BASSETERRE, St. Kitts – NOT many teams go into a competition thinking that they will lose. Over the past decade, the St. Kitts Leeward Islands Debate Competition (LIDC) team had resigned itself to this fate.
This attitude had nothing to do with a lack of confidence in their capabilities. It was because, in recent times, the competition had become notorious for its “home-team tradition”.
Each year brings new judges, new topics and new debaters. But with all these changes occurring around them, St. Kitts LIDC debaters have always had one constant: the belief they could win, but would not win.
Xavienne-Roma Richardson, a member of the 2009 team, stated, “Because of what everyone says about the judging, I didn’t think we would win the competition. We were trained to do our best in spite of this, so that even if we did lose persons would still think we had won.”
Gwendolyn Nisbett has trained St. Kitts LIDC debaters since 1974. She has extensive knowledge of the competition and has seen decades of St. Kitts debaters come and go.
“The need for our debaters to remain humble has always been stressed. They are also reminded of the finality of the judges’ decision and the respect they must have for it.
“However, if having performed at a level of excellence and they do not win, their performance should be so striking that those attending would be the ones to comment on any perceived unfairness. The team must remain humble irrespective of the outcome,” Nisbett said.
From 2001 to 2008, victory by the LIDC host country had been the status quo. While some of these victories were appropriate, many have been fervent acts of patriotism by local judges determined to place victory in the home team’s hands at the expense of more deserving teams.
During the final debate in 2004 in Nevis, radio commentators and the assembled crowd predicted that St. Kitts would emerge victorious. A rumour exists that a finals’ judge, who left before the results were announced, was shocked the next day when he heard the news of Nevis’ victory. When he left the venue, St. Kitts had been the winner.
In 2001 in Anguilla, team St. Kitts lost to the host by a mere point. One of the judges attributed the loss to the leader’s referral of the moderator as “Mr.” instead of “Mrs.” and a subject-verb error contained within the speech.
Crios Freeman, a debater on that year’s team, vehemently believes that St. Kitts was robbed of victory.
“Everyone was predicting a St. Kitts victory. Some of the Anguillian debaters even told us they thought we deserved to win. I feel the judges were unfair in their deliberation and the team was cheated,” Freeman said.
Of course, St. Kitts has not been the only country burned by convention. Other countries have lost debates that many perceived they should have won.
But as a former St. Kitts LIDC debater, I am particularly intrigued by the instances of cheating against St. Kitts. That’s because I was on the 2007 St. Kitts team that lost to Montserrat...only to be told later by a judge that one of his colleagues had deliberately skewed the scoring to make Montserrat win.
Before then, I did not believe in the LIDC tradition. I had been warned and about it, but naiveté and optimism had prevented me from thinking such dirtiness would occur.
Tradition changed on March 1 this year when St. Kitts beat St. Maarten to capture its ninth crown and its first away-from-home championship in 28 years. For the first time, in almost a decade, the home team did not hoist the trophy.
“St. Kitts’ victory is important on two levels. First, it emphasises the team’s talent. And second, it is a positive reflection on the selection of judges and their professionalism in executing their duties,” Nisbett said.
Team St. Kitts’ shock was quickly replaced by joy and excitement. Their supporters yelled and waved their flags with enthusiasm.
Lonell Liburd was one of these supporters, and he called the moment “indescribable”.
“We were all exhilarated and shocked, considering the history of the competition. Last year, persons were sceptical about St. Kitts’ home victory. We knew no one could attribute this win to favouritism,” he said.
Akeem Bacchus, leader of St. Kitts’ finals debate team, summed up their feelings perfectly.
“We were surprised; not that we thought we didn’t deserve the victory, but because for several years it seemed as though no one but the home team did. We bought into the LIDC tradition and the fact that we were the first team in nine years to break that tradition makes this victory sweeter,” he said.
After the winner was announced, I turned to a teammate who had debated in the 2007 Montserrat final and said, “This one is for you.” She knew what I meant. Every past LIDC debater who has been cheated knows what I meant as well.
For us, it means that the nasty taste of Anguilla 2001 was minimised. It means the injustices of Nevis 2004 and Montserrat 2007 were rendered less significant. Most importantly, it gave us back our belief in the integrity of the competition.
In addition to claiming the overall prize, a St. Kitts debater, Rolhensha Henry, took the coveted Best Overall Speaker Trophy. It marked the fourth consecutive year, and the sixth in nine years that a St. Kitts debater had received that honour. Additionally, with the victory, team St. Kitts now holds the distinction of having the most LIDC wins (nine).
However, when one takes away all the statistics and numbers, the victory is still significantly meaningful; because for those of us who believe in fair play and integrity, it signals a return to a tradition worthy of pride and respect.
