WHAT INSIGHT SHOULD
WE EXPECT FROM UNIVERSITY PROFESSORS LECTURES/DEBATES.
The
pattern followed in recent years by all our newly created political
organizations, undoubtedly as a way of seeking legitimacy in the
sight of the public is to recourse to university professors from
Guadeloupe, Martinique and even Paris to explain to the public in
form of lectures or debates the policies of France affecting
St-Martin, in particular related to the option called article 74.
The
pattern followed in recent years by all our newly created political
organizations, undoubtedly as a way of seeking legitimacy in the
sight of the public is to recourse to university professors from
Guadeloupe, Martinique and even Paris to explain to the public in
form of lectures or debates the policies of France affecting
St-Martin, in particular related to the option called article 74.Individualism versus a structured political organization grounded on a continued constant ideology
Obviously, to be elevated to the rank of being flanked by university professors seems to be mission accomplished in a strategy to authenticate personal political standard and to assure the boosting of popularity rating in view of up coming elections.
These lectures/debates are far beyond the intellectual assimilation of the common St-Martiner so it is like saying to the people: “If you don't understand
politics it is your fault, your inaptitude to rise to the level of
politics science, you can only blame yourself for your bewilderment and no
one else”
Once this mission accomplished we find not a
structured political organization united upon a common ideology but most
regretfully, individuals in a group, each concerned only in painting his
or her self into a bright but very misleading personality.
We find individuals with the feeling of being discharged, thanks
to this university professors supporting strategy, of the obligation to acquire
the necessary qualification and pragmatism to master the legal and
political science needed to be capable of handling the problems
inherent in the function of elective political leadership more crucially demanding in a political context as St-Martin yet within the claws of colonialism.
We find individuals in a group with the only personal concern of rising to the honorable position of president, vice-president of St-Martin as a COM or of rising to the national honorable status of senator, or deputy, or Social and Economic counsellor sitting in Paris.
In our thirst for
effective leadership, we may be falsely seduced by theses individuals
spirited performance but this only at the price of suppressing deep
down within us our instinct that is instilling us with a sense emptiness in our eager for a true vision at a satisfactory measure to the true realities affecting
our entire little island,
The rise to political maturity is in the continuation down generations of a constant worthy ideology
Another reason one may accuse this new generation of politicians for seeking their political legitimacy in the only recourse to university professors to the exclusion of worthy elder natives politicians, is to guarantee the favors of metropolitan State's representatives, prefets, proving that they are free from any common political ideology with previous politicians filed persona non grata because of their frank opposition to the metropolitan State's government policies applied in St-Martin.
The rise to political maturity is in the continuation down generations of a constant worthy ideology
Another reason one may accuse this new generation of politicians for seeking their political legitimacy in the only recourse to university professors to the exclusion of worthy elder natives politicians, is to guarantee the favors of metropolitan State's representatives, prefets, proving that they are free from any common political ideology with previous politicians filed persona non grata because of their frank opposition to the metropolitan State's government policies applied in St-Martin.
I'm talking of the now deceased Dr.
Hubert Petit ousted out of leadership in the first half of the 1970's in retaliation of daring boldness to
challenge the French minister of the Overseas, Pierre Messmer plan to
promote the creation of the necessary infrastructure to accommodate
the implantation of a new population in the Overseas territories
including St-Martin.
I'm talking of the now deceased Claude Wathey, never personally being one of his fans in matters of his domestics policies, nevertheless I must admit that at the very beginning of the era of talks on constitutional reform of St-Maarten, his position was simple, was clear, was noble, "Two options: Full independence or nothing"
Certainly in retaliation, he was to find himself quickly after isolated as persona non grata and ended up in public disgrace this after over 40 years of popular reign not limited in the public opinion of the dutch side but covering entire Island public opinion.
His political parti successors betrayed his position and have chosen the road to the most ambiguous non-precedent status within the Netherlands kingdom. In the lights of reality of facts St-Maarten and Curacao are enjoying far less autonomy than when under the status of the former N.A. and even less autonomy than Saba and Statia now under the status of provinces of Holland.
The reason is that if the status of "Province" is constitutionally defined and an integral part of the constitution of the Netherlands when on the contrary St-Maarten and Curacao have chosen to overlook the fundamental principle of having their called status "Country within the kingdom" constitutionally defined and integrated into the constitution of the Kingdom. As a result of this failure, reality of facts has proven them to be placed under the systematic arbitrary rulings of Holland Executive Power.
I'm talking of the now deceased Claude Wathey, never personally being one of his fans in matters of his domestics policies, nevertheless I must admit that at the very beginning of the era of talks on constitutional reform of St-Maarten, his position was simple, was clear, was noble, "Two options: Full independence or nothing"
Certainly in retaliation, he was to find himself quickly after isolated as persona non grata and ended up in public disgrace this after over 40 years of popular reign not limited in the public opinion of the dutch side but covering entire Island public opinion.
His political parti successors betrayed his position and have chosen the road to the most ambiguous non-precedent status within the Netherlands kingdom. In the lights of reality of facts St-Maarten and Curacao are enjoying far less autonomy than when under the status of the former N.A. and even less autonomy than Saba and Statia now under the status of provinces of Holland.
The reason is that if the status of "Province" is constitutionally defined and an integral part of the constitution of the Netherlands when on the contrary St-Maarten and Curacao have chosen to overlook the fundamental principle of having their called status "Country within the kingdom" constitutionally defined and integrated into the constitution of the Kingdom. As a result of this failure, reality of facts has proven them to be placed under the systematic arbitrary rulings of Holland Executive Power.
I'm talking of
militants like myself who in the second haft of the 1970's at the sacrifice of my personal professional career
as 'Expert Comptable” had dared to challenge the educational system
enforced in St-Martin by creating at my sole expense the first
private vocational school in St-Martin preparing the youth to sit to
State's organized exams and to get involved in the electoral process with for ideology the preparation of St-Martin's natives in particular to constitute a
counter-force to the negative effects that was to undoubtedly result from the implementation of the Pierre Messmer plan.
As today as a result, reduced to a native's minority of less than 20% of our homeland total population, my awareness to this
new generation of politicians seeking leadership by all means in the electoral process of the island is that growth to political maturity is only
guaranteed through a precise ideology continued down through generations.
Breaking away from the worthy ideology of predecessors is but a suicidal attitude.
No non-native
university professor better than an experienced elder-native will open-heartedly deliver to you the accurate and pragmatic advice needed to run St-Martin in the right direction.
Time has practically
expired to see the rise of a native political parti grounded upon a
common patriotic ideology capable of creating a sense of connection
and the necessary unity between St-Martiners.
Time for the
elaboration of a structured organization composed essentially of
trusted natives united upon a patriotic ideology beyond immediate
circumstances or events, has expired,
St-Martin from a
population around 7000 inhabitants in 1972, natives in a large
majority has grown today to a population over the 40 000 inhabitants
of which the natives represent less than 20%. It is the only Island
in the Caribbean this has happen to.
Yet this very month
november 15th, 2013 we behold the Préfet Philippe Chopin
holding grand naturalization ceremony with international media
coverage for over 20 foreigners and welcoming speech claiming “France
is a welcoming country, beautiful and noble, a land of hope, strong
on the values of liberty, equalityand fraternity. I wish you a good
life in our country”
Unfortunately in
spite of our minority condition in our homeland, up to this day we
have proving as natives our incapacity to rise the politics of our
homeland beyond immediate personal electoral ambitions and this
exactly at a period of our history when our little island is
suffering the detrimental effects of the metropolitan government
plan set in place since 1971 to implant a new population in our
little Island and needs trust worthy and qualified men and women to
lead the minority group we are reduced too, through this survival
tragedy.
Our failure to have a country-level vision built upon a continued constant patriotic ideology within an accurately structured organization has systematically opened a free high way to the metropolitan government who on the contrary have an ideology, a that it has demonstrated with persistency during the years not missing one occasion to humiliate the natives of the land.
Our failure to have a country-level vision built upon a continued constant patriotic ideology within an accurately structured organization has systematically opened a free high way to the metropolitan government who on the contrary have an ideology, a that it has demonstrated with persistency during the years not missing one occasion to humiliate the natives of the land.
In political
science, the implementation of the policy decided in 1971 consisting
in the implantation of a new population in our Island, is termed:
Genocide by substitution.
Today as natives reduced to less than 20% of the total population, let us make no mistake in our electoral ambitions, It is nothing we can do to reestablish a healthy demographic equilibrium and have control over the political orientation of our once belonged homeland.
Today as natives reduced to less than 20% of the total population, let us make no mistake in our electoral ambitions, It is nothing we can do to reestablish a healthy demographic equilibrium and have control over the political orientation of our once belonged homeland.
St-Martin is the
only Island in the entire Caribbean with a native population reduce
to less than 20% and this in a period of 4 decades.
Why all the lectures/debates or advices received from university professors apparently had not contributed to elevate our politicians and elected leaders to better insight in the deal with Paris for this called COM status?
Why all the lectures/debates or advices received from university professors apparently had not contributed to elevate our politicians and elected leaders to better insight in the deal with Paris for this called COM status?
Should we assess the
enormity of our set back in matters of political status, in matters
of colonial link with France and the E.U., in matters of economic
development, in matters of fiscal justice, in matters of human
resource, in matters of jobs and entrepreneurial achievements, social
benefits, in matters of living standard, even after five years of
administration as a territorial Collectivity within the French
Republic and as a RUP within the E. U., the honest attitude should be to question our attitude and actions.
We have seen the
Municipality contracting the most famous of Paris university
professors in search for guidance in the process of St-Martin
statutory transformation from a Commune of Guadeloupe to a
Territorial Collectivity within the French Republic,
We have seen
political parties, elected leaders, Senator, Deputy... inviting
university professors from Guadeloupe and Martinique to give lectures
to the public on the called “ article 74” or on the called “Loi
organique”, or on the statutory options (RUP or PTOM) within the
E.U. Etc....
In spite of all the lectures/debates and advices received, the people are today left to suffer the complaints of these same politicians and elected leaders, advocators in favour of this
statutary reform with as option the called "article 74" as they are all today deceived in their expectations as
confronted with the reality of where the called “article 74” and
the called “Loi Organique” have taken St-Martin and the people
today.
Remember the last of
my interview on Billy Di "Talking Point" program over “Radio
St-Martin”. My answer to a caller claiming that the “article 74”
option was about nation building was that if we want to talk about
nation building we ought to demand a politic reform (réforme
politique) because article 74 of the French constitution exclusively referring to a question of
administrative reshuffle.
The following day I
was blast over the same Billy Di program by Louis Mussington in terms
of being arrogant and against progress. He and his parti had organized
multiple university professors lectures/debates here in St-Martin to
convinced the public on the windfall this “article 74” option
represents for St-Martin.
From that day that turned out to be my last aired interview, all
the parties involved in the negotiation process of this “Article
74” and “loi Organique” strengthen by their university
professors, some from Guadeloupe/Martinique others from Paris started
to advocate the statutory change in terms of “Political and
administrative reform”
Don't get me wrong! The question here is not to throw any doubt over the competence or authenticity of university professors in the science they profess, but rather to set awareness on the nature of the insight we should expect from university professors or what enlighten we should never expect them to deliver on.
It is a well known
fact by all experienced politicians that as a rule whether out of a tradition or out of professional ethics, university professors in general
within their mission as lecturers, debaters, advisors, would never
demonstrate open controversy against the State's government policies but
rather will always give proof of ingenuity in finding within their
university scientific theories grounds to interpret and even justify
governmental policies and decisions.
This attitude may be
different when they perform as simple citizens within their
affiliated political movement or parti but never when they are
contracted to perform under their professional title out of their intimate context, before a general public.
Politicians aware of this fact, and want to be sincere in their political mission, know what level of cohesion they can count upon and where to draw the line
between receiving a critique analysis of governmental policies, needed to exercise pragmatic politics and theories of political science displayed by university professors.
Others whose only aim is to gain legitimacy in the sight of the public by all means, simply see and use the company and theories of university professors as a convenient boost to their misleading rhetorics.
Others whose only aim is to gain legitimacy in the sight of the public by all means, simply see and use the company and theories of university professors as a convenient boost to their misleading rhetorics.
Again I repeat, from
a scientific point of view we can benefit from university professors
lectures, debates, advice,.... but we must have the capacity to sort out the information received, of course when our serious objective is simply seeking the necessary scientific contribution in our endeavor to produce in terms of our own common ideology an accurate critique
analysis of the State's government policies enforced upon us.
University professors may deliver to us an eloquent painting of the general map of the State's government policies, laws or decisions but they will never deliver to us the precise road map defining the true reality origin from where come our problems or guidance leading to pragmatic solutions, because this will call for a controversial interference in the State's government policy that, as a rule, they forbid themselves.
University professors may deliver to us an eloquent painting of the general map of the State's government policies, laws or decisions but they will never deliver to us the precise road map defining the true reality origin from where come our problems or guidance leading to pragmatic solutions, because this will call for a controversial interference in the State's government policy that, as a rule, they forbid themselves.
We must have the
capacity to elaborate our own precise road map in a spirit of patriotic continuity down generations and also have the ability to establish
cohesion between the informations received from university professors and our
pragmatic knowledge of the human condition, the constitutional, the political, the social and
economic, realities affecting our daily life and to wisely translate
the all into pragmatic ideological orientations.
Evidently this is
impossible if politics for us is to only focus on the political
personality of this individual and that individual instead of putting all our potentials upon a
continued constant political ideology for our Island.
The public unaware,
attend these lectures/debates with the hope to receive practical
answers to practical questions related to the daily realities they
are confronted to in St-Martin, but unfortunately the answers
received are formulated on a scientific level, at times very
ambiguous, that only place them in a state of more bewilderment at
the end.
Article 74 of the French constitution is no more than the splashdown in the French Overseas of a six for a nine
As example, no
university professor would have ever revealed to our public that the called
“article 74” that was advocated as an exceptional opportunity for St-Martin
to accede to autonomy generating a windfall of benefits, constituted in the terms of its stipulated proceedings, a constitutional closed door preventing French Overseas Territories, Departments/Regions, COM... to accede to
any form of constitutional reform but simply allowing administrative reshuffle at the level of the executive power in Paris and this within the only context of articles 73 and 74.
An organic law by nature has no constitutional value and in its role can only compete with "décrets d'application" of certain ordinary Parliamentary laws
An organic law by nature has no constitutional value and in its role can only compete with "décrets d'application" of certain ordinary Parliamentary laws
In article 72-4 of
the constitution we read that any change of regime leading to or from
article 73 or 74 is decide by an organic law (Ce changement de régime
est décidé par une loi organique)
In article 74 of the constitution we read that the status of Overseas Collectivities opting for this article will be defined by an organic law (Ce statut est défini par une loi organique....)
In article 74 of the constitution we read that the status of Overseas Collectivities opting for this article will be defined by an organic law (Ce statut est défini par une loi organique....)
Here is where we
learnt what Moliere meant when he lamented: “ Et par un six de
cœur, je me suis vu capot”.
By its nature,
organic laws represent to constitutional laws what “décrets
d'application” represent for certain ordinary parliamentary laws.
The logic question here is: Is the organic law regulating the St-Martin - St-Barthelemy COM is the one stipulated in article 72-4 deciding on the change of “régime” or the one of article 74 defining the “statut”?
Whatsoever may be the answer, to be handed down an organic law completed by a "Décret d'application” is to my knowledge without precedent in France's legislative history
The logic question here is: Is the organic law regulating the St-Martin - St-Barthelemy COM is the one stipulated in article 72-4 deciding on the change of “régime” or the one of article 74 defining the “statut”?
Whatsoever may be the answer, to be handed down an organic law completed by a "Décret d'application” is to my knowledge without precedent in France's legislative history
An organic law by its nature cannot constitutionally create therefore define a public authority if defining the status means defining the legal or constitutional establishment of the public authority within the constitution of the Republic. Only a constitutional law has that power
On the other hand, no one knowledgeable in
matters of constitutional proceedings would mix up the terms “Régime” and
“Statut” and therefore confound articles 72-4 and 74 of
the constitution in their application in changing St-Martin - St-Barthelemy from Communes of
Guadeloupe to Territorial Collectivities.
A literal interpretation should have required the voting of two organic laws: One deciding of the changing of the regime and another defining the status, but such an enormity would have uncovered the hidden deceitfulness of this article 74 and bring to light the truncated nature of this statutory change.
The serious infringe to constitutional fundamental principle here in that an organic law (Loi Organique) does not have the nature of a constitutional law, can never substitute a constitutional law in short has no constitutional value therefore is but a legal tool in the hands of the only Paris Executive Power.
A literal interpretation should have required the voting of two organic laws: One deciding of the changing of the regime and another defining the status, but such an enormity would have uncovered the hidden deceitfulness of this article 74 and bring to light the truncated nature of this statutory change.
The serious infringe to constitutional fundamental principle here in that an organic law (Loi Organique) does not have the nature of a constitutional law, can never substitute a constitutional law in short has no constitutional value therefore is but a legal tool in the hands of the only Paris Executive Power.
Only a
constitutional law can modify the constitution and create
new public authorities.
Therefore the
State's government though article 74 has closed the front door to true constitutional reform only leaving opened a domestic back-door allowing administrative reshuffles within the frame of articles 73
and 74 of the constitution. Reshuffles exclusively in matters of organization and functioning modalities.
Placing under organic laws the proceedings of all inter-changes from or to articles 73 and 74 of the French constitution has implicitly sealed off all possibility for the Overseas Territories to accede to a real and true constitutional.
Placing under organic laws the proceedings of all inter-changes from or to articles 73 and 74 of the French constitution has implicitly sealed off all possibility for the Overseas Territories to accede to a real and true constitutional.
Contrary to stipulations of article 74, if a change of “régime” means a
change in the organization and functioning modalities and defining of
the status means defining the legal and constitutional form of
existence of the new public authority then the former call fall under an organic law but the latter legally can only be
proceeded through a constitutional law (Loi constitutionnelle).
By definition a constitutional
law decides on the creation, organization and functioning principles of public authorities and is
complete by an organic law fixing in details the organization and functioning
modalities.
The former is integrated into the texts that constitute the constitution of the Republic, the latter as an organic law by its nature has no constitutional value therefore can never be integrated into the constitution.
The former is integrated into the texts that constitute the constitution of the Republic, the latter as an organic law by its nature has no constitutional value therefore can never be integrated into the constitution.
It is fair to say that the present status
of St-Martin and St-Barthelemy has no constitutional
value and therefore in its legal form can only compete with the famous ordinary law called “Loi d'orientation” initiated in
the year 2000 in the benefit of Guadeloupe, Martinique and French guyana.
As a consequence, considering the actual state of the French constitution, St-Martin and St-Barthelemy have no constitutional existence within the French constitution if not yet counted as communes of Guadeloupe.
As a consequence, considering the actual state of the French constitution, St-Martin and St-Barthelemy have no constitutional existence within the French constitution if not yet counted as communes of Guadeloupe.
Today all the fervent advocators of St-Martin option for article 74 of
the constitution voice sadly their state of frustration claiming that :”We were not
given the real article 74”
The truth is that
they are lost constitutionally-wise in their such for landmarks distinguishing the fundamental statutory principles from the organization and functioning modalities, both handed down in a melting pot under the strict and arrogant supervision of the state's representative to the COM, the préfet.
The now sitting
minister of the Overseas DOM-TOM on his recent visit to St-Martin had
accused the failings of the said “Loi organique” to be the cause
of St-Martin COM crisis and promised to work on an amendment of the law
A truncated amendment doomed to failure
Seemingly the
executive body of the COM is working exclusively on there side on
amendments proposals and the other political parties are working each
separately on their own proposals.
But none is asking
the fundamental questions: is the crisis a result of the application
of article 74? or of the “loi Organique”? Or of the “décret
d'application” or of the “Loi des finances” related to the
compensation of the transfer of competence cost? Or of all of these together as a whole?
The answers to these questions are the condition sine qua non to avoid fallen a second time into a demagogic enterprise domed to failure.
The answers to these questions are the condition sine qua non to avoid fallen a second time into a demagogic enterprise domed to failure.
As long as the legal
status of the Territorial Collectivities of St-Martin and
St-Barthelemy is not integrated, in form of a rightful constitutional text, into the
constitution of the French Republic, these two Territorial
Collectivities remain at the arbitrary mercy of Paris Executive Power and the arrogant attitude of its delegated representatives, the préfets.
In our actual state as a COM within the French Republic, we can only compete with the constitution of December 13th, 1799 stipulating that the regime of the colonies are determined by special laws or the law of April 24th, 1833 called "La charte coloniale" granting a semblance of local autonomy under the supervision of the king and his representatives in the colonies.
In our actual state as a COM within the French Republic, we can only compete with the constitution of December 13th, 1799 stipulating that the regime of the colonies are determined by special laws or the law of April 24th, 1833 called "La charte coloniale" granting a semblance of local autonomy under the supervision of the king and his representatives in the colonies.
