Talk:Order of the Nation (Antigua and Barbuda)

Establishment of the Order
I note that the date of establishment of the Order was changed from 31 December 1998 to 26 February 1987. As the Act establishing the Order of the Nation in 1987 was repealed in 1998, this first Order can be deemed to have been dissolved in 1998. Under Antiguan and Barbudan common law (based on English common law), the repealing of an Act of Parliament normally results in its being treated as if it had never passed. See Laws of Antigua and Barbuda and Repeal. A new Order of the Nation was therefore established in 1998 as a successor to the Order established in 1987, but dissolved in 1998. Indeed, the 1998 Act provides for a continuity of membership where members of the Order established in 1987 became members of that established in 1998.

This should perhaps be reflected in the article itself, but I would suggest that the date of establishment should revert to 31 December 1998 as this is when the present Order was established. I should welcome other contributors' views (if any) on the question. --Antigua2015 (talk) 09:33, 14 January 2016 (UTC)


 * As there is continuity of membership from one "version" of the order to the next, I believe that it is most appropriate to keep the founding date as 1987. Appropriate context is given in the text of the article to talk about the first awards act and the the subsequent act that modified the honours system of Antigua and Barbuda. If there were no continuity of membership between the two orders, then I could agree that they are separate. However, the 1998 act binds them together by the continuity of membership. EricSerge (talk) 16:14, 14 January 2016 (UTC)


 * I would agree with your approach. Many thanks. Antigua2015 (talk) 12:17, 16 January 2016 (UTC)

Precedence and privileges - Titles
I have amended some of the changes made to this section as they do not accurately reflect what is actually mentioned in the source. The policy statement published on the website of the UK Parliament does not say that the present policy was adopted in 2015 and that Knights and Dames of the Order of the Nation (Antigua and Barbuda) who are British citizens can use the title of Sir or Dame in the UK for all other purposes other than in a formal context. This is not what the policy says. I have also added in line with the policy statement that the titles of citizens of Commonwealth realms, who are not British, and have been awarded a knighthood by their own country, are recognised in the UK as an official courtesy. --Antigua2015 (talk) 09:49, 14 January 2016 (UTC)

Unwarranted Reversion
An anonymous contributor (46.255.119.7) reverted on 15 January changes made by me on 14 January (see Article History) stating as a reason for the reversion: 'date of Royal assent reinserted as Act not legal without it'. This is incorrect as the changes made on 14 January, which were mainly about correcting the paragraph outlining the UK policy on the use of Antiguan and Barbudan titles in the UK (as detailed in the above section), did not remove the date of Royal Assent from the article, but moved it to paragraph 3 with other details on the National Honours Act 1998.

I am of the view that this reversion was unnecessary and reduced the quality of the article: it re-introduced an inaccurate statement on the UK policy on the use of Antiguan and Barbudan titles in the UK and it removed a new citation and minor editorial or orthographic changes (e.g. 'courstey' is spelt incorrectly). Being relatively new to this, I do not wish to engage in edit warring with an anonymous contributor (or any other for that matter) and should welcome the views of neutral and experienced contributors on how to deal with this issue. Antigua2015 (talk) 12:13, 16 January 2016 (UTC)