A GUY'S VIEW: Impartiality in public office

The President, Vice President and all civil Officers of the United States, shall be removed from Office on Impeachment for, and Conviction of, Treason, Bribery, or other high Crimes and Misdemeanors. (Article II, Section 4 of the Constitution of the United States of America).

IN an interconnected, co-dependent world: and as a small fish living in a big pond, dominated by big fish, it is always important to observe what is happening in the pond, especially with the big fish. Beyond the lessons that may be learnt, one’s very survival might depend on it.

Last week Wednesday, December 18, 2019, the House of Representatives of the United States of America impeached President Donald Trump. This came as no surprise to persons outside of America, but, for purely political reasons, bereft of law, or legal or moral accountability, almost half of the population of that country remains supportive of their President. But that is the beauty of democracy.

Whatever the President did, or did not do, his country’s Constitution provides for corrective action where it is perceived that a leader goes beyond, or falls below, the standards set by the country’s founders. Yes, it appears that the supporters of the President that are appropriately positioned, are determined to hijack the process and keep the President in place, but that is part of the vagaries of human nature and not necessarily a constitutional flaw. The brilliant minds that framed the Constitution could not legislate integrity.

The Barbados Constitution has a different history and lacks the original thought that went into the American version. We laud the efforts of those who delivered this country’s Independence from Britain, but, truth be told, ours was one of the cookie cutter constitutions that were being willingly dished out during that period in British colonial history.

There is no Barbados equivalent to the impeachment provision in the USA. But that does not mean that a rogue leader cannot be controlled. In fact, there need be no roguishness for a leader to be removed. All it takes is for his or her colleagues to withdraw their support and so inform the Governor General.

Party loyalty usually ensures that this will always be rare. It is not often in politics that people place principle above self-preservation. What is being played out in America now, reminds us of this lesson.

The Majority Leader in the Senate openly declared that he has no intention of being impartial and he intends to work with the President’s team to ensure that the President is not removed from office. This is akin to a judge instructing a jury to meet with counsel for an accused person so as to ensure that there is no conviction, regardless of the evidence. In his words, “Everything I do during this, I’m co-ordinating with White House counsel. There will be no difference between the president’s position and our position as to how to handle this to the extent that we can… We have no choice but to take [the impeachment trial] up, but we will be working through this process, hopefully in a fairly short period of time, in total co-ordination with the White House counsel’s office and the people who are representing the president in the well of the Senate.”

The Senate Majority Leader expressed this position, despite the fact that his oath requires him to declare his impartiality: “I solemnly swear (or affirm) that in all things appertaining to the trial of the impeachment of Donald J. Trump, now pending, I will do impartial justice according to the Constitution and laws: So help me God.” But that, they say, is the peculiar morality of politics and explains why politicians are the least trusted people on earth.

The conduct of members of the Republican Party in the USA is not a peculiarly American failing. This seems to be the very nature of “democratic” politics and would likely be manifested in this country, as in most.

But while a country the size and with the political and economic infrastructure of America could afford a blemish or two of this nature, a tiny country like Barbados may be different. Unfortunately, here, we see the same type of political tribalism that our North American neighbours are demonstrating. The conduct we see on show there threatens to keep in place a leader who, it is feared, is an asset of his country’s greatest rival.

Barbados has its share of regional detractors, but no natural enemies, seeking to undermine our way of life. We are not seeking to colonise the rest of the world or to limit the influence of another country. Probably, our greatest danger from a misguided leader lies in the reversal of the social programmes which have ameliorated the condition of the vulnerable among us and created opportunities for their upward mobility. For us, that would be equivalent to the American concept of high crimes and misdemeanours.

In the name of International Monetary Fund austerity, we are now staring this danger in the face. The question on every lip now is, what hardship would be visited upon us next? This question has assumed significant importance since we were told that a country cannot tax itself out of economic trouble. If this theory was true two years ago, what has changed it now?

Imagine what Donald Trump could do if the House of Representatives was also controlled by the Republican Party. It was probably divine providence when that body changed majority control two years ago. We have no such luck in this country, hence, our people are exposed to the worst possibilities of dictatorship. But in a country that is no more than a dot, and with nowhere to run. So how do we respond?

Barbados Advocate

Mailing Address:
Advocate Publishers (2000) Inc
Fontabelle, St. Michael, Barbados

Phone: (246) 467-2000
Fax: (246) 434-2020 / (246) 434-1000