Marianas Variety

Sunday, May 19, 2013-3:13:09A.M.

Skip to content

Last updateFri, 17 May 2013 8am

Classifieds:

The Classifieds section is currently under development and will be back soon.

Login
Username Password
- Forgot your password?
- Forgot your username?
Sign Up

Name:

*

Username:

*

Password:

*

Confirm Password:

*

Email:

*

Confirm email Address:

*

Fields marked with an asterisk (*) are required.

Headlines:

NEWS UPDATE: Inos signs new extradition request

HANMI junior golf deadline extended

Mobil beats defending champions DFS in OT

64: Best combination

Poe tops overseas absentee elections on Guam, NMI

US court denies CPA motion for summary judgment

Bunao tops pie eating competition at Taste of the Marianas

Senator seeks creation of reserve fund for GovGuam

Memorial Week proclamation signing

Public invited to opening of Family Restaurant, Oleai Beach Bar today

CNMI - Letters to the Editor

Dear Speaker Cabrera

Details: Published on Tuesday, August 21, 2012 00:00; Written by; Hits: 1307

Font size:

I understand from reading House Legislative Initiative 17-3 that the House would like to change certain Sections of Article XII of the CNMI Constitution. This initiative, if passed, will reduce the blood quantum requirement of an NMD to “a certain degree or at least 1 percent.”

An integral part of the proposed amendment requires the involvement of the Superior Court “in order to legally provide that a person who has less than one-quarter Northern Marianas descent blood and who is a citizen or national of the United States shall be deemed a bona fide person of Northern Marianas descent for all purposes under Article XII, upon providing evidence to the Superior Court.”

The above provision will become problematical not only to the Superior Court but also to a large number of citizenries whose ancestors and parents are not NMD. Over the decades we have witnessed many non-NMD’s marrying NMD’s. We have large number of students who graduate our high schools and have gone abroad (mostly to the United States) to gain higher education. Some of these young men and women would marry someone they meet while away from the CNMI. Generations down the line, they will be required to hire a lawyer, go to the Superior Court just to prove that he or she is NMD. We can look around and see a number of non-NMD’s marrying NMD’s. Who knows, may be the Superior Court might require the involvement of the hospital to provide for evidential proof that the person who purports to be the owner of a property in the CNMI is in fact an NMD. “CUMBERSOME!”

While I personally appreciate the effort of our political leaders I feel that any proposal short of a complete repeal of Article XII is delaying the inevitable. We must be cognizant of the fact that our people are intelligent and know exactly what they want in life. WE ARE TALKING ABOUT PRIVATELY OWNED LAND. We are undermining the integrity and intelligence of our people. We seem to be telling the private land owners that they are not capable of handling their own affairs. We must not continue to be “paternalistic” to the land owners.

We all know that many of our land owners today want to reign over their private property. Why are we afraid to let them manage their private land? Returning the unilateral right to every land owner is the correct way. Please pass an Initiative to repeal Article XII in its entirely and let us move on with our life.

DAVID M. SABLAN SR.
Papago, Saipan

More Letters to the Editor

Comments

#10 DoTell 08-25-2012 06:53

As a non NMD, I can see both sides to this argument for and against Art.XII, and until recently have leaned towards keeping some parts of Art.XII intact. As #4 stated, locals will shortly be unable to afford to by land as island property in a US territory will be very valuable, and seemingly lost

HOWEVER....... The islands are being lost. They're being lost through schemes and scams to outside investors, By the "haves" preying on the "have nots", and through depletion of the beauty of the land do to shameful stewardship. Maybe the best hope of saving the islands for future generations of NMDs will be in letting the land owners decide to whom they want to sell to and entrust their land.

0 Dislikes 3 Likes, #9 jrsedso 08-22-2012 12:31

juandoe: Article XII denies private landowners OWNERSHIP of their land. If it's my land, why must I seek permission from others in the disposition of my personal property? Too, please shed some light of the relationship between land and culture and whether it still exist. It's about securing full ownership. Disposition is up to the landowner and we can't perpetuate paternalism on people who already know how to make decisions on a mature basis. Thus, the fundamental flaw in Article XII that runs contrary to the law of the land--US Constitution that reigns supreme over local constitutional or statutory provisions. It's called the supremacy of laws!

1 Dislikes 6 Likes, #8 thermite_reaction 08-21-2012 11:09

@#4 juandoe - So by your definition, only NMD's living on Saipan have language and culture. So if a 100% NMD married couple move to, say Texas, and bring their 100% NMD children, are they cultureless? They buy a house and settle into comfortable jobs and raise their family in Texas but speak the vernacular as well as English (American) They are not NMD and are now cultureless. What a narrow minded thought that only a person living on Saipan or the rest of the CNMI could have NMD culture or maintain their NMI decent. The land doesn't define the culture the people do. If the children of 100% NMD lived their whole lives in the states and married a non-NMD, what would you consider their children. Based on Article XII they would technically be defined as 50% NMD but what would you consider them since they never spent time in the CNMI and were born outside the CNMI. If I was one of those children and your were my Uncle or Grandfather I would ask you why do you think I have no culture just because I was born outside of the CNMI but am of CNMI decent. Maybe you and your children will never leave the CNMI but remember that there are CNMI decent out there in the world and they may take issue with you calling them cultureless. You wouldn't want someone to call you classless for calling them cultureless now would you. It never hurts to play devil's advocate once in a while.

0 Dislikes 6 Likes, #7 thermite_reaction 08-21-2012 10:49

@#2 Pompetus - A person who has been never ever been to Idaho, or Texas, or California, etc..., can purchase land there (because they fit the description of US CITIZEN) but a person who was born and bred there cannot (You did not explain this statement very well). Where's the justice? Sounds like a double standard to me. Your statement that an NMD cannot buy land here (CNMI) does not make sense. Why can't they? I am assuming you are implying that they financially cannot. Sounds to me like a personal problem not a Constitutional/Convenant problem. If an NMD does not improve his or herself's lot in life (higher education/better paying job/ambition) why would they need Constitutional/Covenant protection? That doesn't make sense. How about the homeless guy in Idaho or Texas or California who can't buy a house or land because he has no money. Does the Constitution need to be rewritten to protect them? Come on. Maybe if a homesteader who is on foodstamps and welfare could sell his homestead to an expat lawyer from the states for more than $5000.00, he could send his kids to college and they could get a better life. Small thinking leads to small minds. Expand your thinking.

1 Dislikes 5 Likes, #6 Mitch Westland 08-21-2012 10:30

Could Art 12 be giving some people a subtle and tacit, yet officially sanctioned excuse to be bigots? Not to say Art 12 is the only factor, but to Constitutionally mandate an abridgement of civil liberties, seems to me at least, to be having that affect. And frankly, I find it puzzling that in the same document, Art 1 section 6 mirrors the equal protection clause of the 14th Amendment. Such mental gymnastics should be reserved to reading the Bible.

0 Dislikes 5 Likes, #5 Mitch Westland 08-21-2012 10:29

Could the xenophobic, and (most likely unintentionally, but inherently) racist nature of Art 12, have helped contribute to an attitude on these islands of contempt and abuse directed towards non-NMD workers (I specifically cite people like Doctors who don't get paid and other professionals, along with the rest of the CWs), which cause. When a bad law is made, which officially sanctions racial discrimination, does this not have an affect on the citizenry and its interaction with each other?

Back about 50 years ago, schools and other public facilities were segregated in the south by law (and unofficially in the North). These laws that openly discriminated against the rights of non-whites officially sanctioned bigotry. America has changed a lot in regards to losing that bigotry since Rosa Parks refused to give up her seat and the Feds began enforcing the 14th and 15th Amendments. The Army had to go down to the University of Alabama and force Governor Wallace to integrate the school. Since then, racism and discrimination have been on the decline.

cont...

3 Dislikes 4 Likes, #4 juandoe 08-21-2012 09:45

Article XII is all that is keeping us from becoming like the cultureless island of Guam. If Article XII goes away the locals will be renters and the outsiders will be the land owners. Don't tell me that locals won't have to sell. Look at what we've got now. The Retirement Fund is about to collapse and none of the retirees will have money so they will sell their land to outsiders.

Land values will skyrocket and local (real local) workers will never again be able to afford to buy land in our islands. DON'T LET THIS HAPPEN! A few greedy people want to make this a reality and their names are Alex Sablan, Efrain Camacho, David Sablan, Marianne Pierce, Frica Pangelinan, and a bunch of outsiders.

Do you want Saipan to be like Guam? No language, no culture, no class. Do we want to trade our homeland for a new shopping mall? That's what Guam did and that's what will happen to us.

0 Dislikes 7 Likes, #3 jrsedso 08-21-2012 09:00

Genealogy is inherent in every citizen of the world and it would be a travesty to compromise it with non-existent technology determining what percentage of your blood is Chamorro, Carolinian, French, etc. Can this imposition really decipher who is indigenous?

The right to property is a NATURAL right. It's a right that is unalienable. It means that Article XII is null and void from the outset or since 1978. Is this too difficult to understand?

1 Dislikes 5 Likes, #2 Pompetus 08-21-2012 07:59

A person who has never ever been to the CNMI can purchase land here (because they fit the definition of NMD descent) while a person who was born and bred here cannot. Where’s the justice?

1 Dislikes 5 Likes, #1 talala 08-21-2012 07:54

Mr. Sablan, before moving to remove article 12, how did you and your wife obtained the Papago land from the government? But I agree that article 12 should be repealed entirely. Allow me to do as I pleased with my property. Mr. Cabrera, If you or anyone needs protection then make a law and have those people registered as a red zone so investors or buyers must stay away from those zones. In other words, any investor(s) trying to obtain from a red zone should be charged for criminal offense for enticing a land owner to sell......that is the protection you need so the land owners will be allowed to make or break.

Refresh comments list

You must Login first in order to post comments. If you don't have an account, please Register.

JComments