By Gregorio Igartúa de la Rosa
Special to The STAR
In Puerto Rico, several plebiscites have been held, and all won by the pro-statehood New Progressive Party, but without any results in Congress.
We do not vote in federal elections. So it is pertinent to ask, Why haven’t we moved toward statehood status? The reasons are several, but they revolve around confusing people with the need for a plebiscite to grant us statehood. In Puerto Rico, a plebiscite process is unnecessary and questionable. In addition, there is the issue of protagonism and/or ignorance in many cases, even at high levels of the political leadership of the parties. Why a plebiscite again? Why not claim our rights in Congress as American citizens, which we have been since 1917 by our own free will?
It is discriminatory and shameful that we expose ourselves to a process with an alternative of a republic, which would result in us (3.3 million American citizens) leaving the nation. The Free Association alternative proposed by the Popular Democratic Party pursues an association with our nation with terms that are unknown and that the United States cannot grant as it would not grant them to a state. If the two previous alternatives were supported by the people of Puerto Rico, let them be proposed by the Popular and/or the pro-statehood party in a plebiscite, not by us statehood supporters, who are already citizens of our nation, and who on the path of assimilation only need certification to be an incorporated territory in transit toward statehood. (We are de facto incorporated).
One should not think that a plebiscite is a tool to win elections (That is protagonism without reason; in the 2012 elections, statehood won the plebiscite while Luis Fortuño lost the race for governor). Furthermore, it lends itself to an agreement by a group of parties against statehood. However, Governor Pedro Pierluisi issued an executive order to hold a plebiscite on Election Day. This is without including the indispensable part, the United States government. In addition, with the alternatives of free associated state and independent republic, that is, secession from the nation, which is questionable within our permanent union with the United States as embodied in the Constitution of Puerto Rico (preamble, Const. of P.R.).
The Puerto Rico Supreme Court has before it a case brought by the Puerto Rican Independence Party. In essence, it questions the legality of the plebiscite by executive order. Even determining that the plebiscite proceeds, or that it does not proceed, the Supreme Court has before it the supreme opportunity to issue an opinion that clarifies the rule of law that exists in Puerto Rico within the correct legal context of what we really are in our relationship with the United States, not what we could hypothetically be. (Not as concluded in Sánchez Valle.) The truth is that Puerto Rico is the territory that has been most assimilated to the point of being like a state in the history of our nation, and is already a de facto incorporated territory.
The opinion must be issued within the correct legal political perspective. That is, with knowledge of how far we have traveled, if anything along the way, within the elements of statehood that make it up. As noted above, the truth is that since 1898 Puerto Rico has been the American territory that has been gradually most assimilated into being like a state. Our ancestors voluntarily, with their consent, renounced Spanish citizenship in 1898; we have complied with all the requirements of the Northwest Ordinance of 1789 whose criteria were used as requirements to move the territories (more than 30) to be states; we have been American citizens since 1917 with our consent; we have voted for our governor since 1948; we have had a Constitution to govern our internal affairs since 1952, approved by the vote of the people and ratified by the vote of Congress; our Constitution confirmed our loyalty to the U.S. federal system of government, to the democratic system of government by consent, to American citizenship, and to the Constitution of the United States (preamble, Const. P.R.); we pay federal taxes of various concepts; we have defended democracy in military conflicts; we have the minimum population necessary to vote for the president and members of Congress; and the federal Constitution is applied every day in the federal courts and federal laws throughout Puerto Rico, as in the states. Very correctly and honestly, former Governor Rafael Hernández Colón said during his lifetime, at a law conference: “The commonwealth is heading toward statehood within 15 years. …” He had already advised Don Luis Muñoz Marín that with the 1952 Constitution we had completed the requirements to be a state (P.R. Bar Association Journal 207, 1959).
What then is the true perspective (not confusing to the American citizens of Puerto Rico, nor to members of Congress, nor to the courts) of affirmative and correct action to advance equality? Do not demand an alternative that is hypothetical (such as the republic and/or the commonwealth) because it has to be a request to the indispensable part, the United States, channeled and based on what we are, American citizens. In other words, it has to be a claim that follows the parameters of the American system itself in Congress and that they understand there, and not to vote on whether they give us the right to equality. As American citizens we already have that right. Slaves would not be asked to vote for freedom.
The true perspective is to promote, promote and promote the certification in Congress that Puerto Rico is an incorporated territory in transit toward statehood, the correct and safe path to follow (see G. Igartúa, The U.S. Incorporated Territory of PR; see Judge G. Gelpi, Consejo de Salud Playa de Ponce v Rullan). The island Supreme Court has before it the supreme opportunity to make history with an opinion that does not continue to confuse the people of Puerto Rico and the United States Congress. It cannot certify us as an incorporated territory, but it can in opinion conclude that we are de facto incorporated as a result of the assimilation process.
Gregorio Igartúa de la Rosa is a lawyer and longtime supporter of statehood for Puerto Rico.
EDITOR’S NOTE: The Puerto Rico Supreme Court on Wednesday issued an opinion in which it supported the call for a plebiscite for Nov. 5, 2024 through Executive Order OE-2024-016, signed by Gov. Pedro Pierluisi Urrutia. The decision denied a challenge filed by the Puerto Rican Independence Party, which alleged that Law No. 165-2020 and the aforementioned order violated the separation of powers and were unconstitutional (see story on page 3).
コメント