Customs: Open Premier’s Mail In His Presence
Government has officially confirmed that Customs Officers have been directed to only open the Premier’s mail in the presence of the Premier or his representative, and also stated that similar protocols are in place for diplomats in Bermuda.
The official statement follows below:
In a response to recent news stories concerning Customs Procedures for dealing with mail consigned to the Premier, the Collector of Customs made clear that all mail and express consignments imported into Bermuda are subject to customs inspection.
Within these broad customs powers to search mail and other imports, Customs Officers were directed to follow a protocol that should they select for inspection any official mail addressed to the Premier they will not open that mail except in the presence of the Premier or his representative.
Similar protocols exist for diplomats stationed in Bermuda.
Read More About
Comments (18)
Trackback URL | Comments RSS Feed
Articles that link to this one:
- Kim Swan: No One Should Be Above The Law | Bernews.com | June 28, 2010
“Similar protocols exist for diplomats stationed in Bermuda.”
Does this ‘protocol’ exist for other Bermudian politicians? Did this ‘protocol’ exist before Ewart had a hissy-fit? And what difference does it make if he/a representative is there?
All of this makes you wonder – when coupled with the fact that he doesn’t allow the drug sniffing dogs to be present when he/his family arrive – what he’s trying to hide? His five houses in the US have to be paid somehow…
Since when is the Premier a diplomat?
Is the Minister of Tourism a diplomatic post?
Transport? Diplomat?
What do protocols for diplomats have to do with protocols for a Premier?
I think I should have that same right….. I think we should all have that same right!
Guess that tells us that the Premier of Bermuda has little trust in HM Customs…
Whilst I agree that his actions may make him look a bit suspicious and I am the first to consider him a prima donna and to recognize this as his latest tantrum, let’s not forget that he is (unfortunately) the leader of our country. I wonder whether other global leader’s mail is opened by the respective customs authorities. The present premier has faults aplenty and I do not often defend him, but I have no problem with his correspondence being protected. Should a situation arise where a customs dog, for example, alerts on his mail for the presence of contraband, then of course the situation drastically changes and normal policy relating to search and sizure should apply. Nonetheless, the running of a country (whether it is done poorly or done well) involves practices and correspondence that simply must remain confidential. (I am not suggesting that HM Customs officers would in any way use the contents of the premier’s mail inappropriately)
One day we will hopefully have a leader that can be respected and trusted. Do we want to initiate a policy now that will impact the future leaders of Bermuda and jeopardize the sanctity of official correspondence? My two cents – no.
Correct me if I am wrong, but as I understand it, the issue is with courier packages as opposed to correspondence mail. I hardly think anyone is reading or censoring his mail, but checking for contraband, and rightly so.
I dont know whether it is courier or not, but dont see the need for a distinction. Contraband? If you mean,as I did, drugs then that is simple to do without opening the package – ie xray, drug dogs and ion scans. This is a slippery slope.
Contraband = Anything prohibited by law from being imported or exported.
This obviously can cover anything from x-rated material to ivory, shells and endangered animal pelts, ammunition and weaponry, or large amounts of currency…. not just drugs. Not all contraband can be detected by x-ray or drug dogs. That does not mean it has to be the person receiving the package who is the guilty one. It has been pointed out that people will send contraband to the attention of prominant people and intercept it before it gets to them. It has been happening all this time to all other people, why should he be exempt?
My position is that he should be exempt because he is the leader of our country and his correspondence should be priveleged. The things that you mention can and are detected by x-ray. As I said, if there is a reasonable suspicion that there may be contraband, then the package should subject to search in the Premier’s presence. There is a balance to be maintained here, and my position, despite having my own opinion of the integrity of certain politicians, is that the position of premier involves certain prerogatives that must be maintained. Once you take these prerogatives away from this premier, then you take them from all future premiers. Then you find yourself in the position of having a possibly disingenuous customs officer reading documents relating to the Bermuda government’s affairs. I question whether that is appropriate.
An xray machine is not going to tell if there is a stack of paper or dollar bills. It is not going to differenciate between ivory and wood or stone. An xray machine will not be able to tell if that metal part that is detected is a part to a motor or a weapon…. there really is a reason why they open packages, not just to get on the Premier’s precious nerves, and nor is it just done to him. As for the “balance” that you seem to think that is being disrupted… By insisting on being present, it is Dr. Brown who is dirupting the “balance”. ALL other Premiers before him had their packages checked. ALL! There are no prerogatives being taken from Dr Brown whatsoever.
Are we really concerned about the premier importing wood, stone or weapons? If people think that it needs to be done for his protection (in the event of weapons) then he has declined that protection by his statements. As for money, it can be detected by eiter dogs or x-ray. Just two weeks ago I sent my mother in law $60 and it was detected and sent back to me.
As for other premiers, it really doesnt matter what they accepted or otherwise. DOnt get me wrong, I am no fan of Dr. Brown, but unless there is a strong suspicion that some form of contraband is present, then I have to disagree with you. I dont equate premier Brown to any other world leader, but if I allow myself to do so for a brief moment of insanity, I would wonder whether President Obama or David Cameron would agree to having their mail opened by a regular customs officer at the post office or airport, without the appropriate security clearance. I would imagine that a more stringent requirement would be in place and such a task would probably fall to someone in the Secret Service and apply only to incidents where the source is unknown and the contents appear to be questionable.
Nonetheless, I agree to disagree with you….
If this is to become protocol, then fine. Do it properly, through official channels.
This hasn’t been done. It was done through bullying and threats.
I don’t disagree that perhaps there should be a privilege involved in being Premier, but, as evidenced by the testimony from previous Premiers, this privilege is not there at the moment and to assume that the protocol is in place because it “should” be is wrong.
As always, it’s not necessarily WHAT he’s doing, it’s HOW he’s doing it.
And, of course, as always, he’s defending the what and ignoring the how.
UE – does it necessarily need to be an established protocol, or can it just be a ‘courtesy’ or a common sense thing? I have no problem with it being a formalized practice, but dont really see a need for it. The testimony of previous premiers is irrelevant. First of all, the issues we face today are different from those we have previously faced. Secondly, do we know for certain that this privelage as you say was present but just not used? I dont know for sure – ‘just sayin’. I appreciate most correspondence is conducted via email today, but as I keep saying, would you want the average customs officer to have free rein to view sensitive correspondence regarding the governing of the country that is sent via post or courier?
I think the whole issue is a tempest in a teacup.
As always, it’s the WAY it’s being done.
DEMANDING (with threats) that things go his way.
As I said, I don’t have a problem, per se, with WHAT he wants, but why the need for this belligerent method of getting it done?
I DO, however, disagree with “The issues we face today are different from those we have previously faced”. There’s nothing happening now that makes privacy of his mail any more important than previous Premiers.
Trust me – I am not defending the man – I wont share my assessment of him on a public forum for obvious reasons, but I’m sure we are on the same page as far as that is concerned UE.
I stand by my statement that today’s issues are different and as such may require an expectation of privacy. However if, for the sake of argument, I concede to your point, and agree that the ‘privacy of his mail any more important than previous Premiers’ then I would respond by saying that he, like his predecessors has a right to expect said privacy regardless of whether they chose to demand it.
We’re in agreement for the most part, other than that “he… has a right to expect…” it.
I don’t think he does. Not yet, anyway.
I think that perhaps he SHOULD have that right, but I don’t think it’s there at the moment and, again, I don’t think threatening people is the way to procure that right.
No – threats have no place in the equation. That type of behaviour comes from years of being able to do what he pleases with no fear of any effective challenge.
And I think that’s what most people have a problem with, at the root of it.