Portmore parish boundary talks deepen rift as Opposition flags fresh lawsuit

Tension over how Portmore should be carved into Jamaica’s proposed 15th parish sharpened again last Thursday, when the Electoral Office of Jamaica (EOJ) moved to lock in constituency and electoral lines for the new unit.

At an EOJ Boundaries Committee session held in Portmore, the room split along party lines. Opposition Members of Parliament Fitz Jackson, who represents St Catherine Southern, and Dr Alfred Dawes, who represents St Catherine South Eastern, declined to give their blessing to the work underway. On the other side, St Catherine East Central MP Alando Terrelonge and former St Catherine South Eastern MP Robert Miller backed the exercise, saying the EOJ was simply discharging duties set out in the Constitution.

Jackson’s core objection was legal timing. He said the Portmore Parish Bill has cleared both Houses of Parliament, received the governor general’s assent, and been gazetted, yet still lacks force because litigation has not been resolved.

“The exercise today was to explore ways of seeking to have the bill conform to the Constitution, but I think they have run into a roadblock,” Jackson told The Gleaner after the meeting.

“The Boundaries Committee of Parliament, which is controlled by the Government, has mandated the EOJ to make changes to comply with what the court has ordered. Unfortunately what we are seeing is that the EOJ is asked to prescribe constituency boundaries in a parish that does not exist.”

In his view, the EOJ is acting on instructions from Parliament’s Boundaries Committee — chaired by the Speaker of the House — in a manner that sidesteps what the Constitution requires.

“We have a difficulty with this. I would expect that they would seek some proper legal advice as to whether or not they can set constituency boundaries for a parish that does not legally exist,” he asserted, while indicating that further legal action remains an option if necessary to compel the Government to comply with the Constitution.

Dawes was no less blunt. He branded the session illegitimate and said he would skip later sittings.

“My participation will be limited for the simple reason that it is a kangaroo committee. They have already decide they will have a Portmore parish base on gerrymandering. The last time I checked, voters decide who their representative should be and not the other way around,” he said.

He also argued that the panel lacked authority, which is why he would stay away from future gatherings.

Terrelonge pushed back in defence of the EOJ.

“The EOJ is doing their job and we are here to support them. There are three constituencies in Portmore and they will have to be renamed,” he said.

He continued: “This is just the technical work and I believe the EOJ is competent to proceed with their work and it is incumbent on everyone to support the work they are doing.”

The Opposition’s constitutional challenge to the Portmore Parish Bill is still before the courts. That case follows a chief justice’s direction that constituency-boundary questions must be settled before the Government rolls out the new parish map.

Opposition lawyers contend the statute clashes with constitutional rules that a constituency line must not cut across a parish line fixed under the Counties and Parishes Act, 1867. They also say the Portmore parish proposal would touch four parliamentary seats, 13 electoral divisions, and close to 400 polling divisions inside St Catherine.