Campaign finance rules to be set by law, not constitution

The House of Assembly has decided that campaign finance and election spending in the Virgin Islands should be regulated by law rather than entrenched in the Constitution, according to a newly released report on constitutional reform deliberations. 

The decision came during the House’s review of recommendations made by the Constitutional Review Commission (CRC), which had proposed constitutional amendments requiring a formal regime to regulate election expenses and campaign financing. 

However, lawmakers rejected that proposal and instead recommended that any campaign finance framework be created through ordinary legislation.

“The Committee supported regulation of campaign financing, but did not support the CRC’s proposal to constitutionalise that requirement,” the report stated. 

According to the report, legislators agreed that “election campaign finance regulation be established through ordinary legislation,” while allowing the details of the system to be determined within the legal framework. 

The report said the proposed legislative framework would determine “thresholds, disclosure formats, reporting timelines, auditing, enforcement mechanisms, and sanctions”. 

Unnecessary rigidity

Lawmakers argued that while transparency and fairness in campaign financing were important, embedding such requirements in the Constitution would create unnecessary rigidity.

“Members supported the objective of transparency and fairness in campaign financing,” the report stated. “However, they considered the CRC’s proposal to embed a constitutional requirement for such a regime unnecessary, given that the legislature already has the power to enact campaign finance legislation.” 

The report further noted that lawmakers believed campaign finance rules would need practical flexibility to evolve over time.

“Members also considered that the effectiveness of any regulatory regime depends on technical design choices that require practical flexibility and the capacity to be refined over time in light of experience,” the report stated. 

The House’s position examined deliberations on the CRC’s 57 recommendations, which covered governance reform, electoral systems, accountability measures, self-determination, and constitutional modernisation. The House reviewed the proposals during several sittings between October 2025 and April 2026 before finalising the report last month. 

The report showed that lawmakers accepted some CRC recommendations outright, modified others, and rejected several proposals in favour of alternative approaches. In many cases, the House preferred ordinary legislation and administrative measures over constitutional amendments.