Jamaica Confronts Monarchy Debate, Critics Demand Total Colonial Break
As Jamaica advances legislation to remove King Charles as head of state, some citizens argue the proposed bill is only a partial step toward true sovereignty—voices from across the island call for deeper reforms—an end to all remaining colonial-era ties.
A Past Shaped by Colonial Ties
Jamaica’s history with the British monarchy dates back to centuries of colonial rule. The island was under Spain’s dominion until 1655 when English forces seized it. Over the following centuries, enslaved Africans—numbering in the hundreds of thousands—were brought to work on sugar plantations, generating wealth for the empire but leaving lasting socio-economic disparities. Even after emancipation in 1838, Britain maintained political dominance, culminating in the modern constitutional monarchy.
Jamaica officially gained independence in 1962, joining a global wave of nations liberating themselves from colonial oversight. However, like 13 former British colonies, the country still recognizes the monarch—now King Charles III—as head of state. For many, this arrangement remains symbolic of a painful past. Critics claim it perpetuates a vestige of colonial control, even though the monarchy’s direct power is minimal. Over the last decade, Jamaican sentiment has evolved, driven by growing discussions of reparations for slavery, broader decolonization movements, and examples like Barbados removing Queen Elizabeth II as its head of state in 2021.
Most recently, the government of Prime Minister Andrew Holness introduced a bill to replace King Charles as head of state with a Jamaican president. Citing data from Reuters interviews, support for removing the monarch has risen significantly, from around 40% a decade ago to 56% today. Many on the island of nearly 3 million view this as a chance to fully define what it means to be Jamaican, free from antiquated colonial trappings. Yet, some activists and opposition parties say the measure doesn’t go far enough, calling for “full decolonization”—including a more democratic method to choose Jamaica’s future president and eliminating the London-based Privy Council as the country’s highest court.
The Government’s Bill and Emerging Criticisms
Unveiled in December 2022, the new bill proposes eliminating the role of governor general—King Charles’s representative in Jamaica—and establishing a Jamaican president in that role instead. According to the legislation, the prime minister and opposition leader would consult on a presidential nominee. If they disagree, the opposition might propose a name. Ultimately, if no consensus emerges, the prime minister can choose a candidate a simple parliamentary majority would approve. Once Parliament passes it, a referendum must be held, requiring two-thirds support from voters.
But from the moment the bill appeared, some questioned its constraints. Steven Golding, who leads the Universal Negro Improvement Association—founded over a century ago by Jamaican activist Marcus Garvey—voiced concern about adopting a “titular president” in place of the monarch. In a Reuters interview, Golding warned, “We must make sure that it’s not a cosmetic surgery being done… we don’t want to swap having a British monarch for a puppet president. I would like to see an executive president, directly elected by the people.” This sentiment aligns with those who believe that, after centuries of external rule, Jamaicans deserve direct democracy at every political tier.
Members of the People’s National Party (PNP), the main opposition, echoed that stance. Donna Scott-Mottley, a justice spokesperson for the PNP, described the proposed structure as “compromising everything.” She fears that the prime minister could essentially handpick the president, removing the voice of the broader populace. “If you (the PM) wanted your right-hand man to become president, you simply do the nomination,” she told Reuters. Similarly, former Prime Minister P. J. Patterson criticized the approach, warning that any official in the role might function as “a puppet of the prime minister.”
According to Jamaican law, the bill must pass with a two-thirds majority in the House of Representatives—where the governing Jamaica Labour Party (JLP) currently holds enough seats—and the Senate. Even if the bill fails in the Senate, the government may still have a referendum. Polls suggest that most Jamaicans support removing the monarchy, but critics maintain that approval might slip if they see the final arrangement as superficial.
Reparations and the Push for True Sovereignty
One factor intensifying the debate is the parallel campaign for reparations. Generations of Jamaicans—particularly historians, scholars, and activists—have argued that Britain’s centuries-long enslavement of Africans fueled the empire’s prosperity while leaving deep socio-economic scars on the island. African leaders and other Caribbean nations have increasingly demanded apologies, compensation, or development support from the former imperial powers. However, the British government does not grant official reparations. It points to charity and development aid as enough.
Jamaicans want more than a sign of change when they try to end the monarchy. Supporters say one must look closely at old colonial policies if one seeks to fix the unfair results left by slavery. Some call for a root-and-branch approach that not only dethrones King Charles but also relinquishes the use of Britain’s Privy Council as Jamaica’s supreme appellate court. This is a sore point for many local attorneys and ordinary citizens, as traveling to London for appeals is expensive and logistically demanding.
The London-based Privy Council remains the final court for some Commonwealth members, including Jamaica. Opponents of the status quo see it as a lingering colonial institution that disadvantages local people. By contrast, the Trinidad-based Caribbean Court of Justice (CCJ) has been established as a regional alternative. Several Caribbean nations—Belize, Barbados, and Guyana—already rely on the CCJ. Professor Christopher Charles, a political and social psychologist at the University of the West Indies, told Reuters that maintaining the Privy Council “is like wanting to get divorced while still holding a room in the matrimonial home.”
Despite these arguments, the Holness government has proposed addressing the judicial question only in subsequent “phased” reforms, separate from the monarchy debate. Critics within the PNP see that approach as half-hearted. They warn that any referendum that omits court reform might lower public enthusiasm. Haile Mika’el Cujo, a campaigner for constitutional change, told Reuters that “people are not going to sign off on that if we keep the Privy Council.” He fears a scenario where Jamaicans view the monarchy removal bill as incomplete, prompting them to stay home or vote no.
Prospects and the Path Ahead
The Jamaican government plans to hold a referendum on the monarchy question by next year, though it faces potential delays if a general election intervenes. If the public endorses the bill, it would mark one of the most significant constitutional shifts since independence. However, the result hinges on whether critics who want deeper reforms remain on board. Holness’s Jamaica Labour Party holds the lower house comfortably, but the measure could quickly become entangled in senate maneuvering or overshadowed by an election campaign.
The debate encapsulates a broader conversation on Jamaica’s identity in many respects. For a country that contributed major cultural exports—reggae, Rastafarianism, and pan-African thought—some see the monarchy’s presence as incompatible with that ethos. Over the past decades, Jamaican political leaders have expressed the dream of forging a thoroughly Jamaican state, shedding external symbolic authority. Swapping King Charles with a Jamaican president would clearly show that view. Yet a key question remains: Should that president act only as a symbol resembling a ceremonial figure, or should they possess the power to decide matters that suit Jamaica’s needs? Buckingham Palace typically defers to local opinion, with Prince William—now first in line to the throne—stating he respects “any decision Caribbean nations make about their future.”
While the UK is unlikely to offer compensation, supporters of the monarchy claim that the Crown attracts visitors and maintains stability. These claims lose strength as Jamaica undergoes population changes and as younger people push for complete independence.
Also Read: Antigua and Barbuda: Culinary Raisin Feuds, Dialect Pride, Heritage
In the final analysis, removing King Charles from Jamaica’s constitution would likely be more than a mere substitution of heads of state. It represents a long-gestating aspiration to “fully decolonize,” as PNP leader Mark Golding described. For many, the monarchy forms just a small part of the colonial system, and ending it means facing other older institutions like the Privy Council. If every plan falls into place, they can secure Jamaica’s move toward self-rule in government, law, and culture.
