Opposition Condemns Ancestry Rule
Opposition legislator Stacy ‘Buddha’ Mather and other Opposition figures have criticised a proposed constitutional definition of “ancestral Virgin Islanders,” saying it would exclude long-term residents from holding public office. They and affected residents are calling for transparent, inclusive public consultations before any change is finalised.
Opposition legislator Stacy ‘Buddha’ Mather has strongly criticised a recommendation in the current constitutional review that would define “ancestral Virgin Islanders,” warning it risks excluding people who have lived, studied and served in the British Virgin Islands all their lives.
Speaking at a press conference alongside Opposition Leader Myron Walwyn and Melvin ‘Mitch’ Turnbull, Mather said Section 65 (2)(b) of the draft Constitution — which would prevent persons from seeking elected office if their parents were not Belongers at the time of their birth — has caused deep concern across the territory.
Mather read from a letter addressed to all members of the House of Assembly written by Virgin Islanders affected by the proposed restriction. The letter argues the rule is “not only impractical, but also incompatible with the inclusive multicultural society the Virgin Islands has become,” and says the territory has invested in their education and development only for the Constitution to block their opportunity to serve in public life. “We must ask ourselves: if a child is born, raised and has grown up in this country, should that child have the right to seek political office?” Mather said, calling the proposal painful and divisive.
He urged open discussion and warned that limiting debate at the committee stage of constitutional talks undermines democratic transparency. “Transparency is not a luxury. Walwyn has voiced similar objections in the House of Assembly, noting that Virgin Islanders without ancestral ties have protested the proposal and described it as unfair discrimination against families who migrated to the territory decades ago.
The recommendation to constitutionally define who qualifies as a Virgin Islander has emerged as one of the most contentious elements of the constitutional review. Opposition figures are urging wider public consultations, saying such a change could have significant consequences for electoral participation, representation and social cohesion.
For BVI residents, the debate touches on the meaning of Belonger status and who can participate fully in public life. Advocates against the ancestry definition say it risks excluding residents who contribute to the economy, public service and community life, while proponents argue for protecting long-standing cultural and legal definitions of belonging.
Mather encouraged residents to read the full Constitutional Review Commission report and take part in national discussions. “Let our voices be heard… Let us ensure that the Constitution we shape reflects the will of our people, not just the will of the House,” he said, as calls grow for an inclusive, transparent process before any constitutional change is finalised.
Primary source: BVI News