The political consequences of Dominica’s recently passed electoral reform legislation continue to unfold as former Salisbury MP Hector “Spag” John and two other men were granted bail on Monday following their arrest for unlawful assembly during a protest on March 19. The demonstration, which turned violent after police deployed tear gas and rubber bullets, now sits at the centre of a broader national conversation about civil liberties, the rule of law, and the democratic legitimacy of the reforms pushed through Parliament.
John, a former Opposition Leader (2010–2014) and longtime member of the United Workers Party (UWP), appeared in court with co-accused Jno. Baptiste Charles and Bernard Moreau. All three were charged with “unlawfully, riotously, and tumultuously assembling together to the disturbance of the public peace”—a serious offense under the Public Order Act carrying a penalty of up to five years in prison. Magistrate Michael Laudat granted bail to the trio, setting it at EC$30,000 each. Their sureties were accepted, and each man was ordered to surrender travel documents by Wednesday, avoid public gatherings, and refrain from discussing the case publicly.
The court scheduled the next hearing for June 25, with disclosure deadlines set for May 26. Magistrate Laudat emphasized the need for the matter to be expedited, reflecting its political sensitivity and growing public interest.
However, the courtroom offered no relief to co-accused Samuel Durand, who was denied bail and remanded to the Dominica Prison Service in Stockfarm. Magistrate Laudat ruled that Durand failed to satisfy the court that granting bail was in the public interest, as outlined under Section 4(3) of the Bail Act. His attorneys, Ronald Charles and Joshua Francis, have already signaled their intent to petition the High Court.
Outside the courtroom, UWP political leader Dr. Thomson Fontaine took aim at the very laws his party had sought to protest. Labeling the reform legislation as “horrific” and constitutionally questionable, Fontaine expressed concern that the removal of residency requirements for overseas voters could enable individuals who have lived abroad for decades to vote in domestic elections with little accountability or community engagement.
“We are looking closely at a legal challenge to this legislation,” Fontaine said, noting that party lawyers are assessing whether the changes infringe on constitutional protections and electoral standards. “People who’ve been out of Dominica for 40 or 50 years can now just confirm they’re ‘residents’ and vote. That cannot stand.”
Fontaine, who was present at the protest, reiterated that the UWP’s actions are rooted in a long-standing demand for genuine electoral reform—not political theatrics. He thanked Dominicans who turned out in support and called on Prime Minister Roosevelt Skerrit to repeal what he described as dangerously flawed legislation.
The events of March 19 have once again laid bare the deep divisions in Dominica politics. While government officials maintain that the legislative process was fair and transparent, opposition figures insist that key reforms—particularly around campaign finance, voter eligibility, and electoral oversight—were either omitted or manipulated to favor the incumbent party.
With at least one accused still behind bars, potential constitutional litigation looming, and a fresh wave of civic unrest bubbling beneath the surface, the electoral reform battle appears far from over. The political stakes are now higher than ever, and both Parliament and the courts are likely to remain central battlegrounds in the months ahead.
This article is copyright © 2025 DOM767
