A constitutional crisis is brewing in St. Vincent and the Grenadines (SVG) over the interpretation of sections 25 and 26 of the nation’s Constitution, which govern the eligibility of Commonwealth citizens to contest elections. Section 25 outlines the basic qualifications for election candidates, including being at least 21 years old, residing in SVG for 12 months before nomination, and demonstrating proficiency in English. However, Section 26 introduces a critical litmus test: candidates must not, by their own act, acknowledge allegiance, adherence, or obedience to a foreign power or state. The crux of the debate is whether a Commonwealth member state qualifies as a ‘foreign power or state’ under Section 26. Dr. A Linton Lewis, PhD, argues that Commonwealth countries, including Canada, are indeed foreign states relative to SVG, a position that contradicts Dr. Jason Haynes’ interpretation. Dr. Haynes contends that Section 25 explicitly permits Commonwealth citizens to contest elections, making it contradictory to disqualify them under Section 26. Dr. Lewis counters that the Constitution’s drafters clearly distinguished between SVG citizens and Commonwealth citizens, emphasizing that the latter must reside in SVG for seven years to apply for citizenship, underscoring their foreign status. He further asserts that the purpose of Section 26 is to prevent split loyalties, ensuring that elected representatives are fully committed to SVG. The looming crisis stems from the potential disqualification of Commonwealth citizens who may hold allegiance to their home countries, raising questions about the Constitution’s intent and the practical implications for SVG’s political landscape. As the debate intensifies, the issue remains unresolved, with the possibility of a constitutional challenge on the horizon.