The Tribune

SINCE the landmark citizenship ruling by the Privy Council was handed down, there has been considerable discussion about what comes next.

The ruling declared that the children born out of wedlock to Bahamian men and foreign women are entitled to citizenship from birth.

It was widely hailed as an important shift – a move towards greater equality, with further moves urged to equalise the rights of women in terms of being able to pass on citizenship in areas where the rules differ from men.

However, after that ruling, a significant amount of discussion has turned to questions of how it can be proven that Bahamian men are indeed the fathers.

DNA testing has been mentioned on several occasions. Indeed, in today’s Tribune, Minister of Immigration Keith Bell said DNA testing must be considered to mitigate fraud.

He said: “As it stands now, persons in those categories have to apply on their 18th birthday to Immigration to be naturalised. Given the Privy Council’s ruling, Immigration would no longer play a role. That individual would then be able to now go directly to apply for a Bahamian passport, national insurance, etc.”

Mr Bell said where people lack official birth certificates, DNA testing might be necessary. In truth, some have suggested testing even where there are proper birth certificates.

Mr Bell added: “The major concern for us is that where children who are born in The Bahamas and their births are not necessarily registered at the Princess Margaret Hospital, or there are issues and they have to present affidavit evidence, we have to mitigate against fraud and deception.

“So it raises fundamental questions as to what would be our requirement in respect to instances where persons are born in The Bahamas and they are seeking to be registered as Bahamians on the strength of an affidavit.”

Without saying it in so many words, the focus of this conversation seems to be on those children who are born to Bahamian men and, we believe reading between the lines, Haitian women.

However, it is interesting that hot on the heels of a landmark ruling for equality, we seem to be focused on introducing DNA testing rules for just this one segment of society. It seems as soon as this group has won the right to be treated equally, it is going to be treated differently from everyone else again.

There is no DNA test required for a regular birth certificate to be issued – and given the culture of sweethearting in our nation, no one should be surprised that there will be cases where the father named on a certificate is certainly not always the real father, in cases across the board, no matter the nationality of the parents.

So if the government goes ahead and introduces DNA testing for some parents, but not for others, it seems ripe for a legal challenge. Indeed, it certainly seems such a challenge would have strong prospects for success. You simply cannot treat one group differently from another. Equality should mean just that, equal treatment.

If there are suspicions of fraud in specific cases, then investigate accordingly – but treating everyone as if they are committing fraud to start with is going to create resentment among those who have done no such thing.

The outcome of this ruling should see our nation welcoming those who are now entitled to citizenship from birth, instead we seem to be putting another set of barriers in the way.

How will our nation be harmed by accepting the ruling and treating people affected the same as we do others? That has not been made clear.

For the sake of those who have waited long enough for the citizenship they are entitled to, making that clear should be a priority.