We cannot ask persons to violate their religious beliefs – Pitkin
ON THE heels of two St James councillors being unable to take their appointed seats for affirming instead of swearing their oaths, Bishop Conrad Pitkin, the president of the National Religious Liberty Association, has warned against forcing persons to act or behave contrary to their religious convictions.
Pitkin, who is also custos of St James, issued the warning while addressing Thursday’s monthly meeting of the St James Municipal Corporation (StJMC), which was the first meeting held under the leadership of newly minted Mayor of Montego Bay Richard Vernon.
The issue arose after Jamaica Labour Party (JLP) councillors Anthony Murray, of the Rose Hall division, and Gregory Harris, of the Salt Spring division, could not take their seats because they refused to swear on the Bible and instead affirmed their oaths.
“Even to the level of the prime minister or the governor general, if their religious rights prevent them from swearing, they do affirm,” Pitkin told the meeting while briefly addressing the issue.
“We cannot ask persons to violate their religious beliefs.
I stand as the person responsible for the national religious protection of persons, and I am very disappointed that that has been overlooked over the years,” Pitkin added.
The issue got highlighted after questions arose as to the swearing-in process and the language which was used, with special reference being made to Sections 29 and 30 of the Local Governance Act which outline the procedure.
Murray and Harris both cited their religious beliefs as the reason for their decision to affirm instead of swearing on the Bible, and shortly afterward they walked out of the meeting when it was proposed that they could sit in the observers’ gallery.
People’s National Party (PNP) Councillor Kerry Thomas, of the Mt Salem division, had initially also opted not to swear on the Bible, but after the enquiries were raised, he relented and swore the oath.
Under Section 29 of the Local Governance Act, every person elected to the office of mayor or councillor shall, at the first regular meeting of the municipal corporation which that person attends, take and subscribe the oath of office, the wording of which stipulates that the individual shall swear to fulfil the duties of their office to their best of their ability without fear or favour.
Section 30 of the act states that any duly elected person who refuses or neglects to take and subscribe to the prescribed oath of office will be immediately disqualified and will cease to hold the office.
Hours later, however, the StJMC issued a release stating that Murray and Harris would be duly appointed during the next meeting of the municipal corporation, as consultations with the Ministry of Local Government had confirmed that the men’s act of affirmation was acceptable under the Oaths Act.
“Research by Chief Executive Officer of the Corporation, Naudia Crosskill, and communication with the Ministry of Local Government and Community Development revealed that Section 6 of the Oaths Act, 1973 allows for affirmation in cases where individuals opt not to swear,” the release stated.
According to Section 6 of the Oaths Act, a person may be permitted to make a solemn affirmation in place of swearing or taking an oath, in circumstances where an oath is or may be required by law.
Murray and Harris, in arguing their right to affirm rather than swear, cited their giving of affirmation when they were installed as councillors on March 7, following the February 26 local government elections.