Constitution and the Cost of Belonging
A 2007 change to the Virgin Islands Constitution introduced a legal distinction between Belongers by birth or ancestry and Belongers by grant, limiting automatic transmission of status to children. As the Constitution is reviewed, residents are debating the social, economic and familial consequences of that change and whether amendments should restore broader inheritance of Belonger rights.
When the Virgin Islands adopted a new Constitution in 2007 it kept many existing rights but introduced a significant and lasting shift in who can automatically pass Belonger status to their children. In a commentary published on BVI News, Mitsy J. Ellis-Simpson argues that the amendment that split Belonger status into categories — by birth/ancestry and by grant — quietly redefined belonging and disrupted long-standing family continuity in the Territory.
Under the earlier 1976 Constitution, belonging was tied more directly to family connection: the child of a Belonger generally inherited that status. The 2007 Constitution modified that automatic transmission for those who became Belongers by grant (for example, by marriage, residence, or Cabinet approval).
As a result, children born overseas to lawful Belongers can now face additional application steps or exclusion from automatic recognition. That legal distinction has practical consequences for everyday life in the BVI. Land ownership, political participation and access to certain jobs remain closely linked with Belonger status.
The commentary notes that when a child cannot automatically inherit their parents’ status, the family’s connection to land and legacy becomes uncertain. That uncertainty can discourage home improvements, business expansion and other long-term investments, which in turn affects local economic growth.
Financial barriers have compounded the problem. Recent increases in immigration and processing fees make securing status more costly for working families, raising concerns that belonging is becoming transactional rather than based on contribution and connection. The issue also raises competing priorities: protecting the rights of those with ancestral ties to the islands, while recognising the longstanding contributions of residents who became Belongers by grant.
The author calls for balance and leadership as the Constitution undergoes review, arguing that inclusion and heritage protection are not mutually exclusive. As the Territory debates potential amendments to the Constitution, the conversation touches on family, fairness, economic security and national identity.
Residents, policymakers and community leaders will need to weigh how any change would affect land inheritance, investment confidence and civic participation, while ensuring that the concerns of indigenous Virgin Islanders are respected. The views summarised here reflect the commentary by Mitsy J.
Ellis-Simpson and do not necessarily represent the official position of BVI Live.
Primary source: BVI News