The Honorable Paul Lawrence Adderley, a committed Anglican and a man of deep faith ...chose instead the path of national service; one which ultimately would assure that his labor would not be in vain

A tribute to Paul Adderley

Dear Editor,

 

The Honorable Paul Lawrence Adderley, was one of the two children of A.F. Adderley, a well-known and highly esteemed Bahamian lawyer.  Adderley was born in 1928, a time when there was not a large cadre of Bahamian professionals and few black Bahamian lawyers.  Especially being a graduate of Cambridge University and a U.K. trained barrister, he could have chosen to dedicate his life to private practice and to making a lot of money.  Indeed, had he chosen the private practice life, his law firm would probably today have been one of the leading law firms in The Bahamas, if not the leading law firm in The Bahamas.

Adderley, a committed Anglican and a man of deep faith, chose instead the path of national service; one which ultimately would assure that his labor would not be in vain.

Recognizing that politics is a noble profession and a significant means by which there can be fundamental transformation of a society for the benefit of all, he joined the movement to universal suffrage, self-government, majority rule and independence.  He was the longest serving attorney general in The Bahamas, as well as serving in other critical Cabinet portfolios and as acting governor general.  His stellar tenure as attorney general has not been forgotten.

He was at the genesis of the first “third political party”, the National Democratic Party.  He was at the vanguard of the fight for a thriving democracy in The Bahamas.  Certainly, history will record Adderley as one of The Bahamas’ founding fathers and the nation will forever be grateful for his tremendous sacrifices.

I celebrate and am thankful for the living example of Adderley’s commitment to family, his unquenchable thirst for knowledge, his spirit of excellence, his loyalty to friends and his work to accomplish his vision of The Bahamas as a home of and for the brightest and the best.  He believed that The Bahamas is the “best little country in the world”.

Deepest sympathy and prayers are extended to his wife, Lillith Adderley, and his daughters, Catherine, Roseanne and Paula who have lost a husband and father.  The Bahamas has lost one of its brightest and best.  May his soul rest in peace.

 

– Allyson Maynard-Gibson, attorney general

Sep 20, 2012

thenassauguardian

In every way and in every segment of life the Bahamian's value system has certainly changed

The Bahamas' changing value system
tribune242 editorial


WE HAVE had several calls about our editorial of February 11, which for the first time revealed the name of an anonymous letter writer, whose identity excited political circles in 1962, but for 49 years remained a mystery. Today, few people would be interested in our mystery man, but in the political turmoil of the sixties, a British editor was threatened with prison for refusing to reveal his identity.

However, with the death of Paul Bower on January 24, memories of those few days in the Magistrate's Court in October, 1963 came flooding back. For several years speculation continued about the letter writer. Today, when it no longer matters, and few would care, we realised that we were now the last living person who knows the letter's author. For the sake of history we revealed it in this column on February 11.

The calls that we have received as a result of that column, were not about the mystery writer, now unmasked, but about the fate of Paul Bower when he refused to give the court the writer's name. No, he did not go to prison as threatened by Magistrate John Bailey, who when off the bench was one of his best friends.

The case ended suddenly when the Guardian owners decided to pay the plaintiffs' damages, and rescue their man from the edge of the cliff. Magistrate Bailey had refused the Guardian leave to appeal his decision of name or prison.

Mr Bower, who was Guardian editor from 1958 to August 1962 (two months before the case came to court in October), asked the magistrate: "What would happen should I refuse (to reveal the writer's name)?"

"You would be in contempt," the Irish magistrate replied.

"What would be the consequences?" Mr Bower pressed. "A fine or a prison sentence," the magistrate shot back.

"Ten days in Her Majesty's prison!" LB Johnson, one of the six PLP plaintiffs, demanded loudly. This exchange was followed by a luncheon adjournment. By the afternoon the case was over, Mr Bower had missed the arrow, the plaintiffs had their damages, and letter writer Bert Cambridge was still a mystery man.

Guardian lawyer James Liddell had argued that not only was the plaintiffs' complaints vexatious, but that what was being complained of before the court was the letter and its content, not the identity of the writer. But the plaintiffs were not buying that argument, nor was the magistrate. In a few weeks time there would be a general election, which the PLP were confident of winning - in fact they lost. Racism was a heavy card being played at the time, and the six PLP plaintiffs -- all lawyers - wanted to know which white man would dare question their integrity in an anonymous letter. What they did not know was that the writer was, like themselves, a black man, a former politician, whose character Mr Bower had described in glowing terms in court. Several of the plaintiffs were Bert Cambridge's friends. In fact he had given music lessons to one of them. Bert Cambridge's Orchestra was the hottest band in town in the twenties and thirties, and music was his career.

But what we find most interesting is the change over the years in public values. In those days it was seldom that one sued a newspaper for defamation, and anything over £100 in damages was certainly unheard of. And so for "An Open Letter to Mr Paul Adderley," published in The Guardian on August 21, 1962 the six lawyers -- Paul Adderley, Loftus Roker, Lynden Pindling, AD Hanna, LB Johnson and Orville Turnquest -- each asked for £100 for the damage perceived to have been done to their reputations, plus costs, which in those days would have been minimal.

However, thanks to the influence over the years of America's legal system where it almost pays to do oneself an injury in a public place and walk away with millions awarded by the courts, Bahamians have adjusted their opinion of their own worth.

In 1962, Orville Turnquest who became the Bahamas' Governor General, was not bloated up with his own importance. He obviously felt well compensated with £100 for the slight he had felt was committed against him. If he had known that it was his old piano teacher, he probably would have slapped him on the back, had a good laugh and they would have gone off to make music together.

However, today we see some of these complaints, many of them vexatious, and the value -- starting in the thousands --that persons put on their own worth and we wonder where they are coming from.

In every way and in every segment of life the Bahamian's value system has certainly changed.

February 18, 2011

tribune242 editorial

Bahamas Blog International

Constitutional Review Commission Officials At Odds about Some of The New Recommendations of The Commission - and with what the Ingraham Administration had Proposed in The 2002 Referendum

Michael Barnett, Co-deputy Chairman of the Constitutional Review Commission defends the position of the FNM government on the failed 2002 referendum

2002 Referendum Defended

 

By Candia Dames

Nassau, The Bahamas

11 April 2006

 

 

  

 

Two officials of the government-appointed Constitutional Review Commission are at odds over whether some of the new recommendations of the Commission are largely in line with what the Ingraham Administration had proposed in the 2002 referendum.

Co-deputy Chairman Michael Barnett even defended the position of the FNM government on the failed referendum, noting that the proposed changes had been supported by the then opposition in parliament and then later opposed.

"There is no radical difference in the nature of the recommendations with respect to constitutional change," said Mr. Barnett, who was one of the guests on the Love 97 programme ‘Jones and Company’ on Sunday.

He suggested that besides some "tinkering, glossing and tightening up" the recommendations of the new report "are very much the same" as what the FNM government had pushed in the referendum.

Shortly after members of the commission presented a copy of their preliminary report to Prime Minister Perry Christie last month, former Prime Minister Hubert Ingraham, who is now again the leader of the FNM, noted essentially the same.

He also said that the PLP government appeared to now be suggesting that while the proposed changes were wrong under the FNM’s watch, they are now right under the PLP’s watch.

But Commission Co-chairman Paul Adderley, who was also on the Sunday programme, agreed that while Mr. Barnett was suggesting that the groundwork for what the commission is now doing was laid by the Ingraham Administration, that is not true.

He indicated that there are fundamental differences contained in the report of his commission, although he recognized that there are some similarities.

"Firstly, with regard to citizenship, no one objects to the concept of equality of women and the FNM proposal was that Bahamian women married to a foreigner [that their] children became Bahamians just like the children of Bahamian men," Mr. Adderley noted.

"That provision is exactly the same and I think everybody agrees with that."

But he pointed out that while the FNM government proposed that a foreign man who married a Bahamian woman could obtain citizenship immediately, the commission recommends that he be made to wait years before qualifying.

"That particular provision, I think, caused them more difficulty in the referendum than any other, that instantaneous citizenship," Mr. Adderley said.  "This commission proposed between five to 10 years…That is the fundamental difference…That, I think, is very, very significant."

The commission co-chairman also pointed out that the FNM government proposed that the boundaries commission still be subjected to the prime minister’s power to amend.

But the Constitutional Commission is recommending that the constitution be amended to create a truly independent electoral and boundaries commission and remove the power of the prime minister to modify the report of the commission.

Mr. Barnett then insisted again that the concepts and the ideas of the 2002 proposal and the present one are the same.

"With respect to the marriage, what was proposed during the 2002 referendum exercise, I thought, is the concept that the right that was afforded to non-Bahamian women who were married to Bahamian men…that same right should be given to a non-Bahamian male who is married to a non-Bahamian female…That very same concept is repeated in the recommendations that have been made by this report," he said, repeating Mr. Adderley’s earlier point.

Mr. Adderley, meanwhile, said there are also significant differences as they relate to the 2002 proposal on the mandatory retirement age of judges.

"The point where we disagree is with regard to the term of judges," he said.

The Ingraham Administration recommended that the retirement age of a Supreme Court judge be extended from 67 to 72; and the retirement age of a justice of the Court of Appeal be extended to 75, with the right to extend being held by the prime minister.

"Mr. Adderley said, "We have number one suggested so far that the retirement age be 70 – fixed and no question of extending it by the prime minister because we thought that would give the prime minister a little too much leverage and power."

Mr. Barnett said he still thinks that the retirement age being recommended by the commission is "too low", but he said he agreed with the concept that the prime minister should not have the power to extend the retirement age.

On the point of the 2002 referendum defeat, Mr. Barnett pointed out that the PLP while in opposition had supported the Ingraham Administration’s proposal.

"You must not forget that the proposals that had been put forward had received the unanimous support of all the members of parliament and that the people could have been educated as to why those…proposals had been made and why it was that they supported them," he said.

"[The opposition] elected not to do so and as a result of that I think we got caught up in the politics of early 2002 - and what were really sensible proposals were simply rejected…not because of the defects of the proposals or the lack of merit of the proposals because you can see many of the proposals are repeated here."

Mr. Adderley quickly said, "But don’t underestimate the people’s capacity once they are told something to think for themselves."

The commission intends to carry out another round of consultations with the Bahamian people before submitting final recommendations.

Responding to a question that was asked by the show’s host, Wendall Jones, Mr. Adderley said, "[The government doesn’t] have to accept a single word which we put down here, but a government would be a very foolish government not to accept anything we put down."

The commission makes many key provisional recommendations in its report – copies of which are available at the commission’s office in the Royal Victoria Gardens.

A few of the recommendations include abolishing the office of governor general and creating a democratic parliamentary republic with the head of state being the president; increasing the size of the senate to 23 and giving the president the power to appoint five of those senators; and eliminating gender bias from the constitution.

Prime Minister Christie has foreshadowed that a referendum will be held so Bahamians can decide on what changes would actually be made to the constitution.