Tribanon, thanks for the feedback. I don't sign a contract and complain later about the content of the contract. Lol. I agree that changing the Constitution is not something that should be done lightly. I'm not a lawyer, so I would concede that there may be elements that I'm missing here. But, whether a document is written 50 years or 400 years before, it doesn't mean that in the current days context it is still accurate. When Americans speak of the Constitution they try to gauge the intent of the framers at the time, which we do here as well and which I see you are going as well. I respect that. However, the world evolves. Laws are always playing catch up. Although we should not change laws or the Constitution on a whim, we should not take an old document and run with it forever as if it speaks to the world as it exists now. Think of trying to package the information age in the context of the US Constitution.

Further to the above, keep in mind even the courts recognize common law marriage. So, we allow for a long term relationship to be recognized without a formal contact (marriage certificate).

The Constitution is a document written at a specific instant in time. We have to be aware that over time things change. A law that make sense in the 1800s may not make sense in 2021. Yes, we have to be careful that we are not allowing our laws and our Constitution to be trampled on. But, we should ensure that we are not denying someone a right simply because someone put something on a document decades before without taking into consideration certain realities. The situation as I understood was an unwed couple, not a mother who was here illegally. If someone is here illegally we should address that as a matter of immigration policy. But, if both parents have legal standing here (father Bahamian and mother not Bahamian), why should we deny the child a right to be Bahamian? If both were married the citizen would be bestowed on the child. so, essentially we are arguing a legal contract (marriage). There are countries around the world that have a much more open understanding of citizenship. I'm not a proponent of opening the floodgates on citizenship. I just believe that if a person has one Bahamian parent and they live in this country their entire life, they should not be denied the rights that a child born to a married couple has.

If we want to talk history, as you mentioned the Indians had this land. But, there are no Indians anymore. Now, descendants of West Africans (particularly Ghana) and the UK (especially England) decide what the rules are in these Indian lands. So, foreigners to this place are defining what the rules are.

Once again, if someone is here illegally I can understand having a challenge. But, if we are essentially using a marriage certificate between Bahamian man A and foreign woman B as a determinant of the child's status, I think we need to address that situation.

This citizenship situation is a tough one. For all of us not finding ourselves in this situation, as laid out above in that court case, we can not understand the frustration that those who are go through. For me, if a person is born to a Bahamian parent, be it a mother or father in this country, should not have to fight for citizenship. Alienating persons in a society in which they have to live is not something we should push to sustain. There isn't any humanity in this process. Let's try to see life from the perspective of the child born here without certain basic rights.

I agree with Chucky. Going to a grocery store in first world countries is an experience to say the least. It's amazing how we pay so much for 2nd or 3rd rate items.

Wow! The regulator needs to be regulated it seems. Quite sad that in the midst of a pandemic we have to deal with things like this. You can't argue you don't have money while investing heavily in construction.

The article says there were 20 police involved shootings for 2020 where there were 11 fatalities and 11 non-fatal, that's 22. Mmmm...interesting! Does anyone review these articles prior to publication? There are spelling errors, grammatical errors, etc.

That was a good analysis of the FNM's lackluster performance for the last 4 years. Clearly the Prime Minister knows they did a terrible job. Now he wants to blame it on everything else other than him and his team.

Interesting that the housing conversation is focused on those in shantytowns. There are Bahamians living on the streets, living in cars, etc. No need to find them adequate housing, right?

Let's stop playing games. Laws are laws are laws. They need to be enforced. If you know your structure is not up to code and that you should not rebuild it, why be surprised when it's torn down. Before you rebuilt, where were you? You had to be staying somewhere, right?

Can things be done in a better way? Perhaps. But, let's not play this game where we're supposed to look the other way in certain circumstances. It's sad that people have to live in poor housing. It's sad that people suffer financially, are illegal, are forced to survive the best way they can. It's extremely unfortunate. But, we can't help with our limited resources. The UN makes a statement. How many countries in the world have a budget to improve the lives of illegal immigrants or everyone in need of proper housing?

I agree with Mr. Johnson as well. It's incredible for the UN to be criticizing us on this situation. As Mr. Johnson said, there are many components of the Haitian immigration crisis that they clearly overlooked. They should focus on what can be done for Haiti so that people are risking their lives to get to other countries to live illegally.

Another thing, the UN is headquartered in NY. Did they forget the immigration issues the US continues to face which under the previous administration was a true humanitarian crisis.