‘More reform is called for’

By Nick Mann

SARK’S proposals for moving away from feudalism are under attack as the UK considers whether to approve the reform law. Two petitions have been received by the Privy Council, one from Sir David and Sir Frederick Barclay.

The Brecqhou owners believe reform needs to go further.

The petition questions an unelected Seigneur retaining the right to sit and speak in Chief Pleas and the temporary power to veto any ordinance.

Also under the proposed constitution his consent would be needed before an extraordinary meeting of Chief Pleas could be called.

‘All of these matters are incompatible with a modernised and democratised assembly and system of election, and obviously so,’ the petition says.

‘To undertake reform while leaving such anachronisms in place is inconsistent with good government and is a breach of Article Three of the First Protocol of the European Convention of Human Rights, namely the obligation to ensure the free expression of the people in the choice of their legislature.’

The petition also argues the clear definition of the Seigneur’s role should have been included.

‘This is all the more important given that as matters stand Chief Pleas is binding itself to pay indefinitely a substantial £28,000 index-linked annuity for undefined duties without providing any mechanism to deal with disputes, for example misconduct by a future Seigneur, or other issues that might arise.’

The petition says that the dual role retained by the Seneschal as judge of Sark’s court and president of Chief Pleas is incompatible with human rights.

‘Consideration should, therefore, be urgently given to confining the Seneschal to his function and duties as judge or as president of Chief Pleas but not both, without which there will be an inevitable violation of Article Six of the ECHR,’ it says.

‘The problem is more significant than in Guernsey given the size of the community and the extent of the power and influence of individuals in important positions such as that of the Seneschal.’

And it sets out a case that tenants should be compensated for losing their automatic right to sit on Chief Pleas.

Sir David and Sir Frederick also believe the law should set out the constitutional relationship between Sark and the UK.

The proposed property tax law also needs to be considered again by Sark.

One of its provisions, allowing Chief Pleas by ordinance to impose a tax broadly equivalent to the property one, is labelled in the petition ‘particularly obscure and inappropriate’.

A section on legal avoidance is unsatisfactory, it says.