Caribbean leaders back Jamaica petition to King Charles for slavery reparations
Speaking at this week's leaders summit for the Caribbean Community (Caricom), a bloc of 20 member and associate member states, Holness said Jamaica had secured 'broad support' from the region for its petition to the king, the island's head of state.
The petition asks Charles to use his authority to request legal advice from the judicial committee of the London-based privy council, the final court of appeal for UK overseas territories and some Commonwealth countries, on whether the forced transport of Africans to Jamaica was lawful, if it constituted a crime against humanity, and whether Britain was under obligation to provide a remedy to Jamaica for slavery and its enduring consequences.
During the centuries-long transatlantic slave trade more than 12.5 million Africans were kidnapped and forcibly transported to the Americas, including Jamaica, where they were sold into slavery.
Holness, acknowledging the Jamaican MP Mike Henry, who brought the resolution, which has now been passed in parliament and affirmed by the country's cabinet, said the petition was a bold step towards justice. It was a 'watershed moment for Caricom and the broader global movement for reparatory justice', he added.
He said that if the petition was successful, 'the United Kingdom bears a legal obligation to provide reparations to Jamaica and its people for the enduring harm caused'.
Jamaica's culture minister, Olivia 'Babsy' Grange, who announced the petition in June, told the Guardian it was 'going to have a far-reaching impact on our efforts in the region to seek reparation'.
She emphasised that countries were working together: 'Various countries will be making a determination what action they take. But the bottom line is that they are all onboard in support of the position we have taken. That, to me, is the big statement – we're working together in this effort,' she said.
Other leaders reiterated their commitment, with the prime minister of St Vincent and the Grenadines, Ralph Gonsalves, one of the founding members of the Caricom reparations movement, saying 'we are not giving up the reparations fight'.
'In the Caribbean [we] have a specific primary concern, primary responsibility to address reparations for native genocide and the enslavement of Africans,' he said, adding that the region needed allies. He said the issue would be on the agenda at the Africa-Caricom summit, scheduled for September in Ethiopia.
The prime minister of Antigua and Barbuda, Gaston Browne, emphasised that it was a matter of justice for those who were exploited and were not paid for their labour.
'We must be able to fight for justice because not only were our forebearers exploited in terms of not being paid, but the profits that were generated were repatriated to Europe and to North America to build out their economies, and they left our countries bereft of important social institutions, hospitals, schools, and they also did not develop the infrastructure within our countries,' he said.
The premier of the British Virgin Islaands, Natalio Wheatley, congratulated Caricom and Jamaica for pressing the issue in the face of opposition in the UK. 'Some persons would just prefer not to listen to it. And sometimes when you hear about some of the persons in the United Kingdom, some of the journalists, etc, who almost ridicule the whole concept of reparations, and ridicule those who bring those arguments, you see really what we're up against, but we appreciate the leadership.'
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Reuters
15 minutes ago
- Reuters
European leaders mull new sanctions on Putin, UK government says
LONDON, Aug 19 (Reuters) - The British government said on Tuesday European leaders were weighing additional sanctions to ramp up pressure on Russian President Vladimir Putin as part of a broader push to put an end to the war in Ukraine. The government said the so-called Coalition of the Willing, which met virtually on Tuesday, had agreed that their planning teams would meet with U.S. counterparts in the coming days to advance plans for security guarantees for Ukraine. They would also discuss plans to "prepare for the deployment of a reassurance force if the hostilities ended", a spokesperson for British Prime Minister Keir Starmer's office said. They added: "The leaders also discussed how further pressure – including through sanctions – could be placed on Putin until he showed he was ready to take serious action to end his illegal invasion." Ukraine and its European allies have been buoyed after U.S. President Donald Trump told President Volodymyr Zelenskiy on Monday that the United States would help guarantee Ukraine's security in any deal to end Russia's war, though the extent of any assistance was not immediately clear.
Telegraph
15 minutes ago
- Telegraph
Britain's biggest threat isn't Starmer, but the next Labour leader
If the pressures and realities of being in Government seem to have overwhelmed and surprised a large number of Labour MPs, spare a thought for lowly members of the party. Being in office has always been an uncomfortable experience for the comrades. Mario Cuomo's famous dictum that 'we campaign in poetry and we govern in prose' never quite hit home with them. As the writer John O'Farrell once eloquently put it, being a Labour Party member while Labour is in office is like being a David Bowie fan when 'The Laughing Gnome' was in the charts. But these days the conflict between loyalty to party and loyalty to Socialism (always with a capital S) is keener than ever. The political world is in a state of flux and party members are being tested beyond the point of endurance by current government policy, as the recent Survation poll of more than 1000 party members demonstrates. More than seven in 10 paid-up Labour members said the Government was wrong to proscribe Palestine Action as a terrorist organisation. An even larger proportion – 84 per cent – opposes the Government's continued support of the two-child benefit cap. How much more comfortable it was when the party was in opposition! When all members had to do to feel good about themselves was to complain about those evil Tories and talk of the blessed sunlit uplands of the New Jerusalem that would be established by Socialism one day. That's the thing about Labour: electoral victories are barely celebrated for a single day. And then the betrayals get underway by sell-out ministers and everyone starts complaining about the Government again. While most people recognise that being in Government inevitably means tough and unpopular decisions, Labour Party members are generally not among those people. Pontification is so much more appealing than actual governing and legislating. And so Keir Starmer – and particularly his MPs, those in Government as well as on the back benches – should be encouraged by this latest survey. For if his own party, the party that elected Corbyn as party leader twice, is unhappy with him, he must be doing something right. These are the people who think Ed Miliband – he of the Ed Stone, the 2015 general election result, the bacon sarny and the scourge of the oil industry – is the best performing Cabinet minister while Liz Kendall, who tried to rein in welfare spending and wants to get people off benefits and into jobs, is the least popular. I well remember the unexpectedly robust response I received on the doorstep in one of the poorest council estates in my former constituency, after the then Conservative-Liberal Democrat coalition Government introduced the two-child cap on welfare benefits. I had expected local residents to be angry and resentful at this policy. Instead, aside from one or two directly affected, there was a general support for the notion that if better off couples had to limit their families to sizes that they could afford, less well-off families should do the same. That was an eye-opener. And Kemi Badenoch, the Conservative leader, seems to have grasped the reality of that even as most Labour members continue to demand that those in work should pay higher taxes to fund larger families of those out of work. Those are the hard choices and harder realities that governments have to contend with on a daily basis. It's a reality that Labour Party rank-and-file members would rather not confront; that is not, after all, what they joined the party for. Perhaps if Corbyn and his co-leader Zarah Sultana ever get round to forming and naming their new Left-wing party, many of those unhappily remaining in Labour will make the switch to a party more willing to tell them what they want to hear. In the meantime, Starmer needs to imbue in his MPs a sense of discipline and a belief that the hard decisions made today will start to pay dividends when the next general election hovers into view.
Telegraph
15 minutes ago
- Telegraph
America the preferred destination as wealthy consider quitting Britain
A wealth tax by Rachel Reeves would trigger a wave of millionaires living in Britain to flee to the US as they seek to escape punishing levies, new research shows. More than 1,000 UK millionaires polled by Arton Capital said the US was their most preferred destination. Wealthy Britons will prioritise English-speaking countries and nations with favourable tax rates if the Government introduces a wealth tax. Growing interest in the US as a new home for British millionaires comes after Donald Trump cut taxes for America's wealthiest residents, and doubled the estate and gift tax exemption from $5.5m (£4m) to $11.2m per person, in a boost to the country's high-net-worth families. More than half of millionaires (53pc) polled were considering moving abroad if a wealth tax was introduced, while 60pc believed they could have a better quality of life outside the UK. Canada, Australia and the UAE were also found to be popular locations for relocation according to the research from Arton, which advises wealthy individuals on global citizenship programmes. The findings come amid concerns that a new levy on assets over £10m would drive people overseas and trigger a fresh exodus of the rich from Britain. Several Left-wing Labour figures, including Lord Kinnock, the former party leader, have repeatedly called for the introduction of a wealth tax. Last month Jonathan Reynolds, the Business Secretary, dismissed the idea as 'daft' and urged backbenchers to 'be serious'. Mounting pressure on the Chancellor to introduce a new levy on Britain's wealthiest comes as Ms Reeves faces a black hole of as much as £50bn in the public finances. Armand Arton, the chief executive of Arton Capital, said fears from Briton's wealthiest about a potential wealth tax showed the UK was at a 'tipping point'. He said: 'The uncertainty around the Government's proposed wealth tax mirrors the ongoing economic uncertainty seen around the world – from Trump's tariffs to conflict in the Middle East.' The research also revealed that 82pc of millionaires resident in the UK would consider investing in a golden visa or citizenship by investment programme, which allows individuals to gain residency or citizenship through financial investment. Arton offers a consultancy service to millionaires seeking out such programmes. Despite many millionaires weighing up a potential move abroad, 66pc of those surveyed said they still believed the UK was an attractive place to invest compared to other nations. Concerns about a new wealth tax come as the Government faces scrutiny over its approach to Britain's high-net-worth individuals and entrepreneurs. Many wealthy residents are already moving abroad after Ms Reeves scrapped non-dom tax status and introduced inheritance tax on overseas trusts earlier this year. Since the rule change there have been a series of high-profile departures, including Richard Gnodde, Goldman Sachs's vice chairman, who said he was relocating to Milan to avoid being hit by the scrapping of the non-dom status. The Office for Budget Responsibility said in January the abolition of the tax status would result in 25pc of non-doms with trusts leaving the UK, while 10pc of those without trusts would move overseas. Mr Arton said: 'There are many repercussions of the introduction of a levy, but one thing is clear: the longer that unpredictability persists, the greater the risk of losing capital, talent and long-term investment to countries that offer greater security for individuals, families and their futures.'
