defendant in bureaucracy and paperwork, and bleed him for the cost of lawyers, while the person who brings the complaint, however frivolous, stands to lose nothing.†[pretty much sums it up, doesn’t it? -D]
Mr. Sykes said over half all of the Canadian Human Rights Commissions “hate crime†cases have been brought by one person who was a former employee of the Canadian Human Rights Commission. […]
“This is the sort of madness you’ll face in Cayman if [the Bill of Rights] comes,†he said. […]
Mr. Ebanks warned that many of the judges and other who would interpret a Bill of Rights in Cayman would be coming from countries like Canada and the United Kingdom, where post–modern thinking is widely accepted.
So there you have it. In a nutshell: “After the unholy mess that these Miniluvs have made of people’s rights in Canada and elsewhere, you want to bring them here?!? Are you mad!?!”
The worst part of all this is, that they’re absolutely right. These Leftist bureaucratic abominations have done more to run roughshod over people’s rights than anything else in free western history that I can think of. I, for one, am more than a little embarrassed to find that another free state within the Commonwealth is finding themselves looking to us, not as an example of the heights to which they may aspire, but rather the depths to which they can sink. Caymanians would be wise indeed to pay close heed to the words of warning of at least one Canadian, who wrote in a recent letter to the editors of the Cayman Compass:
Speaking as a Canadian, I would strongly urge all your readers to pay heed to Mr. Sykes and avoid any notion of a bill of rights like the plague.
Twenty–five years of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms has done nothing but diminish the freedom of Canadians to speak their mind and associate with whom they wish, and turn what were once the assumed rights of Englishmen into privileges to be decided by ever more intrusive government meddlers.
The recent Internet videos showing the ordeal of Ezra Levant before one of our provincial Human Rights Commissions has made a laughingstock of Canada; Mr. Calder is entirely correct in describing it as madness.
I don’t know if anyone from the Cayman Islands ever comes by here or not but if they do, I cannot suggest strongly enough that they heed the warnings of men like Messrs. Sykes and Ebanks. They clearly have your best interests at heart and even if they didn’t, their actions cannot but be of benefit to you in the long run.
Trust me on this one. I come from a land that has learned this bitter lesson the hard way.
Not a lot of time for shooting my mouth off right now, I’m afraid. Not that that’s likely to shut me up, of course. 😉
Just giving a heads-up to all who like to pop by every now and then that I’m finally getting off my lazy backside and upgrading the software that powers the site. Everybody knows that I damned well hate doing this (something always seems to go wrong in the biggest possible pain-in-the-ass way), but it really is time to get this done.
No, not 
