KINGSTOWN, St. Vincent – Media houses in St. Vincent and the Grenadines are being urged to speak out amid what the Opposition describes as a deepening constitutional dispute with implications for the country’s democratic framework.
In a letter dated April 19, 2026, Opposition Leader Ralph E. Gonsalves called on journalists and media practitioners to make their voices heard on what he characterized as an urgent matter affecting the Constitution, the rule of law, and the separation of powers.
The appeal comes against the backdrop of ongoing election petitions following the 2025 General Elections. These petitions challenge the eligibility of Godwin Friday and Fitzgerald Bramble to be nominated and elected to Parliament, based on constitutional provisions relating to allegiance to a foreign power.
According to the letter, the Government has tabled a constitutional amendment which, if applied retroactively, could have an effect on the outcome of those petitions currently before the Court. The Opposition Leader noted that while constitutional amendments are within the authority of Parliament, their use in circumstances involving active litigation raises significant concerns.
Among the issues outlined are the potential impact on the integrity of the judicial process, the principle that laws should not operate retroactively to affect accrued rights, and the broader limits of Parliament’s constitutional amendment power. The letter also underscores the importance of election petitions as a mechanism for ensuring electoral fairness and accountability.
The Opposition further argued that altering the legal framework while cases are ongoing could undermine legal certainty and public confidence in the electoral system.
In his appeal, the Opposition Leader emphasized the role of the press in safeguarding democratic traditions and encouraged media entities to use their platforms to affirm the importance of constitutional restraint and institutional integrity.
He also called on the Government to reconsider its approach and allow the Court to determine the pending petitions based on the law as it stood at the time of the election.
The letter warns that failing to challenge such actions could set a precedent for future constitutional changes without public consultation, potentially for personal gain or protection.
The matter continues to unfold as the election petitions remain before the courts.