Comparing the Cayman Island’s Bill of Rights with ours

After being exposed to hurricanes Gustav, Hana and Ike we’re happy to be back home in southern CA. While my political participation was very limited over the past two weeks I did pick up a revised proposal for a referendum (Constitutional Modernisation) in the Cayman Islands that was to be held in July.
It is worth checking the differences in their thought process on citizen “rights”

The draft referendum begins with asking the question. Should the residents of the Cayman Islands request independence from Great Britain or remain an Overseas Territory of the UK which apparently is their desire.
They are suggesting that “the Constitution should include a “Bill of Rights” to protect their basic freedoms from interference by government.

“The Bill of Rights” will only apply vertically. In other words it will only bind government, governmental institutions and public officials–not private persons, businesses, churches or private schools. It will not affect relationships or dealings between private persons, businesses, churches or private schools.

It must be clear that the Bill of Rights will not affect our Christian traditions, in particular religious instruction in schools or prayers in schools or public places.

It must be clear that the Bill of Rights will not apply to controversial areas such as the recognition of sex change, gay marriage, or more liberal abortion laws.

Although freedom of religion is an essential part of the Bill of Rights, it must be clear that the government can still ban religious practices or preaching in the interests of public safety, public order, public health or public morality.

Everyone should have access to the courts, in order to challenge the decisions of Government, governmental institutions or public officials for violating their rights under the Bill of Rights, and the courts shall be able to strike down the decision. Legislation could also be challenged, but the courts shall have power only to declare that the Legislation offends the Bill of Rights. It would than be up to Parliament (see proposal 5) to decide whether and how to put things right.”

In the proposal they add: “These rights include the right to a fair trial; to privacy; to a family home; to marriage between a man and a woman; to property; to life; the right  to not be subject  to cruel or degrading punishment, or to slavery; the right of free association; free movement; free speech; freedom of conscience and religion; and the right not be discriminated against on the grounds of race, creed, colour or gender.”

On page 13 it reads: There is no suggestion that we adopt a US style separation between church and state. Therefore the Bill of Rights will specifically recognize our Christian tradition, the right of religious instruction, and the right of prayer in all schools and public places.

The Bill of Rights will not require recognition of sex change, marriage between same sex couples or more liberal abortion laws than we now have.

While this post is not related to the current presidential campaigns, it is worth seeing what others think in terms of our basic rights.  Especially as we share one common thread with the Cayman Islands. We are each children of the UK system.

About Larry Gilbert