Jersey referendums, governance, tradition and direct democracy

Abstract

Historically, Jersey’s governance involved Parishes, the Royal Court, and the States, the Island legislature. Three offices were at the heart of the system: the Bailiff (the senior judge and civic head of the Island); Jurats (lay judges); and Constables (responsible for parish administration). Referendums follow a tradition of Petitions to the Crown and direct democracy through Parish Assemblies, both dating from the Middle Ages. After the trauma of German Occupation, with pressure for modernisation, in 1945 a local paper organised an informal postal Poll, which was strongly in favour of change. Four out of five Referendums held between 1865 and 2014, including one in 1947 following the 1945 Poll, focused on proposed changes to governance, a measure of its importance to insiders. However, change to complex, interlocking institutions resulted in delays and compromise, Referendums adopted tactically, their outcome intended, or interpreted, to slow down change and secure the position of Jurats, Constables, and the Bailiff. The States ignored Petitions and calls for Referendums on other matters which it supported, contributing to dissatisfaction and disengagement with a complex political system. The article considers the role, impact, and failings of Referendums in Jersey.