Jamaica, a nation that gained its independence from Britain in 1962, has long debated whether to sever its remaining colonial ties by removing the British monarch, currently King Charles, as head of state. With a shifting public sentiment increasingly favoring the abolition of the monarchy, the Jamaican government, led by Prime Minister Andrew Holness, presented a bill late last year aimed at making that change. However, the bill has sparked significant controversy, particularly over the details of the proposal and the process by which a new head of state would be selected.
Jamaica, like 13 other former British colonies, has retained the British monarch as its ceremonial head of state even after achieving independence. The country’s constitution establishes a governor-general as the monarch’s representative, and while this role is largely ceremonial, it symbolizes the last vestiges of colonial rule. The bill introduced by Holness’ government seeks to replace the governor-general with a president, effectively ending King Charles’ role in Jamaica’s governance. However, the controversy over the bill has highlighted deep divisions within the country about how to best achieve full political and judicial independence from Britain.
Colonial Legacy and the Push for Full Independence
The drive to remove the monarchy is deeply tied to Jamaica’s history, particularly its legacy as a former slave colony. Hundreds of thousands of enslaved Africans were brought to the island during the transatlantic slave trade, and many scholars argue that the effects of slavery and colonialism continue to contribute to ongoing social and economic inequalities. For years, there have been growing calls for reparations for the descendants of enslaved people in Caribbean nations, including Jamaica, to address the long-lasting effects of this dark chapter in history.
In recent years, public opinion in Jamaica has shifted in favor of removing the monarch. A 2022 poll conducted by Don Anderson revealed that 56% of Jamaicans supported the removal of King Charles as head of state, up from 40% a decade ago. These sentiments were further fueled by Barbados’ decision to remove Queen Elizabeth II as head of state in 2021, becoming the first Caribbean country to do so in recent years. This move, and Holness’ own remarks to Prince William in 2022 that Jamaica wanted to be “independent,” helped push the issue to the forefront of Jamaican politics.
Controversial Aspects of the Proposed Bill
The proposed bill, which could be debated in Jamaica’s Parliament as early as this month, has not been without its critics. While the government aims to replace the British monarch with a president, many critics, including members of the opposition People’s National Party (PNP), argue that the way in which the president would be selected could undermine the very independence the bill seeks to achieve.
Under the government’s proposal, the president would be nominated by the prime minister in consultation with the opposition leader. If the two leaders cannot agree on a nominee, the opposition leader could suggest a candidate, and if the prime minister rejects the candidate, the final nominee would be selected through a parliamentary vote. While this system would ostensibly allow for some checks on the prime minister’s power, critics argue that it would essentially allow the prime minister to choose a president who would be beholden to them, rendering the position largely symbolic.
Steven Golding, the head of the Universal Negro Improvement Association (UNIA), which was founded by civil rights leader Marcus Garvey, voiced his opposition to the bill, calling it a “cosmetic surgery” rather than a true break from colonial structures. “We don’t want to swap having a British monarch for having a titular president,” he stated, advocating instead for an executive president directly elected by the people. Golding’s comments reflect a broader concern that the bill, if passed in its current form, would not lead to the comprehensive political transformation that many Jamaicans desire.
Former Prime Minister P. J. Patterson has also criticized the bill, suggesting that the president would end up being a “puppet of the prime minister” rather than an independent head of state. These concerns have been echoed by Donna Scott-Mottley, a spokesperson on justice for the PNP, who argued that the process for selecting a president would compromise Jamaica’s sovereignty.
Debates Over the Final Court of Appeal
Another contentious issue tied to the bill is Jamaica’s continued reliance on the London-based Privy Council as its final court of appeal. Critics argue that retaining the Privy Council, while attempting to remove the monarchy, would amount to a contradiction. In nations such as Barbados, Belize, and Guyana, the Privy Council has been replaced by the Caribbean Court of Justice (CCJ), which is based in Trinidad and Tobago. Supporters of the CCJ argue that it provides a more accessible and cost-effective judicial process, whereas those who continue to use the Privy Council argue that its decisions are seen as more impartial and prestigious.
The Jamaican government has indicated that the issue of the Privy Council would be addressed in a “phased reform,” with plans to hold a national consultation on the matter. However, many critics, including Scott-Mottley, argue that retaining the Privy Council while removing the British monarch would be “anachronistic” and fail to fully sever Jamaica’s colonial ties. Christopher Charles, a professor at the University of the West Indies, likened the situation to wanting a divorce while still keeping a room in the matrimonial home, suggesting that it would be illogical to keep the Privy Council after removing the monarchy.
The Path Forward: Referendum and Public Opinion
The proposed bill is expected to pass Jamaica’s lower house of Parliament, where the governing Jamaica Labour Party (JLP) holds a two-thirds majority. However, the bill will need at least one opposition vote to pass in the upper house. If the upper house rejects the bill, the government can still proceed with a national referendum, which Holness has indicated could take place as early as next year. To pass, the referendum would need two-thirds of the vote, making it a high bar for supporters of the monarchy’s removal.
As the debate rages on, the Jamaican government has faced pressure to ensure that the process is not just symbolic but marks the beginning of true decolonization. Opposition leader Mark Golding, speaking on behalf of the PNP, emphasized the need for “full decolonization” rather than “piecemeal” reforms, calling for a comprehensive approach that addresses not only the monarchy but also the country’s judicial system and governance structure.
A Nation Divided
Ultimately, the future of Jamaica’s relationship with the British monarchy remains uncertain. While there is significant support for removing King Charles as head of state, the specifics of how to achieve a fully independent and decolonized Jamaica remain contentious. As the debate continues, it reflects the broader struggle of many former colonies grappling with the legacies of slavery and colonialism, and how best to navigate their path to full independence in the modern world.
The outcome of Jamaica’s efforts could have significant implications for other nations in the Caribbean and beyond, as they too assess the lasting impacts of colonialism and their relationships with former colonial powers.
