National Politician Performance Awards (NAPPY) Bahamas

The 2003 Bahamas National Politician Performance (NAPPY) Awards 

The awards season is upon us and as we await the GRAMMYS, OSCARS etc.  Let's not forget the NAPPY awards

> > The Jerry Roker award goes to Fred Mitchell award - because ya can't find him in town.

> > The Stealth Award goes to Frank Smith, Kenyatta Gibson and Neville Adderley.  Like the stealth airplanes you know they are out there somewhere but they never show up on any radar.

> > The "Which way is up?" Award goes to Neville Wisdom, who when he found himself in a hole chose to get a bigger shovel rather than stop digging.

> > The "Stop peeing on me and telling me it's raining "Award goes to the PLP government from the Bahamian people who now all realize that they should not have believed the 2002 campaign promise to, "just put the head in."

> > The "Mort Goldstein Excellence in Business" Award goes to Frankie Wilson who continues to amass a fortune by proving the old adage "in a gold rush, it's not usually the miners who get rich - it's the guy selling the maps, picks and shovels."

> > The Milton Bradley Award goes to Sidney Stubbs.  Not only does he still owes $52,000 for the trip to China. But, also has the gall to continue to claim innocence in the Korean fishing boats scandal in the face of overwhelming evidence to the contrary.  Not to mention abusing credit cards, vehicles hotel rooms etc.  So many games - so little time.

> > The Dragon Award goes to Raynard Rigby who puts out so much useless hot air he must be a fire breather.

> > The Janus Award goes to all those who professed to hate foreigners during the last campaign as opposition yet now actively begging, pursuing and praising foreign investors.  Making concessions, kissing Azzes etc.

> > (P.S. If you don't know, take the time to look up who was Janus).

> > The 'Check is in the mail' Award goes to Leslie Miller.  How can someone who makes so much continue to owe so many?  Pray that he never becomes Minister of Finance.  Did anyone bother to do a credit check beforehand?

> > The GQ/Photogenic Award goes to Ron Pinder for consistently being the best dressed, (and best smelling) MP - male or female.  Mr. Pinder has never met a camera he didn't like.  There were reports that Mr. Pinder once turned down the chance for a photo op.  But, that turned out to be false FNM propaganda.

> > The "Hooked on phonics" Award goes to Bradley Roberts who the remarkable ability to get things done... if only he could get through a speech and make it sound like his own.

> > The "See No Evil, Hear No Evil, Speak No Evil" Award goes to Vincent Peete and V.Alfred Gray who stood by while the Korean boat deal went down.  They claim no foreknowledge yet approval was given by each of their ministries.

> > The "Da Nile is not just a river in Egypt." Award goes to Perry Christie for the immortal quote "What sissies? ain't no sissies in my Government."  Runner-up Sidney Stubbs for the quote, "The Prime Minister never asked me resign."

> > The "Sherlock Holmes Get a clue" - Award goes to Glennis Hanna-Martin - who despite being very smart and having of what is considered the 'easiest ministry' along with an extremely competent permanent secretary at her disposal does not appear to have a clue.

> > The "Poor Taste" Award is a tie between DPM Cynthia Pratt and Kenneth Russell - who both tried to get political points of the Grand Bahama child murders.

> > The "Harry Houdini Great Escape" Award goes to Sidney Stubbs for avoiding prosecution in the Korean Boat deal.  Even though Minister Gray stated that laws had been broken and false documents filed.

> > The "Now you see him now you don't" Award goes to Dion Foulkes who disappeared off the scene faster than black man who stumbled on a KKK rally.

> > The "I've got friends in low places" Award goes to Phillip 'Brave' Davis for showing that not only does crime pay, but it pays very well... if you have the right clients.

> > The "Johnny Cochrane" Award goes to Michael Barnett who has represented Sir Lynden, Hubert Ingraham and now Perry Christie.  Someone needs to suggest him for QC or PC.

> > [Side note: In all recorded history, there has never been a reported case of an attorney being bitten by a snake... apparently snakes are not cannibalistic!]

> > The "Ready Fire Aim" Award goes to Neville Wisdom who just never seems to think things all the way through before taking action.  Mr. shoot first ask questions later.

> > The "Ready Aim Aim" Award goes to Perry Christie, who always seems cocked and ready but can never 'pull the trigger.'

> > The "Balds on a priest - nips on a nun"> Award - aka "The most useless appendage" Award goes to Koed Smith; maybe we do need an Ambassador to the Environment - but first someone needs to explain what he does, and with what authority?

> > The "Albert Einstein Great Idea" Award goes to PM Christie for the brilliant idea that both Minister of Education and Attorney General are part time jobs, even though both our Justice and Education systems continue to be in shambles.

Runner-up was Alfred Sears who let Mr. Christie talk him into trying to prove it.

> > The "Most Unknown Quantity" Award goes to Hubert Ingraham, as the
proverbial snake in the grass.  You never know when he will strike.  But you know his venom can be fatal.

> > The "Steve Urkel" Award goes to Tommy Turnquest.  He is a genius trapped in a nerd's persona; if he can only make the change to Stefan (the 'cool' alter ego) he'll be PM.  Perhaps a "Maury Povich makeover".

> > The "Iraqi Scud Missile" Award goes to Whitney Bastian.  He always seems to hit something but you're never quite sure what he was aiming at.

> > The "10% of something is better than 100% of nothing" Award goes to Tennyson Wells.  Mr. Wells has been a total disappointment as an independent.  He was much more effective when he was a part of a political party.

> > The "Cat got your tongue?"Award goes to Bishop Neil Ellis, who hasmlately been uncharacteristically silent and absent from the PM's entourage.

> > The "Didn't you used to be somebody important?" Award goes to B J Nottage.  Who is struggling to stay relevant?  But was a runner-up for the " unknown quantity" award.  Runner-Up: A seven-way tie ex- FNM Cabinet.

> > The 'Emperor's new clothes' Award goes to all those MP's who stood up in the House of Assembly and with a straight face commended Neville Wisdom for the great job he did with the 2002/2003 junkanoo.  Let's get real!!!

> > The "Dionne Warwick - Promises, Promises" Award goes to Allison Maynard Gibson who's ministry has yet to successfully implement one significant foreign investment project despite continuous promises.  Special mention should go to PM Christie for his promise during the 2003 PLP convention that "his government would announce billions of dollars before the end of the year." We assume that he meant 2003.  We're still waiting.

> > The "gee Toto, I don't think we are in Kansas anymore" Award goes to Perry Christie and Mother Pratt who must by now realize that this was not the ride they signed up for.

> > The "You can dress 'em up, but you can't take ‘em out?" Award goes to Melanie Griffiths who's demeanor (or lack of) during the debate on the Willamae Pratt fire showed she still has along way to go.

> > The "Blood is thicker than water" Award goes to Sidney Stubbs for 'hooking up' his best friend, his brother in-law and his cousin in a single move.

> > The "At least wait 'til the body is cold" Award goes to all those wannabe PLP candidates who have recently been seen hovering over the Holy Cross constituency like vultures.

> > The "At least you could use some Vaseline or K-Y" Award goes to all those cabinet ministers and other government officials who are using their influence to direct business to their old law firms, or have the government rent their property, or award government contracts for 'kickbacks', or to get work permits approved in 2 or 3 days or to travel around the world first class or tending to their own private businesses on government time.

> > The "Barney Fife Award" goes to Alfred Sears.  Runner up Frank Watson no explanations required.

Prime Minister Perry Christie To Do The Cabinet Shuffle

But Christie said he did not want to go into details regarding the specific changes he planned to make to his Cabinet

PM Finalizing Shuffle

By Candia Dames

candiadames@hotmail.com

02/01/2004

Prime Minister Perry Christie has put speculation to rest, indicating that he is finalizing plans to shuffle his Cabinet.

"The prime minister must always examine his government with a view to making adjustments and most certainly I am looking at making adjustments," Mr. Christie told the Bahama Journal recently.

But he said he did not want to go into details regarding the specific changes he planned to make to his Cabinet.

Rumours regarding his planned Cabinet shuffle have been rife over the past several weeks, but Mr. Christie had been tight-lipped on the matter.

The Journal was informed by a source close to the government that one of the changes the prime minister was considering is making Financial Services and Investments Minister Allyson Maynard-Gibson Attorney General.  Mrs. Maynard-Gibson would still retain her present portfolio, according to the source.

With the many challenges being faced in improving the national examination average from a "D", it would probably come as no surprise to many if changes were made to the portfolio of present Attorney General and Minister of Education Alfred Sears.

The Official Opposition has long been calling for changes to the Cabinet - demanding the removal of certain ministers from government altogether.

Free National Movement Leader Senator Tommy Turnquest told the Journal Friday that, "We've made it very clear over the past few weeks that we think to have a minister responsible for both Education and the Attorney General's Office is not in the best interest of the education system or the legal system of The Bahamas.  We believe there ought to be some changes in that regard."

Again calling for the removal of Neville Wisdom as the Minister responsible for culture, Mr. Turnquest added, "We believe that after two consecutive years of having controversy in Junkanoo there ought to be movement in that regard and we ought to move Neville Wisdom from the portfolio of culture that is responsible for Junkanoo.

"We believe that he ought to be removed out of the Cabinet altogether.  But at a minimum, he ought to be relieved of the portfolio of culture, which includes Junkanoo."

Mr. Turnquest also said the Official Opposition believes that Trade and Industry Minister Leslie Miller should be sacked, given the fact that The Bahamas Agricultural and Industrial Corporation has already been removed from his portfolio, which Mr. Turnquest said was the main aspect of his responsibilities.

"Leslie Miller publicly said he did not know what was going on at BAIC and for a Minister to say that about a matter under his portfolio is condemnation in itself," Mr. Turnquest told the Journal.  "For that statement alone he ought to have been relieved of his Cabinet responsibility."

But Minister Miller's response to that was that, "Tommy Turnquest needs to get a life and find something constructive to do for 2004."

"I don't have time for foolishness," said Minister Miller, when asked to respond to Mr. Turnquest's suggestion.  "What about his mishandling at the Ministry of Tourism?  He's not even the true leader of the Opposition."

He said he does not pay attention to anything Mr. Turnquest has to say.

But Minister Miller added, "I wish him all the best for 2004."

In his interview with the Bahama Journal, Mr. Turnquest also said one of the biggest disappointments in the Cabinet has been Glenys Hanna-Martin, the minister responsible for transport and aviation.

"I had very high hopes for her because she is a very intelligent person...but I have been very disappointed with her over the past 12 months...I think she ought to be removed to a more suitable portfolio," he said.  "I believe she has the skills to perform in government, I just have been disappointed with her performance in government.  She hasn't done a good job in that portfolio.

"In terms of looking at it objectively, those are comments I think are shared by a cross section of the Bahamian society."

But he added, "We also accept the fact that the appointment of the Cabinet is the prerogative of the prime minister."

However, Mr. Turnquest charged that "the country has been drifting aimlessly without a clear national plan and the prime minister ought now to seriously consider appointing men and women in portfolios best suited to them as we move forward because we do want the Bahamas to succeed."

Trade Unions and Industrial Disputes in The Bahamas

2003 - A Year of Serious Labour Unrest in The Bahamas

Trade Unions & Industrial Disputes – Part 1

By Apostle Cedric Moss
Nassau, The Bahamas

2003 will probably go down in history as the year with the most serious labour unrest our country has seen in modern times.  While many of the 2003 disputes have been or are being resolved, at the time of this writing (January 1, 2004), the very public contract negotiations dispute between the Bahamas Hotel Catering & Allied Workers Union (BHC) and the Bahamas Hotel Employers Association (BHEA) continue and the end does not seem to be in sight.

Today I offer the first of a two-part commentary on industrial disputes generally and the BHC and BHE dispute specifically.

Prefatory Remarks

I wish I did not have to preface my remarks at all but in an attempt to minimize being misunderstood, I offer the following preface.

First of all, I have not been privy to any aspect of the ongoing negotiations between BHC and BHEA nor am I aware of the points of differences and the reasoning behind the positions held on these points.  Therefore, I do not write in support of either side and as such hold a neutral position.

Concerning trade unions, as a matter of principle, I support them.  My support is not based on the fact that our constitution and laws permit them…I fundamentally support the philosophy of labourers acting corporately to represent their general welfare and interests as a necessary part of the production equation.

Similar to my support for organized labour, I support free enterprise and the right of investors to enjoy the rewards of their entrepreneurship as well as to form associations among themselves to represent their general welfare and interests.

The Greatest Concern

Of all the labour disputes, the dispute between BHC and BHEA is of greatest concern. There is a primary and simple reason for this: Our nation is highly dependent upon tourism as its economic lifeblood.  So we are all affected, perhaps not immediately but certainly inevitably, by how things go in the hospitality industry.  Therefore, the negotiators for both BHC and BHEA must see their stewardship beyond the immediate constituencies they represent and be conscious of the welfare of Bahamians in general as they adopt positions.

The Strike Vote

Recently, BHC members voted to strike but according to press reports, only 17% of the union members eligible to vote actually voted.  Obviously our laws allow for a simple majority of those who vote to determine whether a union will be certified to initiate strike action or not.  In this regard, I do not fault Mr. Pat Bain and his leadership team for using the results of the vote: They have a legal mandate to strike.  However, like many others, while recognizing the legal right to strike, I question whether 17% provides a moral mandate to strike.  In addition, I believe the results raise some other important questions related to the 87% of persons who, for whatever reasons, did not participate in the vote.  Is it that they are contented with their present employment conditions and voted by not voting?  Is it that they are indifferent?

The Infamous Go Slow

I share the view of many that the decision to call for a go-slow during the state visit of President Thabo Embeki was a national embarrassment and poor judgment.  This is not an attack on Mr. Pat Bain and his leadership team; it is just my considered view.  I do not know Mr. Bain other than in the press and he seems to be an intelligent, informed and responsible union leader who is genuinely concerned with the welfare of his members.

However, I believe the now infamous go slow incident raises a fundamental question: Is it fair for employees to intentionally reduce their work productivity and still expect to be paid normal wages based on the usual higher productivity?  The answer of all fair-minded people is a simple but resounding no.  As such I support relevant legislation to outlaw go slows and to make clear the right of employers to cut the pay of employees who intentionally produce less than they have been contracted for and are capable of.  After all, it is only fair.

Preview of Next Week

Join me next week when I will conclude my comments by addressing the practice of sickouts by employees and stalling strategies of employers, among other things.  Until then, best wishes for a healthy and prosperous 2004!

Apostle Cedric Moss serves as Senior Pastor at Kingdom Life World Outreach Centre. Commentary and feedback may be directed to: apostle@kingdom-life.org

Bahamian referendum, 2002

A multiple referendum with five questions was held in the Bahamas on 27 February 2002. Voters were asked whether they approved of:


1 * the removal of gender discrimination from the constitution
2 * the creation of a national commission to monitor the standards of teachers
3 * the creation of an independent parliamentary commissioner
4 * the creation of an independent election boundaries commission
5 * the increase of the retirement ages of judges from 60 to 65 (or 68 to 72 for appellate judges)

All five questions were rejected by voters, with between 62.8 and 70.9% voting against.

swiss.dreab

Caribbean Blog International

Tax Information Exchange Agreement (TIEA) Between The Government Of The Commonwealth Of The Bahamas And The Government Of The United States Of America For The Provision Of Information With Respect To Taxes And For Other Matters

WHEREAS The Bahamas has taken significant steps in the international fight against money laundering and other financial crimes, and the United States recognizes The Bahamas as a cooperating country with respect to all relevant international efforts to counter money laundering activities;

WHEREAS the United States has recognized the efforts on the part of The Bahamas to ensure that the same financial standards apply in The Bahamas as apply in other recognized international financial centers;

WHEREAS, the Government of The Bahamas and the Government of the United States (the “Contracting Parties”), wish to enter into an agreement (the “Agreement”) to establish the terms and conditions governing the provision of information by the Government of The Bahamas to the Government of the United States with respect to certain taxes; and

WHEREAS the Contracting Parties wish to enter into a form of agreement that allows United States taxpayers to deduct expenses allocable to a convention, seminar or similar meeting held in The Bahamas in the same manner and to the same degree that such a deduction would be permitted if such meeting were held in the United States,

NOW, THEREFORE, the Contracting Parties agree as follows:

ARTICLE 1 – DEFINITIONS

1. In this Agreement, unless otherwise defined:

a) “civil matter” means an examination, investigation or proceeding relating to United States federal tax administration and enforcement with respect to conduct that does not constitute a criminal tax offense under the laws of the United States;

b) “Competent Authority” means:
(i) in the case of the United States, the Secretary of the Treasury or his delegate; and
(ii) in the case of The Bahamas, the Minister of Finance or his delegate;

c) “criminal matter” means an examination, investigation or proceeding concerning conduct that constitutes a criminal tax offense under the laws of the United States;

d) “information” means any fact or statement, in any form, that is foreseeably relevant or material to United States federal tax administration and enforcement, including, but not limited to,
(i) testimony of an individual, and
(ii) documents or records;

e) “pending matter” means an examination, investigation or proceeding under the federal tax laws of the United States that is pending at the time the request under Article 2 is made, and
(i) in the case of a criminal matter, relates to a taxable period commencing on or after January 1, 2004; or
(ii) in the case of a civil matter, relates to a taxable period commencing on or after January 1, 2006;

f) “person” includes an individual and a partnership, corporation, trust, estate, association or other legal entity;

g) “privileged communication” means a communication that
(i) is a confidential communication, whether oral or written, passing between-

(a) a counsel and attorney in his or her professional capacity and another counsel and attorney in such capacity; or

(b) a counsel and attorney in his or her professional capacity and his or her client, whether made directly or indirectly through an agent of either;
(ii) is communicated or given to a counsel and attorney by, or by a representative of, a client of his or hers in connection with the giving by the counsel and attorney of legal advice to the client;
(iii) is made or brought into existence for the purpose of obtaining or
giving legal advice or assistance; and
(iv) is not made or brought into existence for the purpose of
committing or furthering the commission of some illegal or wrongful act.

h) “resident” means:
(i) a citizen of the United States or any person, other than a company, resident in the United States for the purpose of United States tax; but in the case of a partnership, estate or trust, only to the extent that the income derived by such partnership, estate or trust is subject to United States tax as the income of a resident, either in its hands or in the hands of its partners or beneficiaries; and:
(ii) a company created under the laws of the United States, any state
or the District of Columbia.

i) “tax” means all federal taxes in the United States;

j) for purposes of determining the geographical area within which jurisdiction to compel production of information may be exercised,
(i) “United States” means the United States of America, including Puerto Rico, the Virgin Islands, Guam and any other United States possession or territory;
(ii) “The Bahamas” means The Commonwealth of The Bahamas.

ARTICLE 2 – PROVISION OF INFORMATION WITH RESPECT TO

UNITED STATES TAXES

1. The Competent Authority of the United States shall only make a request for information pursuant to this Article when the Competent Authority of the United States is unable to obtain the requested information by other means, having made all reasonable efforts to do so.

2. Upon receipt of a request made in conformity with the provisions of this Article, the Competent Authority of The Bahamas shall, subject to the provisions of paragraph 7 of this Article, make all reasonable efforts to provide to the Competent Authority of the United States information with respect to United States federal taxes.

3. Any request for information made by the Competent Authority of the United States pursuant to this Article shall be made in connection with a pending matter of a United States taxpayer and shall be framed with the greatest degree of specificity possible. In all cases, such request shall specify in writing the following:

a) the legal name of the person about whom the request is made;

b) the type of information requested;

c) the period of time with respect to which the information is requested;

d) the likely location of the information;

e) the matter under United States federal tax law with respect to which the information is sought and whether that matter is criminal or civil in nature; and

f) the reasons for believing that the information requested is foreseeably relevant or material to United States federal tax administration and enforcement with respect to the person identified in subparagraph a) of this
paragraph.

4. This Article shall not apply to the extent that the requested information:

a) relates to a matter under United States federal tax law that is barred by the applicable statute of limitations; or

b) constitutes or would reveal a privileged communication.

5. Where the Competent Authority of the United States requests information with respect to a matter which (i) relates to a person not resident in the United States or (ii) does not constitute a criminal matter, a senior official designated by the Secretary of the Treasury of the United States shall certify that such request is foreseeably relevant or material to the determination of the federal tax liability of a taxpayer of the United States or the criminal liability of a person under the federal tax laws of the United States. If information is requested relating to persons not resident in the United States, it shall also be established to the satisfaction of the Competent Authority of The Bahamas that such information is foreseeably relevant or material to the administration and enforcement of the federal tax laws of the United States.

6. If specifically requested by the Competent Authority of the United States, the Competent Authority of The Bahamas shall provide information pursuant to this Article in specified forms to be admissible in judicial or administrative proceedings in the United States to the same extent that such specified forms can be obtained under the laws and administrative practices of The Bahamas. The specified forms shall include depositions of witnesses and authenticated copies of original documents, including books, papers, statements, records,
accounts, and writings.

7. Nothing in this Agreement shall be construed so as to impose on the Government of The Bahamas the obligation to:

a) carry out administrative measures at variance with the laws and administrative practices of The Bahamas;

b) supply particular items of information which are not obtainable under the laws or in the normal course of the administration of The Bahamas;

c) supply information which would disclose any trade, business, industrial, commercial or professional secret or trade process; or

d) supply information the disclosure of which would, in the judgment of the Government of The Bahamas, be contrary to national security or public policy in The Bahamas.

8. Notwithstanding paragraph 7, the Competent Authority of The Bahamas shall have the authority to obtain and provide information held by financial institutions, nominees or persons acting in an agency or a fiduciary capacity or information respecting ownership interests in a person.

9. In connection with a request for information under this Article:

a) a claim of privilege under the laws of the United States shall be determined exclusively by the courts of the United States; and

b) a claim of privilege under the laws of The Bahamas shall be determined
exclusively by the courts of The Bahamas.

ARTICLE 3 – PROTECTION OF INFORMATION WITH RESPECT TO UNITED

STATES FEDERAL TAXES

1. Information provided to the Competent Authority of the United States pursuant to this Agreement shall be disclosed only to departments, agencies and judicial and administrative bodies of the Government of the United States, and to employees and agents thereof, involved in the

a) determination, assessment, and collection of; and

b) administration of, the recovery and collection of claims derived from, the enforcement or prosecution in respect of, or the determination of appeals in respect of;

those United States federal taxes with respect to which the relevant request was made pursuant to this Agreement, or the oversight of the above. Such departments, agencies and judicial and administrative bodies, and the employees and agents thereof, shall use such information only for the purposes listed in this paragraph. Such departments, agencies and judicial and administrative bodies, and the employees and agents thereof, may disclose such information in connection with court proceedings related to those federal taxes with respect to which the relevant request was made pursuant to this Agreement.

2. The Competent Authority of The Bahamas shall treat any request for information received from the United States pursuant to this Agreement as confidential and shall only disclose such information as necessary to carry out its obligations under this Agreement. Such requests may be disclosed in connection with court proceedings related to the performance of the obligations of The Bahamas under this Agreement.

3. Nothing in this Agreement shall be construed to permit the Government of the United States to share information received pursuant to this Agreement with an agency or employee of any other government.

4. Information that is provided to the Government of the United States pursuant to this Agreement before January 1, 2006 concerning a criminal matter shall not be used in connection with any other matter without prior written consent of the Competent Authority of The Bahamas. With respect to information that is provided to the Government of the United States pursuant to this Agreement on or after January 1, 2006, the Competent Authority of the United States shall provide prior written notice to the Competent Authority of The Bahamas before using such information for a type of United States federal tax matter other than the one
for which it was requested.

ARTICLE 4 – QUALIFIED INTERMEDIARIES

For the purposes of considering an application by a person in The Bahamas to enter into a Qualified Intermediary Withholding Agreement (within the meaning of Revenue Procedure 2000-12) with the Internal Revenue Service of the United States, The Government of the United States shall certify that The Commonwealth of The Bahamas has taken significant steps towards achieving effective rules and/or procedures for providing tax information to the United States of America for both civil tax administration and criminal tax enforcement purposes, and the Internal Revenue Service of the United States of America has determined The Bahamas’ “know your customer” rules to be acceptable within the meaning of Section 3 of Revenue Procedure 2000-12.

ARTICLE 5 – CONVENTION TAX TREATMENT

A United States taxpayer may deduct from income costs incurred with respect to attendance at a conference or convention held in The Bahamas in the same manner and to the same extent that such taxpayer is permitted to deduct such costs with respect to attendance at a conference or convention held in the United States.

ARTICLE 6 – ADMINISTRATIVE PROVISIONS

1. The Competent Authorities of the Contracting Parties shall enter into an agreement (the "Competent Authority Agreement") regarding implementation of this Agreement.

2. The Competent Authorities of the Contracting Parties shall endeavor to resolve by mutual agreement any disputes arising as to the interpretation or application of this Agreement.

3. The Competent Authorities of the Contracting Parties may communicate directly for the purposes of reaching an agreement under this Article.

4. The Government of the United States shall reimburse the Government of The Bahamas for all direct costs incurred in providing information pursuant to this Agreement as provided in the Competent Authority Agreement. The Competent Authorities of the Contracting Parties shall consult from time to time with a view to minimizing such costs.

ARTICLE 7 – ENTRY INTO FORCE, EFFECTIVE DATE, MODIFICATION AND

TERMINATION

1. This Agreement shall enter into force upon an exchange of notes by the duly authorized representatives of the Contracting Parties, confirming their agreement that both sides have met the constitutional and statutory requirements necessary to effectuate this Agreement.

2. The provisions of Articles 2 and 3 shall take effect

a) on January 1, 2004 with respect to requests for information made in connection with a criminal matter; and

b) on January 1, 2006 with respect to requests for information made in connection with a civil matter.

3. The provisions of Article 5 shall take effect on January 1, 2006.

4. The provisions of this Agreement, with the exception of those identified in paragraphs 2 and 3 of this Article, shall take effect upon the entry into force of this Agreement.

5. The effective date provisions set forth in paragraph 2 of this Article are established in the expectation that the United States will enter into arrangements with certain other off-shore financial centers for the provision of information with respect to taxes. If the United States has not entered into such arrangements by January 1, 2004, or if the United States, at any time, enters into such arrangements that differ in material respect from the provisions of this Agreement, the Government of The Bahamas and the Government of the United States shall hold consultations concerning appropriate modifications to this Agreement.

6. If, at any time after the entry into force of this Agreement, the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development or other international organization develops a model agreement on tax information exchange, a Contracting Party may propose modifications to this Agreement for the purpose of bringing this Agreement into conformity with the model agreement. Upon receipt of such a proposal, the other Contracting Party shall enter into good faith negotiations concerning the proposal.

7. This Agreement shall remain in force until terminated by one of the Contracting Parties. Either Contracting Party may terminate this Agreement at any time upon three months prior written notice transmitted through diplomatic channels.


IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the undersigned, being duly authorized by their respective governments, have signed this Agreement.


DONE at Washington, in duplicate, this twenty-fifth day of January, 2002.

FOR THE GOVERNMENT

OF THE COMMONWEALTH

OF THE BAHAMAS:

FOR THE GOVERNMENT

OF THE UNITED STATES

OF AMERICA:

[Date of Entry Into Force: 29^th December, 2003]

bahamas.gov.bs

Caribbean Blog International

UNITED NATIONS SECURITY COUNCIL UNANIMOUSLY ADOPTS WIDE-RANGING ANTI-TERRORISM RESOLUTION; CALLS FOR SUPPRESSING FINANCING, IMPROVING INTERNATIONAL COOPERATION

4385th Meeting (Night)

SECURITY COUNCIL UNANIMOUSLY ADOPTS WIDE-RANGING ANTI-TERRORISM RESOLUTION;

CALLS FOR SUPPRESSING FINANCING, IMPROVING INTERNATIONAL COOPERATION

Resolution 1373 (2001) Also Creates Committee to Monitor Implementation

Reaffirming its unequivocal condemnation of the terrorist acts that took place in New York, Washington, D.C., and Pennsylvania on 11 September, the Security Council this evening unanimously adopted a wide-ranging, comprehensive resolution with steps and strategies to combat international terrorism.

By resolution 1373 (2001) the Council also established a Committee of the Council to monitor the resolution’s implementation and called on all States to report on actions they had taken to that end no later than 90 days from today.

Under terms of the text, the Council decided that all States should prevent and suppress the financing of terrorism, as well as criminalize the wilful provision or collection of funds for such acts.  The funds, financial assets and economic resources of those who commit or attempt to commit terrorist acts or participate in or facilitate the commission of terrorist acts and of persons and entities acting on behalf of terrorists should also be frozen without delay.

The Council also decided that States should prohibit their nationals or persons or entities in their territories from making funds, financial assets, economic resources, financial or other related services available to persons who commit or attempt to commit, facilitate or participate in the commission of terrorist acts.  States should also refrain from providing any form of support to entities or persons involved in terrorist acts; take the necessary steps to prevent the commission of terrorist acts; deny safe haven to those who finance, plan, support, commit terrorist acts and provide safe havens as well.

By other terms, the Council decided that all States should prevent those who finance, plan, facilitate or commit terrorist acts from using their respective territories for those purposes against other countries and their citizens.  States should also ensure that anyone who has participated in the financing, planning, preparation or perpetration of terrorist acts or in supporting terrorist acts is brought to justice.  They should also ensure that terrorist acts are established as serious criminal offences in domestic laws and regulations and that the seriousness of such acts is duly reflected in sentences served.

Also by the text, the Council called on all States to intensify and accelerate the exchange of information regarding terrorist actions or movements; forged or falsified documents; traffic in arms and sensitive material; use of communications and technologies by terrorist groups; and the threat posed by the possession of weapons of mass destruction.

States were also called on to exchange information and cooperate to prevent and suppress terrorist acts and to take action against the perpetrators of such acts.  States should become parties to, and fully implement as soon as possible, the relevant international conventions and protocols to combat terrorism.

By the text, before granting refugee status, all States should take appropriate measures to ensure that the asylum seekers had not planned, facilitated or participated in terrorist acts.  Further, States should ensure that refugee status was not abused by the perpetrators, organizers or facilitators of terrorist acts, and that claims of political motivation were not recognized as grounds for refusing requests for the extradition of alleged terrorists. 

The Council noted with concern the close connection between international terrorism and transnational organized crime, illicit drugs, money laundering and illegal movement of nuclear, chemical, biological and other deadly materials.  In that regard, it emphasized the need to enhance the coordination of national, subregional, regional and international efforts to strengthen a global response to that threat to international security.

Reaffirming the need to combat by all means, in accordance with the Charter, threats to international peace and security caused by terrorist acts, the Council expressed its determination to take all necessary steps to fully implement the current resolution.

The meeting, which began at 10:50 p.m., adjourned at 10:53 p.m.

Resolution

The full text of resolution 1373 (2001) reads as follows:

“The Security Council,

“Reaffirming its resolutions 1269 (1999) of 19 October 1999 and 1368 (2001) of 12 September 2001,

“Reaffirming also its unequivocal condemnation of the terrorist attacks which took place in New York, Washington, D.C., and Pennsylvania on 11 September 2001, and expressing its determination to prevent all such acts,

“Reaffirming further that such acts, like any act of international terrorism, constitute a threat to international peace and security,

“Reaffirming the inherent right of individual or collective self-defence as recognized by the Charter of the United Nations as reiterated in resolution 1368 (2001),

“Reaffirming the need to combat by all means, in accordance with the Charter of the United Nations, threats to international peace and security caused by terrorist acts,

“Deeply concerned by the increase, in various regions of the world, of acts of terrorism motivated by intolerance or extremism,

“Calling on States to work together urgently to prevent and suppress terrorist acts, including through increased cooperation and full implementation of the relevant international conventions relating to terrorism,

“Recognizing the need for States to complement international cooperation by taking additional measures to prevent and suppress, in their territories through all lawful means, the financing and preparation of any acts of terrorism,

“Reaffirming the principle established by the General Assembly in its declaration of October 1970 (resolution 2625 (XXV)) and reiterated by the Security Council in its resolution 1189 (1998) of 13 August 1998, namely that every State has the duty to refrain from organizing, instigating, assisting or participating in terrorist acts in another State or acquiescing in organized activities within its territory directed towards the commission of such acts,

“Acting under Chapter VII of the Charter of the United Nations,

“1.   Decides that all States shall:

“(a)  Prevent and suppress the financing of terrorist acts;

“(b)  Criminalize the wilful provision or collection, by any means, directly or indirectly, of funds by their nationals or in their territories with the intention that the funds should be used, or in the knowledge that they are to be used, in order to carry out terrorist acts;

“(c)  Freeze without delay funds and other financial assets or economic resources of persons who commit, or attempt to commit, terrorist acts or participate in or facilitate the commission of terrorist acts; of entities owned or controlled directly or indirectly by such persons; and of persons and entities acting on behalf of, or at the direction of such persons and entities, including funds derived or generated from property owned or controlled directly or indirectly by such persons and associated persons and entities;

“(d)  Prohibit their nationals or any persons and entities within their territories from making any funds, financial assets or economic resources or financial or other related services available, directly or indirectly, for the benefit of persons who commit or attempt to commit or facilitate or participate in the commission of terrorist acts, of entities owned or controlled, directly or indirectly, by such persons and of persons and entities acting on behalf of or at the direction of such persons;

“2.   Decides also that all States shall:

“(a)  Refrain from providing any form of support, active or passive, to entities or persons involved in terrorist acts, including by suppressing recruitment of members of terrorist groups and eliminating the supply of weapons to terrorists;

“(b)  Take the necessary steps to prevent the commission of terrorist acts, including by provision of early warning to other States by exchange of information;

“(c)  Deny safe haven to those who finance, plan, support, or commit terrorist acts, or provide safe havens;

“(d)  Prevent those who finance, plan, facilitate or commit terrorist acts from using their respective territories for those purposes against other States or their citizens;

“(e)  Ensure that any person who participates in the financing, planning, preparation or perpetration of terrorist acts or in supporting terrorist acts is brought to justice and ensure that, in addition to any other measures against them, such terrorist acts are established as serious criminal offences in domestic laws and regulations and that the punishment duly reflects the seriousness of such terrorist acts;

“(f)  Afford one another the greatest measure of assistance in connection with criminal investigations or criminal proceedings relating to the financing or support of terrorist acts, including assistance in obtaining evidence in their possession necessary for the proceedings;

“(g)  Prevent the movement of terrorists or terrorist groups by effective border controls and controls on issuance of identity papers and travel documents, and through measures for preventing counterfeiting, forgery or fraudulent use of identity papers and travel documents;

“3.   Calls upon all States to:

“(a)  Find ways of intensifying and accelerating the exchange of operational information, especially regarding actions or movements of terrorist persons or networks; forged or falsified travel documents; traffic in arms, explosives or sensitive materials; use of communications technologies by terrorist groups; and the threat posed by the possession of weapons of mass destruction by terrorist groups;

“(b)  Exchange information in accordance with international and domestic law and cooperate on administrative and judicial matters to prevent the commission of terrorist acts;

“(c)  Cooperate, particularly through bilateral and multilateral arrangements and agreements, to prevent and suppress terrorist attacks and take action against perpetrators of such acts;

“(d)  Become parties as soon as possible to the relevant international conventions and protocols relating to terrorism, including the International Convention for the Suppression of the Financing of Terrorism of 9 December 1999;

“(e)  Increase cooperation and fully implement the relevant international conventions and protocols relating to terrorism and Security Council resolutions 1269 (1999) and 1368 (2001);

“(g)  Ensure, in conformity with international law, that refugee status is not abused by the perpetrators, organizers or facilitators of terrorist acts, and that claims of political motivation are not recognized as grounds for refusing requests for the extradition of alleged terrorists;

“4.   Notes with concern the close connection between international terrorism and transnational organized crime, illicit drugs, money-laundering, illegal arms-trafficking, and illegal movement of nuclear, chemical, biological and other potentially deadly materials, and in this regard emphasizes the need to enhance coordination of efforts on national, subregional, regional and international levels in order to strengthen a global response to this serious challenge and threat to international security;

“5.   Declares that acts, methods, and practices of terrorism are contrary to the purposes and principles of the United Nations and that knowingly financing, planning and inciting terrorist acts are also contrary to the purposes and principles of the United Nations;

“6.   Decides to establish, in accordance with rule 28 of its provisional rules of procedure, a Committee of the Security Council, consisting of all the members of the Council, to monitor implementation of this resolution, with the assistance of appropriate expertise, and calls upon all States to report to the Committee, no later than 90 days from the date of adoption of this resolution and thereafter according to a timetable to be proposed by the Committee, on the steps they have taken to implement this resolution;

“7.   Directs the Committee to delineate its tasks, submit a work programme within 30 days of the adoption of this resolution, and to consider the support it requires, in consultation with the Secretary-General;

“8.   Expresses its determination to take all necessary steps in order to ensure the full implementation of this resolution, in accordance with its responsibilities under the Charter;

“9.   Decides to remain seized of this matter.”

UN

Randol Fawkes' Appeal to The United Nations for Independence of The Bahama Islands

RANDOL FAWKES’ APPEAL TO THE UNITED NATIONS ON BAHAMAS NATIONAL INDEPENDENCE

MR CHAIRMAN,

 

DISTINGUISHED REPRESENTATIVES OF THE COMMITTEE ON COLONIALISM

I am here today to secure the encouragement and the concrete assistance of the United Nations in the efforts of the people of the Bahama Islands to prepare themselves for independence.

In this we seek your expert advice and technical assistance in the promotion of the political, economic, and social advancement of The Bahamas that would make a transition from colonialism to freedom less painful than it otherwise would be.

It is our conviction that eternal colonialism in the Bahamas prevents the development of international and economic cooperation, impedes the social, economic and cultural development, and violates the spirit and letter of the Charter of the United Nations.  We therefore hope that the United Nations will recognize the indisputable right of The Bahamas to complete freedom and will help us to achieve and exercise our sovereignty and the intergrity of our national territory.  In faith believing, I relate the following:

On September 1966, your petitioner requested a select committee to take into consideration the advisability of inviting the government of the United Kingdom to convene a constitutional conference with a view to establishing the independence of the Bahama Islands.

Before the speaker could reach the item on the agenda calling for the appointment of select committees, The Premier, Sir Roland Symonette read the following prepared communication:  “I wish to make the following communication to the House in view of the public interest that has been aroused on the question of a constitutional conference on independence.  This is a statement that I would have given to the House on Thursday the 25^th August if the motion on the agenda for the appointment of a select committee on the subject had been proceeded with on that day:

As a result of the 1963 Constitutional Conference, the Bahamian Islands now enjoy a constitution which gives the people, through their representatives, virtually full control of their internal governmental affairs.

It has been suggested that because some other countries - perhaps less able to accept full autonomy – have become or are becoming independent, The Bahamas should do the same.  The government regards this attitude as misconceived.  Independence could be requested, and would no doubt be granted, and this government would be glad to manage the external affairs of the country but the facts must be looked squarely in the face.

Complete independence would impose on our country the financial burden of responsibility for security, defence and external affairs.  This burden is at present largely borne by Her Majesty’s government, at small cost within the framework of Britain’s defense and diplomatic commitments, but it would be extremely expensive, both in money and in manpower for The Bahamas government to take on the task of establishing embassies and high commissions abroad, and of raising and the equipping its own armed forces.  Considerable government funds would have to be diverted for these purposes which, in the view of this government, would be much better spent on the progress and development of the Bahama Islands for the good of all the inhabitants.  For these reasons the government cannot support proposals for a constitutional conference at the present time.”

In due course, the motion was put but was lost by a vote of thirteen to seven.   Both Progressive Liberal Bahamian Party and the National Democratic Party supported the motion, but the United Bahamian Party not only denied the courtesy of a select committee, but no member of the party participated in the debate.

Now if we were to examine the statement of the Premier, we will find that his argument against independence is facetious.  The premier stated that The Bahamas could not take on the expense of establishing embassies and high commissions abroad, but Gentlemen The Bahamas government is now maintaining very highly paid administrative offices in major cities of the world.  Some of them in London, Miami, New York, Chicago, Los Angeles, Dallas, St. Louis, Washington, and even in Bonn, Germany.

In many of these offices, Bahamian personal is either nil or negligible.  So the excuse that we cannot maintain an embassy is tenuous indeed.

According to the United Kingdom, we are not Africans, yet “Bahamians” is not a legal term under the constitution, and no one can say with any degree of truth that we are British.  As a people we are without history, without culture, and without a national identity.  We study British history, British culture, and even British weather, but about ourselves, we have no past – and in colonialism, no future.

Because of the colonial status, the value of the Bahamian dollar is questionable.  Should the British pound be devalued, it would have serious consequences on the economy of The Bahamas.

Because of our colonial status, Bahamians pay a penalty in the form of high custom duty for trading with countries other than the British Commonwealth.  Our economy is tied to the Western Hemisphere.  Indeed everything we eat and wear comes from the Caribbean, North or South America.

It has been suggested that The Bahamas has a democratic constitution based on municipal suffrage – one man, one vote.  Because members in the House of Assembly are not paid, only the rich are financially able to represent their districts – hence membership in the present assembly is composed mainly of the merchants and professional class, but the labouring class has only very limited representation.  In the past 200 years, only on two or three occasions have the Out Islands been able to have representation by a person who resides in the Out Islands.

This situation is aggravated by the fact that there is no local government of the Out Islands.  These areas are governed only by an appointed commissioner, but there are other elected bodies to assist in the administration.  Without more education and greater participation in government, the people will not be prepared to master the responsibilities of independence.

We therefore, request that the United Nations take swift action to influence Britain to set a time-table for the eventual independence of the Bahamas and; in the meantime a commission of United Nations experts should be appointed to make a survey of the political, economic and social conditions of The Bahamas with a view to introducing adequate measures that would prepare the Bahamian people to master their own responsibilities.

HOME to The Positive Achievements of Sir Randol Fawkes>>>