By Mar-Vic Cagurangan
Variety News Staff

ATTORNEY General Alicia Limtiaco has been asked to revisit the recurring constitutional question involving “ancestry-based” local laws which critics say institutionalize “racial discrimination” on Guam.
“There are several local statutes that are in obvious conflict with federal law and modern constitutional principles. Unfortunately, the situations and problems presented in these matters seldom see the light of day unless the issues end up in court at great expense to both the local government and plaintiffs,” Yigo residents Thomas Sheldon and Arnold Davis Jr. stated in a Jan. 14 letter to Limtiaco.
Sheldon and Davis specifically discussed two local statutes, one of which restricts the self-determination plebiscite to “native inhabitants” of Guam, and the other excludes non-Chamorros from participating in a government land program that authorizes 99-year lease at $1 a year.
The political status determination process was established by Public Law 25-106, which created the Commission on Decolonization for the Implementation and Exercise of Guam Self-Determination, commonly known as the “Chamorro-only” plebiscite law.
The law allows “native inhabitants of Guam” to decide on the island’s political status based on three options: independence, statehood and free association. The plebiscite has been postponed indefinitely pending completion of the registry of “eligible” Chamorro voters.
Sheldon and Davis said P.L. 25-106 is consistent with the Organic Act, which provides that “No discrimination shall be made in Guam against any person on account of race, language or religion, nor shall the equal protection of the law be denied.”
“The term ‘Guam self-determination’ in the title of the law is a poor attempt to conceal its true nature and intent and is the only such reference to be found,” Sheldon and Davis stated.
Besides the conflict between PL 25-106 and the Organic Act, they mentioned recent rulings by the Ninth District Court and the U.S. Supreme Court resulting from ethnic-based voting and candidacy restrictions in Hawaii.
Sheldon and Davis were referring to the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision that upheld the candidacy of former Hawaii Governor Ben Cayetano, who is of Filipino descent.
The court held that “an inquiry into ancestral line” was inconsistent with the Constitution, which treats everyone as “persons” and “citizens,” and that classifying people based on their ancestry “demeans the dignity and worth of a person.”
Sheldon and Davis said the political status vote is not likely to take place “for many reasons.” But just the same, they said, the Decolonization Commission “persists, consumes funds at an alarming rate, and will continue to do so until the issue is finally put to rest.”
Sheldon and Davis applied the same legal arguments in criticizing PL 12-226 that created the Chamorro Land Trust Act and the Chamorro Land Trust Commission, which provide land programs and services exclusive to Chamorro natives.
The law also provides that at least three members of the CLTC board of directors and its director must be “native Chamorros.”
Sheldon and Davis cited a federal court ruling that CLTC “is unconstitutional because it is an impermissible assertion of ethic group rights by a government and the CLTC unconstitutionally favors one ethnic group over another.”