TOPIC: AN ACT TO IMPLEMENT THE UNITED NATIONS CONVENTION RESPECTING THE SUPPRESSION OF THE FINANCING OF TERRORISM, THE UNITED NATIONS SECURITY COUNCIL RESOLUTION 1373 ON TERRORISM AND GENERALLY TO MAKE PROVISION FOR PREVENTING AND COMBATING TERRORISM

OCTOBER 1, 2001
 

OPENING REMARKS
Mr. Speaker, I rise today on behalf of the great Constituents of Bain & Grants Town and in this instance on behalf of all the people of the Bahamas as a Minister in the Government of the Bahamas, to contribute to a Bill known in short as the Anti-Terrorism Act 2003. The purpose of this Bill is to aid in the prevention and combating of terrorism.

Mr. Speaker, in the purest sense of the definition, terrorism is really nothing new to the Bahamas, for the masses of Bahamians were terrorized prior to 1967 by a wicked and oppressive regime and likewise for ten years starting from 1992 to 2002. However terrorism has taken on a more lethal and sophisticated form and today we must address this potential menace with a resolve to protect our borders, our people and neighboring countries from any such attempts that we have seen too many of since 2001.

Mr. Speaker, this Bill before us today is, almost two years to be exact, behind the time of when it should have been enacted. One may question why the previous Administration did not act on this Resolution 1373 passed by the United Nations Security Council on September 28, 2001 before being relieved of it’s duties by the Bahamian people on May 2, 2002. However I believe that the previous FNM Government during the Fall of 2001 was too busy basking in their success at having terrorized the Public Treasury when they were using school repair contracts and scholarship loans in order to satisfy their political objectives, to even realize after September 11th that the United Nations had put forth an anti-terrorism initiative.

Likewise Mr. Speaker, one may question why my government didn’t enact this Bill before us today sooner than this time period. I would hope that Bahamians would appreciate that though an international Anti-Terrorism Bill is a priority, the recovery of the Bahamas from the local terrorism of the previous FNM Government, was much more urgent than any terrorists we could ever face from abroad. Hence Mr. Speaker, my government having basically arrested the fear and the threat of FNM terrorists ever terrorizing Bahamians again, today I am delighted to address the United Nations’ Resolution1373 on terrorism and measures to be put in place by all nations wishing to play a role in safeguarding the world from terrorists and their ability to finance such activity.
 

UN’S SECURITY COUNCIL RESOLUTION 1373

Mr. Speaker, terrorism took on a more sophisticated and immediately deadlier form on September 11, 2001. And though since then up until now we have not poised our selves as a nation that today’s international terrorists would seek to attack, we are however in very close proximity to those countries in which terrorists have deep enmity toward. Therefore it is possible that we can become unwitting and unwilling conduits for the instruments used by terrorists to achieve their skewed objectives on neighboring nations.

Hence Mr. Speaker, while we are always grateful that we have not been used as a launching pad for any terrorist attacks on any of our neighbors, my government is ever mindful that we do not live in this world alone and if we were to fall to sleep on the reality of the times, we may end up one day not waking up at all, or contributing to one of our neighbors suffering more horror and casualties.

Therefore Mr. Speaker, it was a great day when on September 28, 2001, the United Nations brought forth a wide–ranging anti-terrorism resolution, which called for the suppression of financing terrorism and improving on international cooperation to minimize and hopefully eradicate the ability for terrorists to succeed in the mission of death and misery. Mr. Speaker, as I said this resolution was passed on September 28, 2001, with a mandate to be adopted by all countries no later than ninety (90) days from the said date. But yet we are here today bringing the Bahamas into full participation with the cooperation required. I seek at this time to apologize to all nations for the Bahamas just reacting to this vital Bill, but as I said earlier, the Government first had to deal with the terrorist in our midst and we will be forever grateful to the Bahamian people for so doing on May 2, 2002.

Mr. Speaker, arising out of the UN Resolution was the Counter Terrorism Committee. The Committee brought forth binding obligations on all States with the aim of combating terrorism in all its forms and manifestations. The Resolution requires that all cooperating States adhere to the following in combating terrorism:

· DENY ALL FORMS OF FINANCIAL SUPPORT FOR TERRORIST GROUPS;
· SUPPRESS THE PROVISION OF SAFE HAVEN, SUSTENANCE OR SUPPORT OF TERRORISTS;
· SHARE INFORMATION WITH OTHER GOVERNMENTS ON ANY GROUPS PRACTISING OR PLANNING TERRORIST ACTS;
· CO-OPERATE WITH OTHER GOVERNMENTS IN THE INVESTIGATION, DETECTION, ARREST AND PROSECUTION OF THOSE INVOLVED IN SUCH ACTS;
· CRIMINALIZE ACTIVE AND PASSIVE ASSISTANCE FOR TERRORISM IN DOMESTIC LAWS AND BRING VIOLATORS OF THESE LAWS TO JUSTICE;
· BECOMES PARTY AS SOON AS POSSIBLE TO THE RELEVANT INTERNATIONAL CONVENTIONS AND PROTOCOLS RELATING TO TERRORISM.

Mr. Speaker, these requirements are clear and decisive but not without reasoning and rationality; for the Committee is also aware that each State would have to take these specific actions based on the specific circumstances in each country. Therefore, the UN is asking for uniformed adherence to the requirements of Resolution 1373, but in accordance with the specific circumstances in which Bahamians live. Likewise the Committee also encourages ongoing dialogue between the UN Security Council and cooperating States like the Bahamas in an effort to raise our capacity to combat terrorism.

Mr. Speaker, the United Nations Security Council in drafting Resolution 1373 to combat terrorism, was also mindful of the reality that they too would need assistance in evaluating the reports of our progress in meeting the international requirements for combating terrorism, so they have formed sub-committees to advise them on the technical aspects of such reports complimented by a cadre of Independent Expert Advisers to lend their expertise in the following areas when assessing our progress reports:

· LEGISLATIVE DRAFTING;
· FINANCIAL LAW AND PRACTICE
· CUSTOMS LAW AND PRACTICE
· IMMIGRATION LAW AND PRACTICE
· EXTRADITION LAW AND PRACTICE
· POLICE AND LAW ENFORCEMENT
· ILLEGAL ARMS TRAFFICKING
 

Mr. Speaker, based on the reality that Resolution 1373 seeks assistance from independent experts on evaluating our progress on meeting the requirements of combating terrorism, I cannot express enough how important it is for our Civil Servants to be proficient and timely in the areas that are to be assessed as a measuring device to how well we are complying with the requirements of Resolution 1373. For it would not bode well for us as a cooperating State to be lax in our participation in meeting the requirements of combating terrorism. A lax or nonchalant attitude by any Civil Servant in responding to the call to combat terrorism would surely be detrimental to every Bahamian in the big picture where international cooperation and an attitude of the same is a must. Hopefully for the Civil Servants of our nation, this word to the wise will be sufficient, for our comfort and safety are literally at stake.

Mr. Speaker based on the analysis from the sub-committee on the reports of our progress, the Counter-Terrorism Committee then assesses how well we are complying with Resolution 1373. The Committee will then send a letter to the Bahamas accompanied by guidance from the Committee’s independent experts, where any matters can be bought forward concerning our compliance to Resolution 1373. And we in turn are required to respond to the Committee in a further report within three months. Needless to say, Resolution 1373 is an ongoing process, one that must continue as long as the threat and consequences of terrorism is in existence.

THE SERIOUS AND WIDE RANGING COST OF TERRORISM
 Mr. Speaker, the ultimate and direct price of terrorist acts is the maiming and loss of human life. But for us in the Bahamas, who have been fortunate to not be the recipients of the ultimate, there is a collateral price that all countries must pay for acts of terrorism.

Mr. Speaker, in a paper presented to an APEC Senior Officials Meeting, one Dr. Geoff Raby, submitted his learned views on the economic cost associated with terrorist acts and I want the Member for Montague to listen carefully, because the good Dr. Raby first gave an example of the savings one can experience in eradicating terrorism, by speaking briefly about the days of piracy on the high seas by those of a prior generation.

Mr. Speaker, Dr. Raby revealed from his findings and research that:

“THE COST OF PIRACY IMPOSED ON INTERNATIONAL SHIPPING AND TRADE ARE (SIMILAR) TO THOSE OF TERRORISM. BETWEEN 1814 TO 1860, MAINLY DUE TO THE EUROPEAN POWERS ELIMINATING PIRACY, INTERNATIONAL SHIPPING COSTS FELL BY OVER 80 PER CENT AND THE INDUSTRY’S TOTAL FACTOR PRODUCTIVITY ROSE BY ABOUT 500 PER CENT. IMPROVEMENT IN MANAGEMENT ALSO CONTRIBUTED. BY ALLOWING SHIPS TO DISPENSE WITH CANNON AND REDUCE THEIR MANPOWER, SHIPPERS COULD INTRODUCE FASTER, CARGO-SPECIFIC SHIPS DRAMATICALLY REDUCING COSTS AND BOOSTING PRODUCTIVITY. THIS FALL IN SHIPPING COSTS SIGNIFICANTLY EXPANDED INTERNATIONAL TRADE FLOWS IN THE NINETEENTH AND TWENTIET CENTURIES.”

Mr. Speaker, that is the upside to eradicating criminal acts across international borders. And for some generations as the Member for Montagu could attest to if he so chooses, the elimination of piracy in one generation, benefits another generation who chooses to evolve their operations into legitimate shipping.

Mr. Speaker, the comparison of piracy with terrorism and the benefits derived from its elimination, as told by Dr. Raby, is significantly out weighed by the cost of terrorism left unchecked. Dr. Raby’s also opined that:

· THE INCREASED RISK AND PREVALENCE OF GLOBAL TERRORISM LOOMS AS A MAJOR THREAT TO REGIONAL DEVELOPMENT. TERRORISTS ACTS HAVE ALREADY IMPOSED SIGNIFICANT INCREASED COSTS ON ALL ECONOMIES
· THE IMMEDIATE COSTS OF TERRORIST ACTS INCLUDING LOSS OF LIFE, DESTRCUTION OF PROPERTY AND DEPRESSION OF SHORT TERM ECONOMIC ACTIVITY ARE COMPOUNDED BY THE COSTS ASSOCIATED WITH THE CONTINUING THREAT OF TERRORISM.
· TERRORISM UNCHECKED CREATES UNCERTAINTY, REDUCES CONFIDENCE AND INCREASES RISK PERCEPTIONS AND RISKS PREMIUMS LEADING TO LOWER RATES OF INVESTMENT AND LOWER ECONOMIC GROWTH. TERRORIST ACTS CAN SEVERELY DISRUPT INTERNATIONAL TRADE AND THE CONTINUING THREAT OF TERRORISM IMPOSES COSTS ON INTERNATIONAL TRADE.
· GIVEN THEIR GREATER RELIANCE ON TRADE AND CAPITAL INFLOWS, DEVELOPING ECONOMIES MAY INCUR HIGHER COSTS RELATIVE TO GDP FROM UNCHECKED TERRORISM.
· THE COST OF IMPLEMENTING COUNTER-TERRORISM MEASURES SHOULD BE VIEWED AS AN INVESTMENT THAT, BY REDUCING THE THREAT TERRORISM, WILL REDUCE RISK PREMIUMS AND THE BIAS AGAINST LONGER TERM, PRODUCTIVITY RAISING ACTIVITIES THAT UNCERTAINTY AND RISK CREATE.
· DUE TO REGIONAL AND INTERNATIONAL ECONOMIC LINKAGES, TERRORIST EVENTS IN ONER ECONOMY CAN IMPOSE SIGNIFICANT COSTS ON OTHER REGIONAL ECONOMIES. ECONOMIES WHICH FAIL TO COMBAT TERRORISM AND ENSURE THE SAFETY OF TRADE AND PEOPLE MOVEMENT. COULD EXPECT TO INCUR SIGNIFICANT COSTS IN TERMS OF LOST INVESTMENT AND TRADE OPPORTUNITIES.
· THE THREAT OF TERRORISM ALSO REDUCES TRADE FLOWS. A SHUTDOWN OF MAJOR PORTS OR AIRPORTS DUE TO TERRORIST ATTACKS COULD RESULT IN HIGH COSTS, PARTICULARLY FOR THOSE ECONOMIES MORE RELIANT ON TRADE. IT ALSO INCREASES INSURANCE COSTS FOR CARGOES AND PASSENGERS.

Mr. Speaker, based on the research of Dr. Raby and on the actual effects seen as a result of terrorist threats and attacks, all Bahamians must support the Resolution put forth by the United Nations Security Council three years ago. Just the thought alone of our air and seaports being vulnerable to such activity is terrifying in itself, and that is not to even mention the effects such activities would have on our tourism product and our ability to sustain ourselves by the importation of goods and services.

CONCLUSION—LOCAL TERRORISTS
Mr. Speaker, I would like to close by saying with certainty that this Bill before us today is of major importance; one that should not have been left for my government to do. But alas, so many matters of urgency was left undone by the previous FNM Administration, because of their desire to satisfy their political objectives above all else, leaving my government with the duty of taking care of the people’s neglected affairs.

Therefore Mr. Speaker, it is our duty as Members of this august body of legislators to adopt the provisions in this Bill, calling for stringent anti-terrorism measures and join the rest of the rational and civilized world in the war on terrorism and the instruments used to aid and abet such acts.

Hence Mr. Speaker, I join with my colleagues in my government and in this Parliament in supporting the international measures and all of the implications associated with not only protecting our borders, but also assisting our partners of democracy in protecting their borders as well. As for me personally, I only wish that this Bill before us today along with it’s international measures could have taken into account the local terrorists in the Bahamas that are peculiar to our way of life.

For while it is a truism Mr. Speaker that on May 2, 2002, the Bahamian people saw fit to take the millstone of local terrorism from around their necks, as far as I am concerned there are still some lurking around in the bushes seeking to wage guerilla warfare on the masses.

As an example Mr. Speaker, we have a few would be terrorists using the media for the express purpose of bringing a sense of fear into the lives of average Bahamians and when they are not doing that, they are then using terrorist tactics to attempt to intimidate any one who chooses not to see things their way, especially if the possibility exist where their ways may entail that laws be broken.

For instance Mr. Speaker, one of the longest reining practitioner’s of terrorist behavior has been the publisher and editor of the Tribune Newspaper and her weapon over the years has been the Tribune itself. For example Mr. Speaker, in the September 25, 2003 editorial of the Tribune under the title, ‘Time for BTC bids to be made public,’ the terrorist of Shirley Street said:

‘WORKS MINISTER BRADLEY ROBERTS SEEMS TO BE THE MOUNTPIECE FOR THOSE BTC EXECUTIVES WHO BELIEVE THE COMPANY SHOULD REMAIN IN THEIR HANDS.’

Mr. Speaker, this remark is tantamount to a terrorist throwing a bomb into the first crowd of persons they see and object to, just because their own agenda isn’t being satisfied. For if anyone is the mouthpiece for any interest group, it would be Ms. Eileen Carron, for it is her as a shareholder in the troubled Systems Resource Group (SRG), seeking to benefit from a privatized BTC, who has something to gain. It certainly isn’t this Member of Parliament. And in her claims that I committed BTC to a $60 million dollar Family Island undersea cable, just like the Iraqi Information Minister, Eileen Carron is engaging in terrorist propaganda. For no such thing ever happened.

When I consider the posture the terrorist of Shirley Street takes in using the Tribune as a weapon of mass destruction, I am reminded of Ishmael the outside child of God’s very own Abraham. Ishmael was a child who was born outside of the promise of the God and lived like a vicious animal in the rough and rugged mountains with his only ability being to fight and destroy.
 

Mr. Speaker, it didn’t matter to Ishmael that he was blessed nonetheless with the minerals and sustenance derived straight from the ground, he was not satisfied because he was not blessed with the peace that came along with God’s promise. He was born out of luck and out of the loop and so he took on the character of his circumstances and determined that to fight and destroy was the only way to live.

 Likewise Mr. Speaker, there is no where recorded in the Bible where Ishmael ever gave anyone any credit for anything they accomplished, unless it was in line with his way of life; to seek, destroy and then horde for himself. So it should be of no surprise that Eileen Carron didn’t see fit to even congratulate the people, if not my government, for the reduction in BEC rates. Mr. Speaker, Ishmael is whom I am reminded of when I consider the terrorist of Shirley Street. It is therefore my only hope that she would at some point in the near future catch up with the times in which terrorists live today and evolve in her acts of terrorism to becoming a suicide bomber.

Then Mr. Speaker, we have another individual who sits atop an operation like Usama bin Laden and has his terror network wreaking havoc on the Bahamian community through a publication called the Confidential Source. Mr. Mohammed Harajchi has found it necessary to use the intimidation tactics associated with terrorism to seek to extract the fruits of his agenda from my government. However and sinister enough, the public seems not to know what it is he seeks, for he has not found it necessary to let the public know the true reason why he uses the Confidential Source as a tool of terror.

At least Mr. Speaker, bin Laden informs the public why he is doing the things he is doing. But Mr. Harajchi operates differently. He comes disguised as one disgruntled at Bahamian politics and government policy all in the interest of the people. But what is the reality? But what is the truth? I invite Mr. Harajchi to tell the reading public, whom he seeks to have terrorized by the Confidential Source, why he sees fit to utilize the Source as a tool of terrorism. And then Mr. Speaker, we can leave it up to the public to decide whether Mr. Harajchi is a man prone to acting on upstanding principles, or one who has imported from his homeland, the terror principles used by some in the Middle East.

Mr. Speaker, there also still exist in the Bahamas a few individual terrorists, with the greatest of all time being the Member for North Abaco. But there are a few others as well. For example, the Member for Montagu claimed in this place last week of my government being duplicitous in bringing in foreign assistance on the airport, because while in Opposition we objected to him as Airport Chairman, bringing in foreign assistance to run the airport parking lot.

Well Mr. Speaker, I think that the Member for Montagu still hasn’t figured out as yet what we were objecting to when he was in charge of the airport. We were objecting to him being in charge of any part of the people’s affairs in any instance and therefore, we objected to all of his decisions. And Mr. Speaker, the Member for Montagu and his participation in the people’s affairs will always be objectionable. We must not forget that many terrorists dress up in business suits when the situation is called for. But that can never erase the fact that they are terrorists looking for any advantage to satisfy their own agenda’s at the cost of the people.

So the question I would ask the Member for Montagu is, would he have felt better if my government would have consulted him to get assistance for the airport from one of his vast foreign contacts? Is that Mr. Speaker what is truly troubling the terrorist from the east? And then there are those fledgling terrorists who raise unnecessary suspicions as was done last week by the Member for North Eleuthera, when he questioned who engineered the moving of School Superintendents from certain schools, while claiming it was politically motivated but bringing no proof.

Mr. Speaker, that is the kind of behavior exhibited by terrorists who are left on the battle field by their leaders to fend for themselves and when left with no artillery, end up throwing dirt. Well Mr. Speaker, since that is one terrorist who was left on the battlefield because all of his superiors were shot down on May 2, 2002, I would like him to answer this question, who was the terrorist that engineered the flagrant use and corrupt abuse of the education loan scheme and the school repair contracts of the Summer of 2001? Who were his superiors that engineered the terror put on the Ministry of Education, Ministry of Works and the Public Treasury?

Mr. Speaker that is the question that I want the Member for North Eleuthera to answer. He must have intimate knowledge of those terror attacks, seeing that he was the Parliamentary Secretary at the time and on that historic Saturday in November of 2001 when the Parliament met so that Minister, Dion Foulkes, could explain his case, like an obedient and yapping cell of terrorism, the Member for North Eleuthera was sitting right next to his boss helping him to defend the terror attack put on the loan scheme and school repair contracts.

Another glaring example, Mr. Speaker, was the FNM administration’s cruel act perpetrated on the people of Long Island with the installation of water lines just before the general elections of 1997.  Those  water lines, Mr. Speaker, remained filled with dust from 1997 todate.  The former Member of Parliament for Long Island and Ragged Island James Knowles’ twenty-five year tenure was terminated by the people of Long Island and Ragged Island.

In my opinion, this was an act of terror perpetrated by the former administration on the good people of Long Island.  With your permission, Mr. Speaker, I take this opportunity to inform this House and the good people of Long Island that their reign of terror for lack of good potable water will come to an end in early 2004.  Mr. Speaker, a contract will be signed on October 7th  with a company jointly owned by a Bahamian and his US partner to build a reverse osmosis plant on a build,  own and operated (boo) programme.  The Water and Sewerage Corporation has been successful in negotiating excellent rates to provide water under the terms of the contract.    I must acknowledge, Mr. Speaker, that the Member of Parliament for Long Island and Ragged Island has been aggressively pursuing the combination of the installation of the reverse osmosis plant for his people in Long Island.

Hence Mr. Speaker, from these few examples that I have just given, all can see the need for this Bill on Anti-Terrorism and the need to eradicate all acts of such kind whether they be of an international or local nature. For man was not created to live under conditions where a group or individuals make decisions based on their own skewed logic and to their benefit that strike terror in the lives of others. Maybe one day those who engage in local terrorism will graduate to international terrorism and then they can be made to face the consequences that this Bill will bring.
Therefore, it is with great pleasure that I support my government’s moving of this Bill on Anti-Terrorism. As always Mr. Speaker, on behalf of the great people of the Bain & Grants Town Constituency, I thank you.