“Sam” wants churches to take up issue of children born in VI by non-nationals
Speaking on the show aired on a local television station on December 15, 2012, Mr Henry said he believes the current system is unfair to youths.
“I think it is unfair and I remember asking the good Minister [Henry Bellingham, M.P.] those questions...and those are the kind of concern I want to raise, we have to protect our youths, if they born here they belong here...and I am surprised the churches haven’t taken up this fight.”
He said the churches should be pressed into lobbying for affected parents and children.
“A lot of you go to these churches and these churches are not taking up your fight, you supposed to be on top of that pastor. These are human rights issues that the churches should be fighting on behalf of the people. Regardless of where you are from, if the child born in this country they belong to this country. That is my take on that,” Mr Henry stated.
Back in April 23, 2012 following the signing of the Protocols for Effective Financial Management here in the Virgin islands, Mr Henry had asked Mr Henry Bellingham, a United Kingdom (UK) Member of Parliament (MP) how the UK intended to address the issue of children born in Overseas Territories (OTs) to parents who are not indigenous citizens. Mr Bellingham had acknowledged there was no immediate answer but “it is something that we keep under close review I can assure you.”
Mr Henry had opined that one of the things hampering the growth of the Virgin Islands (VI) right now is the “disconnect” because children who are born in the VI to parents not indigenous to the island have no identity attached to them.
“…they can’t get a passport based on the British Nationality Act. What is the UK doing right now to address the situation with those kids? It’s a problem to a growing society like the BVI,” he stated.
However, MP Bellingham had pointed out that “obviously what Territories really want to do is to control migration because what they got are small countries that have limited resources and obviously they are going to need to control the increase in population.”
Premier Dr the Honourable D. Orlando Smith had also touched briefly on the issue and told reporters, “It is something that is being discussed...and it is something that we will arrive at a conclusion and make some recommendations”.
The Virgin Islands takes an extremely restrictive position in relation to immigration. Even birth in the country is not sufficient to grant belongers status (unless the person is born to parents who are themselves belongers). It is possible to be naturalised after a period of long residence, but it is rare to be naturalised after less than 25 years and often much longer.
.png)
Follow Us On
19 Responses to ““Sam” wants churches to take up issue of children born in VI by non-nationals”
you hear the good brother "Sam" running for office. I sometimes want to puke when
i see and hear these guys talk...
The BVI already has a clear problem with immigration....so why would we seek to open the flood gates wider? Give the child the right of citizenship and belonger status....and their expat parents will never have the leave why? Those 2 expats who have to return home....who have a one year old child born in the BVI now have a valid claim that their child.....belonging to the BVI and being a British Citizen have the constitutional right of establishment in the BVI and removing one parent or both would deny that child the right and potentially make them a ward of the state. All we would need is but one solid case in favour of such an argument....and Pandora's box would swing wide open! In the US they call them anchor babies! Be careful what you wish for Sam!
As for those implying that the UK should stop conferring citizenship on the folks of the BVI....Please, please, please understand these shores have been under British rule before the United States became independent! Generations of our forefathers worked the ground under duress, no pay and inhumane conditions....for the benefit of the United Kingdom! Yet after that we voluntarily and mutually agreed to remain part of her kingdom. That makes me just as British as any other British Citizen....be it born in London....Gibraltar or the Falklands!
Chapter 1-Interpretation 2(2) on page 6 of the V.I Constitution states "For the purposes of this Constitution,a person BELONGS TO THE VIRGIN ISLANDS,if that person-(a) is born in the Virgin Islands and at the time of the BIRTH his or her FATHER or MOTHER is or was-(1)A British Overseas Territories Citizen(or British Dependent Territories Citizen)by virtue of BIRTH,REGISTRATION, or NATURALIZATION in the Virgin Islands or by virtue of descent from a FATHER or MOTHER who was BORN in the Virgin Islands".These are the instructions of Her Majesty-The Queen,in Coucil,when she ordered the V.I Constitution,on 13th June 2007.Now,let us not forget,that in 2005,the Constitutional Commission[the persons who were on radio in the BVI etc..lobbying for this new Constitution] had the opportunity,to call on Her Majesty,to make the necessary amendment to this section of the Constitution:The government at the time chose not to,and I am sure,that there are VERY GOOD REASONS for that. I did a research on Caribbean Constitutions and other big countries,and in many other countries,the very same situation applies in other countries.[The USA seems to be the only country with the "where you is where you from concept] Rationally,it is my belief that "where you born is where you from" that is just my views,BUT the V.I.CONSTITUTION,which was ordered by Her Majesty,is advising us as BV-Islanders,that a child gets the STATUS of the parent or parents at BIRTH.So if a BELONGER/BOTC gives birth to a child outside the BVI,that child is deemed to belong to the BVI,or if the father is from the BVI,and he fathers a child born outside the BVI from a none-belonger mother,that child is deemed to Belong to the BVI,BUT if a none-belonger-mother gives birth to a child in the BVI,and the father is not a belonger,that child is also NOT a belonger!If the father is belonger,then that gets the father's status,and hence the child id a belonger.
This issue on a whole is a Constitutional issue:So we cannot call on the churches or even the politicians to comment on this matter;It is a matter for public petition to Her Majesty,the Queen,to Amend the Constitution,to remove this clause.Until then,that is the law of the land.It is a Constitutional matter.It is not a domestic matter.Vino,thanks for allowing the legal team,to enlight the public on the LAW relating to this matter.God bless VINO.