It is clear that the world's suspicions that the UK will not allow elections in Turks and Caicos are true. Last summer 2009, when the British took all governance of the Turks & Caicos Islands in a coup d'etat, the UK told the world that it was taking governance of Turks and Caicos to straighten out local corruption, but would allow elections in 2011. The world bought it, hook, line and sinker.
Many investigative reporters knew this was a lie. Why? Because the Foreign Commonwealth Office (FCO) made this decision solely and did not get a consensus from the United Nations, European Union and most shockingly even the UK Parliament. That's right, the FCO made this draconian decision on its own, without any input from domestic or foreign entities. The only reason for the FCO to make such a secret move is it knew that blocs would not allow it or approve it. This is the same as Bush invading Iraq without permission from anyone and in spite of the UN's disapproval.
The UK took over governance in the Turks & Caicos Islands last August 2009 and took all civil rights from the people, including local input on government decisions affecting the people. It took the local judiciary and put one man in charge, an UK diplomat called Gordon Wetherell. The news from the region became scarce, to say the least. The UK intimidated the mainstream press on a large scale and began putting out its own news vis-a-vis a propaganda site called TCI Journal, run by a former opposition party leader called Shaun Malcolm. The news coming from this site is a clear and despicable sham. Incidentally, the people of TCI Journal are the same people who accused the local government of corruption, and acted with the UK to take the local government. Do we believe that this is a causal coincidence?
The entire time that the UK was enslaving the local people and taking their right to self determination, the UK, in order to keep the people from speaking out, continued to promise elections in 2011. The more learned knew that this was not to be trusted. But nonetheless, the local Turks & Caicos people, though sophisticated, are also forward thinking by nature, and trusted the UK's promises.
The UK made several veiled comments concerning UK elections in 2011, such as their promise of a permanent presence and making sure that there is a proper leader. This had the peoples' feathers ruffled, as an elected representative should be for the people and by the people and this does not include the UK's input let alone their interference.
Nevertheless, the two political parties continued to rely on the UK's promises of elections and continued their conventions and campaigning.
However, last week, I brought you a concerning clue that things were not looking good. Doug Parnell, the leader of the Peoples Democratic Movement (PDM), went to London to visit the Foreign Commonwealth Office to discuss elections. The director, Henry Bellingham, barely made time for Mr. Parnell who had traveled across the world with a very important matter to sort out. It was as if Mr. Bellingham did not want to discuss Turks & Caicos elections. Perhaps he was too busy readying for the election reform referendum afforded to UK citizens.
Doug Parnell was undoubtedly frustrated with the UK's lack of concern or care for the Turks & Caicos people. However, Parnell sheepishly told the local press that he was encouraged by UK's listening of his concerns. I thought that this might have been a self serving evaluation by Parnell who might not have wanted to rock the boat with the MPs. Now, it turns out that my suspicions were correct, that the UK MPs were blowing smoke up Parnell's you-know-what when they addressed his concerns. I hope that Parnell is reading between the lines now.
On July 6, a bombshell! Henry Bellingham of the FCO confirmed what the people of Turks & Caicos Islands have been afraid of for over a year. Self determination will not be given to the Turks and Caicos people.
Henry Bellingham made an announcement that elections will be allowed if the UK can approve the candidate. This means no fair elections in laymen's terms. The UK only wishes to approve elections if the candidate supports and backs the UK agenda. This is no election at all, not a democratic one anyway. This is a rouse meant to bind the people to a leader of the UK's choice for the UK's agenda.
Though the UK has been unable to prove any former government corruption after a year of investigation, Henry Bellingham, director of the FCO, said in his speech, "We want to avoid the danger of re-electing politicians involved in corruption." Hey Mr. Bellingham? There has been no proof of corruption, let alone even a hint of an upcoming trial. Why do you keep commenting about corruption?
This is a very curious situation. The matter of the UK take over of the islands without any consensus, taking democracy from the people, running the local economy into the ground and failing to prove any corruption. UK's actions there raise more questions than answers.