Nation News – Wednesday, 22 November 2023

THE SAGA involving Praise Academy of Dance and the National Cultural Foundation (NCF) may be moving from the stage to a showdown in the law courts.

The group is vowing to take legal action in the High Court after losing its appeal against the NCF’s judges’ decision to disqualify its theatrical production Speak Life on October 27 in the National Independence Festival Of Creative Arts (NIFCA).

In a release last Friday night, the NCF said Senator Gregory Nicholls, the appointed arbiter for competitions produced by the Foundation, had rejected the complaint brought by Praise Academy.

In the ruling, dated November 17 which the NCF stated was disseminated to both parties, Nicholls, an attorney, said “there is no basis to interfere with the prior decision of the judges of the entry Speak Life which was disqualified under Rule 9B of the NIFCA Rules.

“The rationale for my decision to dismiss the complaint is that the NIFCA judges are experienced practitioners in their respective fields and are carefully chosen by NCF to judge in its competitions.”

He added: “The judges determined that the entry was in breach of the rules, more specifically, in that it exceeded the bounds of good taste. The entry was adjudged to have denounced various gender identities of the LGBTQ community via raging characterisations and expressions. This was a determination that the experienced panel of judges were entitled to make.

“The rules in question have been in place for many years and the complainant has entered NIFCA under the said rules. This demonstrates that the complainant agreed to the rules of the competition and to abide by the same.”

However, attorney for Praise Academy, Davida Maynard-Holligan, told the MIDWEEK NATION

yesterday the arbitration did not address the constitutional argument brought by the group, and that Nicholls was not qualified to make such a decision in the first place, leaving them no choice but to take matters to a higher level.

“We really have to go to the High Court. The matter was beyond the jurisdiction of the arbiter to begin with, but we were simply following procedure based on the rules of NIFCA which said to take grievances to the arbiter. When the matter went before him, the case of Praise Academy was that the decision of the judging panel was arbitrary and unconstitutional, that they made an illegal decision which went against the human rights of each member that performed the piece.

“A constitutional argument was made so the arbiter ought to have stood the matter down and said it was a matter for the High Court,” she said.

Judging rules

The attorney charged that Nicholls did not decide on whether the actions of the NCF were illegal and had no authority to judge on whether there was a constitutional infringement, so his decision was based on whether the judges were within the judging rules, regardless of legality, something she said was an exercise in futility.

Speak Life told the story of a 15-year-old girl who was struggling with gender identity, eventually finding her identity in God.

Founder and artistic director of Praise Academy, Marcia Weekes, had said the submission was written and expressed from a biblical world view and based on biological science. The musical production premièred on August 26 at the Combermere School Hall and was later submitted to NIFCA for judging.

Maynard-Holligan said they also had an issue with the decision being displayed all across social media and traditional media without proper context.

“We are in the preparatory phases of a court action. We all have the right of freedom of expression. The piece is based on Holy Scripture and scientific, chromosomal differentiation between male and female. That should not be banned. We must understand we live in a time where people have wildly different opinions on things and they are all entitled to them,” she added. The attorney said Barbados’ Constitution was in a state of flux and the final version was yet to be presented, with certain definitions changing “under our feet”, so it was a good time to take such a matter to the High Court, adding should the case set any precedents, she hoped they would be good ones.