Make a firm decision!

Commentary: Belize and the Commonwealth countries must decide which court should have the final say
Published on Friday, July 25, 2008

Sorce: Caribbean Net News, Cayman Islands
Print Version

By Wellington C. Ramos In most of the English-speaking Caribbean countries there has been a significant increase in the number of murders that are being committed weekly. Especially in countries such as Jamaica, Trinidad, Guyana and Belize. The governments of these countries are so baffled and confused about this situation that they are making all type of efforts to stop these senseless killings.

The problem is that in all these countries the last deciding legal body is the Privy Council in London. In these countries they have a national Supreme Court and an Appeals Court. These courts have been sentencing murderers to death but when most of these cases are appealed to the Privy Council in London, the sentences are reversed and the execution of capital punishment is terminated or downsized to manslaughter due to some technicalities.

Born in Dangriga Town, the cultural capital of Belize, Wellington Ramos has an M.A. in Urban Studies from Long Island UniversitySome of the legal experts are pushing for the Caribbean Court of Justice (CCJ), a regional court, to become the final court for all decisions. However, some legal experts in Belize and the other Commonwealth countries are against that change. They probably fear that if the last decision is given to a national court in their respective countries, there is a strong possibility that some of their nationals would be executed for political reasons despite the fact that they were innocent.

While these countries are not making any decision as to which way to proceed, their citizens are living in fear due to the continued increase in the amount of murders in their countries and the possibility of losing a loved one or a friend next is increasing. In Belize the murderers are bold and brazen because they are executing people in broad daylight without any fear or respect for the laws of our country.

The issue of capital punishment is a controversial topic not only in Belize but throughout the entire world. There will always be people who are in favour and against capital punishment. There will also be statistics that support and dispute the impact capital punishment has on the increase or decrease in the number of murders that are being committed in every country. In my five years when I was a police officer in the country of Belize, I have never seen Belize in such a state of fear. When we had capital punishment enforced, our murder rate was so low that, when we had a murder, we all could attend the funeral and sympathise with the family. Today, there are so many murders being committed in a week that we have to choose which funeral to attend.

I am not a legal expert and it does not take a legal expert to come to the conclusion that we should consider solving this problem now. The governments of the Commonwealth nations and the English-speaking Caribbean, including Belize, can put a referendum question to their citizens to decide which court they want to have the last say on all legal matters in their country. They will then choose between the Privy Council in London, the Caribbean Court of Justice (CCJ) and the Belize Court of Appeals. I would prefer the Belize Court of Appeals being the last court to decide on all maters affecting my country. I am a nationalist Belizean and I cannot see another country’s court system deciding the final decision on pertinent issues such as these.

The case of Michael Ashcroft has caused me to believe that he will do everything to avoid our national courts. This is a case that we should take seriously even though it is only dealing with a financial dispute. If he becomes victorious in London, it will set a major precedent and have wider implications because it will give the Privy Council the power to derail many laws passed by our House of Representatives. What does the word independence mean if we are not a sovereign state? It would be meaningless and there should have been no reason why we sought it. If any person or group of persons enter into an agreement with any government and they feel that their rights were infringed or violated, they could go to the International Court of Justice to seek redress.

I think the Privy Council’s role in the Commonwealth nations judicial system, is spelled out in their nation’s constitution. This role should be redefined because this arrangement we have in place is not working in the best interest of our country and the Commonwealth nations.

CCJ sets hearing November 10

CCJ sets hearing on complaints against Guyana published

Friday July 25, 2008
PORT-OF-SPAIN (CMC)

The Caribbean Court of Justice (CCJ) has adjourned to November 10 hearing of an application by the Trinidad Cement Limited (TCL) and the TCL Guyana Incorporated (TGI) for leave to appear as special parties to a court matter filed against the Guyana Government.

Historic sitting

In an interim ruling, the seven judges described the proceedings as "historic" since "this is the first matter in which the Caribbean Court of Justice has been called upon to exercise its original jurisdiction".

The applicants had gone to the CCJ for special leave to appear as parties seeking compensation and/or injunctive relief from the Guyana Government after alleging a breach by Georgetown of the provisions of Article 82 of the Treaty of Chaguaramas which oblige Guyana to establish and maintain a common external tariff (CET) on cement imported into that state from third states.

They argued that the imposition of the CET at the rate of 15 per cent on imports of cement from third states is of great commercial benefit to them because of the protection thereby afforded to their products.

Competitive advantage

TCL and TGI also said that when the CET is imposed by Guyana, they enjoy a competitive advantage over imports of cement from third states which do not qualify for Community treatment in accordance with the treaty.

But, according to the two companies, they do not now enjoy this competitive advantage because the Guyana Government in January 2007 suspended the implementation of the CET on imports of cement into that country from third states.

Justified

In response, Guyana's Attorney General Doodnauth Singh admitted that the Bharrat Jagdeo government had suspended implementation of the CET on cement and that the Caribbean Community's Council on Trade and Economic Development (COTED) had not authorised any suspension in respect of the relevant period.

But, he said, that the suspension was justified because of the critical shortage of the commodity and in light of Guyana's urgent developmental needs as a "dis-advantaged country" pursuant to Article One of the treaty.

CARICOM most successful behind EU

OAS assistant secretary general speaks of advantages offered by Caribbean countries
Published on Wednesday, July 30, 2008
Print Version
Source: Caribbean Net News
WASHINGTON, USA:

Touting the benefits Florida business leaders could derive from investing in the Caribbean, Organization of American States (OAS) Assistant Secretary General Albert Ramdin argued that the region’s trading arrangements offer prospects for expanded market for their products and services. Calling the Caribbean Community (CARICOM) the most successful integration system after the European Union, Ramdin highlighted the Single Market to enhance business promotion and entrepreneurship. He said the Caribbean Court of Justice as CARICOM’s highest court of appeal “is another significant step in providing judicial certainty to individuals, business community and nations.”

OAS Assistant Secretary General Albert Ramdin. OAS PHOTOThe State of Florida needs to unite on an agenda for the Caribbean. “It is not only in the interest of the Caribbean, but also in your own interest,” Ramdin declared at the weekend, in his keynote address to the second annual meeting of the World Affairs Council and the World Trade Center of Tampa Bay, Florida. City of Tampa mayor Pam Iorio introduced the OAS Assistant Secretary General to the guests.

“For the State of Florida in general and for Tampa in particular, given the proximity to the Caribbean, it is important to strengthen political and economic relations and to work towards a comprehensive agenda of collaboration, not only in trade, but also in culture, education, and other areas,” said Ramdin. “There are opportunities, but if these are not used or if the relationship deteriorates because of economic problems, there will be also risk.”

His address was entitled “New Trends in the Americas: Focus on the Caribbean” and it was delivered at an event where Rick Murrell, Chairman and President of Tropical Shipping Lines, received this year’s International Commerce Award for outstanding contribution to promoting international trade. Hailing the honoree, Ramdin also cited Murrell’s “important contribution to the economies of the Caribbean.”

Ramdin noted CARICOM free trade agreements with the Dominican Republic, Costa Rica, Colombia, Venezuela and Cuba, and negotiations for preferential trading with Canada to become a full-fledged free trade agreement. He added that a longstanding preferential economic trade agreement with the European Union has been re-negotiated into an Economic Partnership Agreement. In addition to proximity, the OAS Assistant Secretary General said the Caribbean region offers potential Florida investors advantages of language, comparable legal systems and relative peace.

Overall, the investment climate is generally an inviting one, he stated. “Taking advantage of these programs could be a good win-win for Tampa and the Caribbean in bringing home the advantages of an integrated market with commercial links and new personal relationships on which to build a long-term, stable market,” said Ramdin. “Tourism, health services, value-added agriculture, high-tech services, financial services; energy products, and cultural items for the large Caribbean diaspora represent key sectors for development in the Caribbean,”

Ramdin told the business leaders. “Eco-tourism and cultural tourism are on the rise. Agriculture is being expanded for high-value products such as cacao, coffee, limes, mangoes and coconuts for export," he explained.Major donors such as the World Bank, the US Agency for International Development, the Canadian International Development Agency, the British Department for International Development and others are helping to fund programs to upgrade the Caribbean’s trading infrastructure, Ramdin stressed. “This creates another type of business opportunity for companies such as those you have here in Tampa.”

These donors will be giving the Caribbean special attention in the build up to the Fifth Summit of the Americas, which will be held in April 2009 in Port of Spain, Trinidad and Tobago. This will be the first meeting of the new US president with his 33 counterparts in the Americas and an excellent opportunity for the launch of new programs to assist the Caribbean. “Those companies who have thought ahead and have products and services ready to link with the region will have a jump on the competition and be able to take advantage of this “tipping point” in the Caribbean.”

Ramdin accentuated the OAS’s activities, telling his guests that the organization’s “ultimate objective… is to promote and contribute to an environment of peace and stability, so as to create conditions for social and economic development in the Western Hemisphere.” He identified as central issues for the hemisphere the consolidation of democracies that respond effectively to citizens; maintaining fiscal responsibility and economic stability; improving transparency; fighting entrenched poverty as well as inequality; significantly reducing crime; improving the environment; and creating opportunities for young people to thrive.

CCJ rules in favour of TPL ( Guyana)

CCJ rules in favour of TPL for part of long-disputed Turkeyen land

Source: Stabroek News - Guyana

Published July 16, 2008

State to retain control over other parcels

The Caribbean Court of Justice (CCJ) yesterday ruled in favour of Toolsie Persaud Limited (TPL) for a section of land at Turkeyen that had been tied up in a marathon legal dispute dating back to 1989 but lost its claim to land that the court said was always in possession of the State.

Land identified in Toolsie Persaud’s petition to the CCJ as areas, `F’, `G’ and `H’ were found to be within lawful claims of the company in addition to an area identified as `C’ but the court ruled that a complication arose with `C’ given that the previous owner, Shivlochnie Singh had transported the land to another person and that individual was not a party to the proceedings.

The court in a lengthy judgment ruled that TPL had successfully petitioned for prescriptive title by adverse possession for 12 years by combining the state’s and its hold over the land since 1977 but it cannot now assert any rights against the current owner of land referred to as C’, who was named as Raymond Austin, since he was not a party to the proceedings in court. According to the judgment, the CCJ, Guyana’s final court of appeal, found that it was quite improper to make any order which affected Austin without giving him an opportunity to be heard.

“It is unfortunate that, given the inordinate length of time that these proceedings have been in progress, that is, some fifteen years (the duration of the appellant’s case), the final disposition of this case will still leave the appellant with another hurdle to cross if it is to succeed in securing title for area ‘C’, but this is a consequence of events over which we had no control’, the CCJ said in its decision.

But ruling on the principal issue of whether the State can acquire by adverse possession land, which it had taken possession of under an order for compulsory acquisition, which had subsequently been declared by the court to be invalid, presiding Justices of the court President Michael de la Bastide; Rolston Nelson; Duke Pollard; Jacob Wit and David Hayton said that physical occupation and use of land with the intention of excluding everyone else, amount to adverse possession, whether the occupier acts in good faith, believing himself to the owner, or in bad faith, knowing that someone else is the owner.

Further they said that the state appears on the record of title as the lawful owner of the other parcels of land and cited a fundamental rule which is that, “possession is never adverse if it can be referred to as a lawful title” and therefore dismissed Toolsie Persaud’s petition for prescriptive title to those areas identified as `K’; `J’; `N’ and `O’ calling it, misconceived. The company’s petition against the State in respect in respect of the area called `K’ was also dismissed since the court found that an Albert Chung-Wee had been the lawful title holder at the time of the compulsory acquisition of the land in 1977.

In its judgment, the CCJ pointed out that the legal disputes relating to the October 1987 contract between the state and Toolsie Persaud remain to be resolved as they, too, were not within the ambit of the appeal.

“It would be an extremely unfortunate waste of resources if these prime lands for development stagnated for decades yet to come due to protracted litigation over the contract. It is hoped, therefore, that the disputes arising from the contract can be speedily settled by the parties with the aid of their legal advisers”, the court said.The CCJ also expressed hope that such a settlement will not be delayed by a protracted dispute between the Toolsie Persaud and Raymond Austin over area C’.In April, 2008 when the matter went before the CCJ the court reserved judgment but requested that the attorneys make written submissions in 14 days on how the court should fashion relief or remedies, were it to find favour with Toolsie Persaud’s application.

In its petition before the court Toolsie Persaud named the Attorney General; Andrew James Investment Limited and Shivlochnie Singh as respondents and was seeking a declaration that it had acquired title by prescriptive title by undisturbed adverse possession of land for 12 years referred to as areas, `C’; `F’; `G’; `H’; `K’; `N’; `J’ and `O’ as being part of Plantation Turkeyen, East Coast Demerara.

But the petition was opposed as to areas `F’; `G’ and `H’ by Andrew James Investments Limited; area `C’ by Singh and areas `K’; `N’; `J’ and `O’ by the Attorney General on behalf of the state.

Background

The entire tract of land had been the subject of a compulsory acquisition order (CAO) of June 8th 1977. In October 1987 the state contracted to sell the entire tract to TPL and the company took possession in April 1988. In March 1989, the First Respondent (James) filed a constitutional motion challenging the CAO. Kissoon J ruled in the favour of the First Respondent in May 1990 and title was returned to it. An appeal by the state of this decision was dismissed by the Court of Appeal in March 1995. The second respondent (Singh) also succeeded in having title returned to her in July, 1995 after launching proceedings in November 1989.

In 1993, TPL filed a petition claiming prescriptive rights by adding its own adverse possession to that of the state. It was this tack that won its case against the First and Second respondents as the CCJ found that the respondents could have taken action earlier against the CAO.

The CCJ held that “a landowner’s right of action to recover his land arises as soon as he can bring an action in which he can claim recovery of title and possession. Thereafter, time runs against him. An action could have been brought against the State from 8th July, 1977 claiming that the CAO and the acquisition of title thereunder were invalid and requiring title and possession to be restored to the relevant landowner. After the appellant took possession in April 1988, the action needed also to be brought against the Appellant. However, no action was brought against the Appellant by the First or Second Respondents up to the time the Appellant filed its petition. There had therefore been the requisite twelve year period (1977 to 1989) during which the State and then the Appellant were successively in possession of the land”.

Attorneys Sir Fenton Ramsahoye SC; Anand Ramlogan and Chandraprakesh Vikash Satram appeared for the appellant, Toolsie Persaud while Ashton Chase SC and Sase Narain represented Andrew James Investments Limited and Rex McKay SC; Neil Boston and Hukumchand appeared for Singh.

The court has ordered that Andrew James Investment Limited and Singh are to pay two thirds of the costs incurred by Toolsie Persaud in the petition while TPL is to pay one third of the AG’s costs.

http://www.stabroeknews.com/news/ccj-rules-in-favour-of-tpl-for-part-of-long-disputed-turkeyen-land/

CARICOM or GUATEMALA

CARICOM or Guatemala

Source: http://www.amandala.com.bz/index.php?id=7168
Posted: 08/07/2008

“Man, proud man
Dress’d in a little brief authority
Most ignorant of what he’s most assur’d
His glassy essence – like an angry ape
Plays such fantastic tricks before high heaven
As make the angels weep.”
—William Shakespeare

I prefer the Jamaican creole patois version of the above, which goes as follows:

“Likkle men wid brief authority
Beat dem likkle puny chests to the sky
Whilst di angels dem haffi cry.”

As the Opposition during the last administration, the present government voted against Belize signing on to the CCJ (Caribbean Court of Justice) at a vote taken in the National Assembly. Following the recent visit and seminar given by the Justices of the CCJ, the present government, in the person of the Attorney General are now saying they are willing to “revisit” their previous stance on the CCJ. We’ll see.

“During the past few years, the people of British Honduras have begun to realize that they are the victims of a monstrous conspiracy to deprive them of their country.” –Hon. Philip S.W. Goldson,
United Nations, New York, 30 August 1967

“ The time to save your country, is before you lose it.” —Hon. Philip S.W. Goldson

In the mean time, the life-sized bust of this Belizean patriot, tireless benefactor, and national hero is allowed to sit languishing on the muddy roadside along the Northern Highway. The attitude seems to be that if you ignore it, and its messenger (the sculptor), somehow the message will likewise be ignored, maybe even go away. We’ll see.

It is sometimes said that one’s attitude will determine one’s altitude. However the converse is also true. Altitude can determine attitude. Pilots learn very early in flight school that adequate altitude is the aircraft’s life blood. Fly low and the engine fails, no chance for recovery, gravity quickly determines the aircraft’s attitude, nose dive, spin, crash and burn. On the other hand, fly high enough, the engine fails, there is room for recovery, maintain a nose up attitude, glide, find a landing area, land, survive.

So, just as choosing an adequate flight level (altitude) is important for survival in an aircraft….similarly choosing and maintaining a high standard of association is important for survival as a people and as a country.

CARICOM, and its two main organs - the CSME ( Caribbean Single Market and Economy), and the CCJ, I venture to say, do not need Belize half as much as Belize needs them. For Belizeans of the Caribbean diaspora, it may just be our last chance of survival as a people. I am again reminded of the statement Derek Walcott from St. Lucia made on receiving his Nobel Prize in Literature....” That a day may come when people may ask not only what became of our shores and bays, but of a whole people.”

Currently CARICOM has fifteen (15) full members - Antigua & Barbuda, Bahamas, Barbados, Belize, Dominica, Grenada, Guyana, Haiti, Jamaica, Montserrat, St. Kitts & Nevis, St. Lucia, St. Vincent & the Grenadines, Suriname, Trinidad & Tobago. There are five(5) associate members - Anguilla, Bermuda, British Virgin Islands, Cayman Islands, Turks & Caicos Islands. There are seven observers - Aruba, Colombia, Dominican Republic, Mexico, Netherlands Antilles, Puerto Rico, Venezuela.

The entire population of the fifteen full members is approximately 15 million. The associate members number about 154,000, and observer countries 290 million.

At the last census July 2007, the population of Guatemala was around 13 million.

There is a CARICOM Common Passport which is aimed at making intra-regional and international travel much easier for CARICOM citizens. As of late 2007, ten member states have already introduced the CARICOM passport. Unfortunately, we have been fed negative attitudes, and imagined obstacles to the Caribbean integration process – “distances too large,” “lack of transportation,” “lack of market access.”

We had intra-regional economic, educational, cultural, sport, and every other exchange with the Caribbean long before container ships, airplanes, and, of course, the Internet. CARICOM detractors, and our enemies fuel the negativity. Meantime the illegal immigration and illegal citizenship continue unabated, changing our demographic landscape.

“No person shall be entitled under provisions of this Chapter to be a citizen of Belize or be granted citizenship of Belize if such person shows any allegiance to or is a citizen of a country which does not recognize the Independence, sovereignty, or territorial integrity of Belize”

—Constitution of Belize Chapter III 29 (3)

CARICOM, the CSME, and the CCJ are a work in progress headed in the right direction, especially for Belize, a nation of 300,000 people, a large portion of which are citizens of a retrograde country which has long since, and still does not recognize our right to survive independent, sovereign, and with territory intact.

October 18, 1999 - Foreign Minister of Guatemala, Eduardo Stein, in a long note to the then Prime Minister of Belize, wrote that all the territory between the Sibun and Sarstoon Rivers must be “returned”to Guatemala, together with all the cayes, except St. George’s Caye,…additionally declaring Guatemala’s non-recognition of our borders as laid down in the 1859 Boundary Treaty.

April 29, 1987 at a ministerial meeting in Miami, Guatemala demanded that Belize cede the Toledo District and the Ranguana and Sapodilla Cayes, and British compensation totaling one hundred million pounds sterling as the price of settlement. One must note today the recent land disputes in the Toledo District with considerable interest and concern, if not suspicion.

So, we in Belize, especially those of the Caribbean diaspora, have a sacred responsibility to embrace CARICOM, the CSME, and the CCJ, and to do all in our power to make it work. If it means encouraging government to subsidize a small airline to link us with Jamaica and the Cayman Islands, thus eliminating the need for travel through Miami, the associated costs, and US transit visa requirement, then begin thinking about it. If you think it, you will do it.

May seem a small step, but will be the opening of the gateway, that elusive bridge that our fellow CARICOM citizens and ourselves will use to enhance the integration process, encourage freedom of movement, drive market access, nurture cultural exchanges, grow the tourism product, revive sports through serious competition, renew educational opportunities, maintain military and security support, sharing all the other aspects of life in the Caribbean Community.

“One Love. One Heart. Let’s get together and feel alright.” —Bob Marley

CCJ Reserves Ruling Under Original Jurisdiction - TCL/TGI Case

TCL/TGI case against Guyana gov’t -CCJ reserves ruling on special leave to sue
By Miranda La Rose

Source Stabroek News

July 7, 2008

Arguments in the application to the Caribbean Court of Justice (CCJ) by Trinidad Cement Limited and TCL Guyana Limited (TGI) to be granted special leave to commence proceedings against the Guyana government have been heard but a ruling has been reserved for a later date.

At the three-hour hearing at the CCJ in Port of Spain, Trinidad and Tobago on Monday, Queen’s Counsel Dr Claude Denbow presented the case for TCL (the parent company) and TGI while Guyana’s Attorney General Doodnauth Singh argued against the CCJ granting special leave to commence the hearing. CCJ President Michael De La Bastide presided over the court

Doodnauth SinghTCL/TGI are asking that their matter, in which they are claiming losses due to the Guyana government’s unilateral waiver of a 15% Common External Tariff (CET) on cement imports, be dealt with in accordance with Article 222 of the Revised Treaty of Chaguaramas and Part 10 of the Caribbean Court of Justice (Original Jurisdiction) Rules of 2006. It is the first time that the regional court has been approached in its original jurisdiction.

In their application TCL and TGI said that under Article 82 of the Revised Treaty they are entitled to protection under the Common External Tariff (CET). Their written submission said they “have been prejudiced in the enjoyment” of their rights by the government.

They also said that T&T as the contracting party was entitled to espouse TCL’s claim but had not done so and the same was the case in relation to Guyana and TGI. Appended to the application was a letter by TCL to the T&T Attorney General Bridgid Anissette-George, dated February 20, 2008, asking for permission for TCL to pursue the claim on its own behalf or for Port of Spain to forward the claim on its behalf. Anissette-George replied on March 4, 2008 with a three-line letter that said the matter had been duly noted.

In his summary, Denbow said that it was important to note that the issue of public importance was the preservation of the integrity of the Revised Treaty and the TCL was acting in a fashion wholly consistent with the Revised Treaty. He noted that TCL was engaged in substantial cross-border investment, investing over US$10 million in a state-of-the art facility in Guyana on the condition that it would enjoy market access, have the opportunity to expand, produce and supply its products to the Guyana market. The US$10 million investment was part of an overall loan package of US$105 million obtained from the International Finance Corporation in Washington DC to expand and modernize TCL plants in Jamaica, Trinidad and Tobago and Guyana.

He said that the company’s expectation was not made possible because of the steadfast refusal of the Guyana government to implement the CET. After the further suspension of the CET from 2004 to 2006, TCL and TGI approached the government but after not getting any results in 2007 they approached the Caricom Council for Trade and Economic Development (COTED) in November 2007 which suggested that Guyana should once again implement the CET because the supply issue which the country had raised in the past no longer existed. Denbow said that there was total silence on the part of the government and the CET remained in place.

Community law“On what legal authority, one does not know,” he said adding that, “What you have here is a flagrant breach of community law.” In the circumstances, he submitted that as guardians of the Revised Treaty the CCJ ought to intervene to uphold the community law. “That is why I am asking the court to grant special leave to prosecute these proceedings,” he said, noting that correspondence between TCL and TGI to resolve the matter between ministers of the Guyana government and his clients were repeatedly ignored.

He said that the case cries out for the CCJ to intervene in order to protect the integration process of Caricom and to uphold the law between the state and investors under the Caricom agreement.

In defence of the Guyana Government, Attorney General Singh said that Denbow did not define who in terms of nationals was entitled to be heard by the CCJ and the circumstances. No where in his arguments did he establish the issue of management and control but instead referred to the history of the company and its shareholders of which Sierra Trading 9 Cemex SA de CV) held 20% of the shares, the largest in the company.

He said it was significant that when a contracting party alleges a violation between a contracting party and another it was obligatory that they enter into consultations and attempt to arrive at amicable settlement within the provisions of the Revised Treaty and further to take steps to arbitrate in disputes but this was not done.

The absence of consultation and arbitration, he said, were reasons why special leave should not be granted, adding that litigation should be a last resort.

Even though Guyana acted unilaterally in waiving the CET, he said, TCL never objected to the waivers. While the government ought to have imposed the CET, he said that it would appear that because of the difficulty being experienced the GOG implemented the policy on a yearly basis. It was because TCL appreciated their inability to meet the demand that the T&T government never implemented the CET as well, he contended.

With Justices Desiree Bernard and Adrian Saunders noting that there were breaches by the Guyana government and asking why he was using the breaches in his arguments, he explained that it was to show that in spite of them TCL allowed the violations to continue for a year because they could not supply the market.

Vienna Convention

Justice Saunders reminded him that Guyana ratified the Vienna Convention of the Law Treaty on September 5, 2005 which says that “treaties must be fulfilled in the utmost…”Justice Bernard said that whether TCL allowed the violations, the point was that the State of Guyana flouted the treaty obligations and to try to make excuses for an apparent disregard on the basis of TCL or action or inaction was inexcusable.

However, Singh replied that he was not seeking to justify but to rationalise why TCL did not take steps earlier to correct the issue of the CET. “They came late in the day,” he said.

Accepting what was said that the Guyana government should have approached COTED to get the permission to have the waiver implemented, he insisted that he was “attempting to demonstrate that in the interest of justice and for the exercise of its discretion that those factors could be taken into account to determine whether the overall requirements of justice could be utilised in such a way that leave ought not to be granted.”

In closing his arguments, he said that based on a publication he read from, dated May 2, 2008 TCL’s profits should be noted by the courts.TCL and TGI filed their request for special leave on April 3, under Article 211 (d) and 222 of the Revised Treaty of Chaguaramas, which established the Caribbean Community, including the Caricom Single Market and Economy (CSME) and Articles XII (d) and XXIV of the agreement establishing the CCJ.

Once the CCJ hears the case TCL (the parent company) and TGI would be claiming according to the written submissions “compensation from and/or injunctive relief against the Government of Guyana in respect of breach of provisions of the Revised Treaty under which Guyana is obligated to impose and maintain a Common External Tariff on cement imported into Guyana from countries outside the Caribbean Community.”

TCL and TGI are asking the CCJ to declare that the Republic of Guyana, a party to the revised treaty, violated the provisions of Article 82 by failing to implement and maintain the CET of 15% in respect of imports of building cement. They also seek a declaration that as a party to the revised treaty and member state of Caricom, Guyana failed to maintain the CET, violating the right and entitlement of the claimants to the protection of the provisions of the revised treaty.

As a consequence, the claimants feel, Guyana is liable to pay compensation to them for any loss suffered by reason of its conduct. It is also asking the CCJ for an order to direct the government to bring its regime of imports of building cement in conformity with Article 82 of the revised treaty by implementing the CET; and for damages for loss of profits as a direct result of the government’s failure to implement the CET for the period January 2007 to December 2007 and continuing; exemplary damages; an order that the costs of the proceedings be borne by the government of Guyana; as well as such other orders that the CCJ deems fit.

According to the full statement of facts, the first claimant TCL is a limited liability company incorporated under the Companies Ordinance, Chapter 31:01 of the laws of Trinidad and Tobago but it is also registered “as an external company under the Companies Act, No 29 of 1991 of the Laws of Guyana with its registered office at 2-9 Lombard Street, GNIC Compound, George-town, Guyana.

The second claimant, TGI, is a limited liability company, which was incorporated on March 17, 2004 under the Companies Act, No 29, with registered office at Lombard Street as well. TCL holds 80% of the issued capital of TGI and the other 20% is held equally by Toolsie Persaud Ltd and Anral Shipping Ltd.

CLICK LINK TO HEAR AUDIO: http://www.caribbeancourtofjustice.org/audio/ar12008/ar1_2008_am.html

Hang Together or Hang Separately

We must Hang Together - or Separately

Social Commentary

Source: The Democrat Newspaper - St Kitts & Nevis

July 7, 2008

We blindly repeat the quotes “Unity is Strength”, and “United we stand, divided we fall” but it is never clear that we really believe them enough to walk the walk despite how .often we talk the talk.

By the time this article is printed, the CARICOM SUMMIT would have ended and we hope that apart from the eloquent ‘lippy lippy’ we hear speakers giving there, that we will see action plans being implemented quickly to unify and strengthen this organization in order to combat the common problems which could ‘hang’ each island separately.

Why does TEAMWORK seem to be a dying art – both on the local and regional levels? Is it that we are so insecure that ego-bloating and insular sovereignty must be pushed ahead of long term security to boost and maintain our stranglehold on power. The bottom line is that politicians who cannot practice the tenets of UNITY at home cannot be expected to understand it on a regional level either.

This why just two weeks ago Prime Minister Gonsalves of St. Vincent and the Grenadines could see nothing wrong in creating more division in CARICOM by openly calling it a “ramshackle political apparatus”.

"It is most doubtful that we would see in CARICOM an integrated judiciary as in the OECS, or an enhanced institutionalised ''supranationality'' in political decision-making which is required to transform a ramshackle political-administrative apparatus in CARICOM into a purposive, matching vehicle correspondingly, for the Single Economy venture . . . ." Gonsalves said.


This will not mend fences or promote the spirit of working together to solve common challenges in the region. In the same way, some prime ministers see nothing wrong in invading the internal boundaries of a neighbouring state to campaign on behalf of another prime minister and call the opposition leaders insulting names.

This “I can do as I like’ attitude creeps right into CARICOM decision making. So Caribbean leaders still cannot “hang together” on matters like “Cruise Passenger taxing”, “LIAT financing”, “the Caribbean Court of Justice”, and the “One-China Policy”. They drag their feet on CSME, do not agree on adopting CAPE exams (Dominica), and opt out of whaling agreements. Even at this Summit this week, there is talk that Guyana will not sign on to the EPA agreement and that Tourism ministers are finding it hard to see beyond their own white sand beaches.

And while they will seek to create a single economic space in CSME, they will not even come close to adopting the common OECS currency which has proven to be stronger and more stable than other regional currencies (with the possible exception of Barbados)

So whither CARICOM? What exactly are we clinging to? How exactly is Secretary-General Carrington to forge unity among these “own way” sovereign states?

Caribbean scholar and recent Head of ACS, Professor Norman Girvan, said recently, "Our Community leaders are still clinging to an insular sovereignty that perpetuates failure to strengthen the region''s integration movement by an effective system of governance.”

‘DUMP IT, DISCUSS IT, DELEGATE IT’

If we cannot unite for the good of our country or region, what are the alternatives? Surely we cannot dump our problems, for this would be like taking on a suicidal attitude. CARICOM is great at discussing and delegating and the latter is based on the premise that each country can take on a manageable slice of problem solving. Internally, when governments fail to join with Opposition on finding solutions ESPECIALLY ON CRIME, they can at least delegate areas to civic-minded groups. Such an act can only redound to the benefit of all. Just recently a regional police officer was speaking of the areas in which action needs to be taken simultaneously for the elimination of gangs. They are:
PREVENTION – keeping children out
INTERVENTION – stopping it; providing alternatives
SUPPRESSION – more patrols; searches; law enforcement
RE-ENTRY – rehabilitation of offenders into society


Finally, since the murder of the Head of the Jamaica Urban Transit Company (JUTC), Douglas Chambers in late June, one outraged writer to the Jamaica Gleaner Newspaper has offered suggestions to the Prime Minister. We would do well to listen to all suggestions to break the circle of this escalation of crime that threatens to engulf us. Here are his suggestions:

ENOUGH! Prime Minister, Opposition leader, Security minister, Opposition spokesman on Security, Commissioner of Police and Army Chief, draw the line on the platitudes after each murder and come on TV, radio and in the printed press and speak openly and loudly in one voice. ENOUGH!

Prime minister, you need to do a number of unprecedented things NOW.

1. Speak to the nation with the aforementioned persons around you. Use the creativity shown by advertising firms during elections to have a clear, powerful message made and have the TV stations rebroadcast this at their expense in the national interest every day with the same frequency and intensity when the election messages were bombarding us.
2. Co-opt the DJs sound system owners, discos to create voice-overs with strong, powerful street messages played at every session as a rule.
3. Order radio stations to stop playing all gun-related garbage now and anyone promoting ''informer fe dead'' must be treated as a criminal and charged for inciting murder.
4. Invite churches, service clubs, schools, businesses to dedicate a half day per month to do community service work to spread the message.
ENOUGH!


We need to ‘hang together’ as a country and as a region, or we shall ‘hang separately’.

Last Visited : July 7, 2008 : http://www.pamdemocrat.org/Newspaper/Details.cfm?Nz=*4W!P5IN%3DDWNO10%20%20%0A&Iz=%23*%22%3CD%0A

CARICOM'S CONFLICTING SIGNALS

Caricom's conflicting signals

RICKY SINGH

Source: Jamaica Observer

Sunday, June 29, 2008

LATEST INDICATION of significant differences among member governments of the Caribbean Community (Caricom) has come from Guyana on the eve of this week's 29th Caricom Summit that gets underway on Tuesday (July 1) in St John's, Antigua.

It was the disclosure last Wednesday in Georgetown by President Bharrat Jagdeo that, based on further information and legal advice obtained, the Guyana Government may not join Community partners in signing next month the Economic Partnership Agreement (EPA) that was initialled last December in Barbados between representatives of the European Commission (EU) and CARIFORUM (Caricom plus Dominican Republic).

Prior to this development, and amid conflicting signals on moving the process forward to access the Caribbean Court of Justice (CCJ) as the final appellate institution for Community partners, there was the recent verbal blast by Vincentian Prime Minister Ralph Gonsalves over "political decision-making" in Caricom and his scathing dismissal of the Community Secretariat's functioning as "a ramshackle political-administrative apparatus..."

It is likely that Secretary General Edwin Carrington may allude in his remarks at the opening session, to Gonsalves' criticisms that were made on June 16 when he addressed the launch of public consultations on the draft OECS Economic Union Treaty.

The Vincentian leader, who will be briefing his Community colleagues on an alleged plot involving drug dealers to assassinate him, had said that he was "satisfied that the politics of a limited regional engagement in Jamaica shackled by the ghosts from the federal referendum; the politics of ethnicity in Trinidad and Tobago and Guyana; a mistaken sense of 'uniqueness, specialness and separation' among large sections of the Barbadian populace; the peculiar distinctiveness of Haiti and Suriname, and the cultivated aloofness from the regional enterprise by The Bahamas, are destined in the foreseeable future to keep Caricom as a 'Community of sovereign states' in which several of its member states jealously guard a vaunted and pristine sovereignty...." Conflicting policies and attitudes towards advancing the process of free movement of Caricom nationals; differences over foreign policy issues as well as in approaches for attracting foreign investment and economic aid have also been causing concerns in more recent times among member governments and other stakeholders.

Those Caricom leaders who last week participated in the New York Conference on the Caribbean are reported to have been exposed to a common thread in the thinking of US lawmakers and financial investors in favour of dealing with Caricom as a common entity and not with fragmentation on the edges in terms of less or more developed member states.

So far as embracing the new trade and economic package with the 25-member European Union is concerned, even prior to the conclusion negotiations for a full EPA, Guyana's president had expressed strong reservations in contrast to a very favourable response from Jamaica's Prime Minister Bruce Golding, who shoulders lead responsibility for the Community's Prime Ministerial Sub-committee on External Economic Negotiations.

Among suggestions surfacing for discussion on signing arrangement for the EPA is that it be put on hold and for initiatives to be pursued instead for a special summit of the 78-member African Caribbean and Pacific (ACP) to, hopefully, arrive at some common positions on core aspects of the regional accords before any meeting with EU representatives for a signing ceremony which Barbados has already agreed to host.

Both Jagdeo and Golding are scheduled to be among five heads of government to address Tuesday evening's ceremonial opening of the four-day summit. This has aroused new interest about the tone and content of their planned messages to the people of the 15-member Community.

For Golding, who became prime minister following last September's general election at which his Jamaica Labour Party secured a 32-28 parliamentary victory, it will be his debut address to a Caricom heads of government conference.

REGIONAL DEVELOPMENT FUND

He would be expected to also signal his administration's position in relation to Caricom's Regional Development Fund (RDF) which is scheduled to be officially launched during this week's summit.
Status of allocated contributions by member states to enable operationalising of the RDF is viewed as essential to its formal launching. With the exception of St Lucia which has almost completed its fixed initial allocation, the OECS countries are either far below or like Grenada and summit host Antigua and Barbuda, are still to come forward with their contributions. In contrast, Barbados has already paid up US$5 (five) million of its allotted share of US$11 million.

Creation of the estimated US$250-million fund, for which Trinidad and Tobago will be the single largest contributor among Caricom with an overall pledge of approximately US$120 million, and has already fully paid up its initial contribution of US$37 million was strongly advocated by the Organisation of Eastern Caribbean States (OECS) as a mechanism to provide special and differential treatment for enhancing socio-economic development for the less-developed countries.

The rest of Caricom responded by turning to the Caribbean Development Bank (CDB) for expert guidance in creation of the RDF with the understanding that the countries of the OECS in particular will be on board by mid-2007 for the Community's single market as other partner states had done in January last year and with all working together for the realisation of a single economy by 2015.

Should member states fail to honour pledged commitments they could jeopardise the prospects of the fund attracting resources from foreign donor nations and international financial institutions. A major provision for accessing the fund is the denial of resources to defaulting contributors.

After a series of postponements, launching of the RDF would be a positive development in the face of lingering uncertainties about the way forward for Caricom - the regional economic integration movement that was inaugurated five years after the birth of the Caribbean Free Trade Association (CARIFTA) in 1968 (not 1965 as incorrectly appeared in an earlier article).

Independence and Accountability

Caribbean Chief Justices underscore independence, accountability
Monday, June 16 2008 @ 05:00 PM
Source: Breaking News ( Trinidad and Tobago)
http://news.bn.gs/

The 9th Meeting of the Caribbean Heads of Judiciary, June 5-6, 2008 today dispatched the following communiqué to the media.

OPENING CEREMONY

The opening ceremony took place in the Regency Ballroom of the Hyatt Regency Trinidad, on the morning of June 5, 2008, with a keynote address from the Honorable Chief Justice and President of the Constitutional Court of South Africa, Mr. Justice Pius Langa on the topic, The Judiciary: Maintaining Trust and Confidence.

The topic of Mr. Justice Langa’s address was also the theme agreed upon for the Ninth Meeting of the Heads. Among those attending the opening ceremony were: His Excellency the Acting President of the Republic of Trinidad and Tobago, Mr. Danny Montano; the Speaker of the House of Representatives of Trinidad and Tobago, the Honorable Barry Sinanan; former President of the Republic of Trinidad and Tobago, Mr. A.N.R. Robinson; former Chief Justice of Trinidad and Tobago, Mr. Satnarine Sharma, Judges of the Supreme Court of Trinidad and Tobago and the Caribbean Court of Justice, other Judicial Officers, members of the diplomatic corps; senior State officials, and representatives of the private sector and other distinguished guests.The ceremony was also witnessed and covered by a wide cross section of the Trinidad and Tobago media, and disseminated live to the national community by television.

AGENDA

The Agenda for the Conference was disposed of in three plenary sessions over the two scheduled days, including a working lunch hosted by The Honorable the Chief Justice of Trinidad and Tobago, Mr. Justice Ivor Archie.

Agenda items included the following:

• Matters arising out of the 8th Annual Conference Judicial Independence and Administration including presentations by Court Consultant, Mr. Robert Hann, and Court Executive Administrator of the Caribbean Court of Justice, Mrs. Christie-Ann- Morris-Alleyne on the topic: Context and issues of Court Administration; Alternative Models of Court Administration and recommendations for the way forward.

• Publication of the Commonwealth Caribbean Civil Court Practice Text;

• Update on Conference of Judicial Officers;

• Update on Caribbean Court of Justice Trust;

• Discipline and Accountability of Judges, (including a presentation by the President of the Caribbean Court of Justice, the Right Honorable Michael de la Bastide).

AGREEMENTS

Heads devoted much of their attention to discussion of the principles of judicial independence and accountability.

Heads noted that the principle of judicial independence in the 21st Century embodies much more than non-interference in the adjudicative function. It also includes the provision of adequate financial and administrative resources placed under the control of the Judiciary to facilitate proper discharge of judicial responsibilities.

Heads recognized that in this region and internationally, the expanded boundaries of judicial independence now involved the management by Judges of many of the processes necessary for the effective and efficient delivery of justice.Heads reaffirmed their commitment to impartiality in the exercise of the judicial function and stressed that members of civil society must at all times be able to perceive the Judiciary as impartial and independent of the legislative and executive branches of government.

Heads agreed also that judicial independence and judicial accountability must co-exist, and the Judiciary has an inescapable duty to account to the public for the performance of its functions. Judiciaries are obligated, not only to hold themselves responsible for their own conduct and performance, but must also do so in a manner that is fully transparent.

Heads accepted that in order to maintain confidence in the administration of justice, the Judiciary is under an obligation to inform the public about its work and function.Heads agreed that Judges’ allowances and salaries should be fixed by independent Salaries Review Commissions.

Heads also agreed to make representation to Regional Governments to ensure that all Judges and other Judicial Officers, including Magistrates, are provided with adequate security in recognition of the risk inherent in the performance of their duties.Heads noted that Judiciaries were taking positive steps to implement programmes of continuing judicial education and training. They regarded this as being essential for enhancing the performance of Judges and Judicial Officers.

Heads urged that the planning and financing of such training should be under the control of the Judiciary in keeping with the Latimer House Principles, agreed to by the Commonwealth Heads of Government. Heads further noted that prior approval of the Executive ought not to be required for Judges and Judicial Officers to participate locally and abroad in continuing education and training.

The Conference agreed as follows:

• Any disciplinary process for Judges should be insulated from political interference from inception to conclusion

• Procedures should be established for receiving and dealing appropriately with complaints against Judges, Magistrates and other persons performing a judicial function. The public should be informed of the prescribed procedures.

• Appropriate mechanisms should be put in place to deal with judicial behaviour that falls short of the kind of misconduct that would justify removal from office.

• Appropriate standards of ethical conduct for Judicial Officers should be adopted by all Judiciaries of the Caribbean and such guidelines should be published and made available to all members of the Judiciary and to members of the public.

On matters pertaining to Judicial Independence as it relates to administration, alternative models and the way forward, the Conference agreed as follows:

• That Judiciaries establish properly resourced offices of Court Administration, under the direct control of the Judiciary, with responsibility for all matters relevant to court administration.

Matters to be under the direction of Court Administration should include:

a) Finance and budgeting,

b) Human Resource Management (recruitment, training, terms and conditions, and discipline)

c) Executives should work towards providing the minimum percentage of the national budget for annual allocation to Judiciaries that is consistent with international benchmarks.In accordance with decisions at the Eight Annual Meeting of Caribbean Heads of Judiciary, the Constitution has been amended so as to provide for the President of the Caribbean Court of Justice to be a member of the Conference.

The Honorable Chief Justice of Belize, Mr. Justice Conteh, has agreed to represent the Conference as a member of the Board of the CCJ Trust for one more year.The Heads also agreed that a meeting of Judicial Officers of the Region be held in late June or early July 2009.Chairmanship of the next Conference is expected to be held by the Chancellor and Head of Judiciary of Guyana

Tempests Rage: Yet We Linger

Tempests rage: yet we linger
Published on: 6/11/08.
Source: The Nation Newspaper

If you tickle us, do we not laugh?
-The Merchant of Venice Act III, Scene 1.

MOST CARICOM LEADERS and citizens accept there is value in regional collaboration. That in the present sea of economic turbulence, driven by unyielding energy costs and surging food prices, the region's salvation must come from one voice resonating to a chorus that we are one people. Yet, these sentiments are mere words without serious intent or meaning.

All know that our small size and fragile economies stymie sustainable development. That our separate voices are too weak to be heard far less understood; that our countries have been known to be looked upon as 'a beautiful piece of real estate' where playboys languish on the sands and in the sun, while partaking of the libation of their choice.

It is years now since the 3B's – Barrow, Bird and Burnham – spawned CARIFTA. There has been a change in nomenclature – from CARIFTA to CARICOM – yet we still search for harmonisation of fiscal incentives; a regional Central Bank; a single currency; an all-embracing Caribbean Court of Justice; common cross-border legislation relating to a stock exchange; freedom of movement for CARICOM citizens; common customs tariffs; regional air and sea transport and regional security. Yes, we continue to be long on talk and short on action.

Here at home, as if blinded by regional practice and example, we have spent some two decades fiddling with the control and arrest of PSV culture and disrespect for law and order. That the minds of our young students, hungry for learning, are being vicariously poisoned by dancehall fare unsuitable for junkies seems not to be a sufficient bother.

Our sidewalks, store pavements and even streets are belching with the encroachment, even invasion of vendors claiming the right of the small man "to make an honest dollar". Worse still, PSV commuters as well as bystanders are being deafened by noise way beyond legal limits, claiming to be today's music and a pleasure to warped sensibilities.

Amidst price rises, creeping inflation and serious challenges in providing housing stock to satisfy demand we have permitted an unmanaged immigration process, bringing with it additional pressure for school places, jobs, and a real potential for social dislocation, crime, and health issues.

We seem to see no compelling reason to stop the rot despite the growing and frightening recklessness of violent crime in neighbouring Trinidad and Tobago and Jamaica – a natural sequel to open migration, attracting, as it often does, scores of unskilled people. Meanwhile, the region smiles at the new title of being among the leading murder capitals worldwide.

We seem to find more energy and tasty satisfaction in debating the wisdom of a realignment of the age of consent, majority and its related consequences. Although our water stocks are known to be finite, our inability to provide natural gas to households in need is glaring, our productivity levels are showing decline, discordant voices continue to bellow unashamedly in the highest forums of the world, seemingly expecting a magical outcome of benefit to self and region.

AG of Antigua Endorses CCJ

Simon endorses CCJ as final court of appeal
Monday June 09 2008
by Patricia Campbell

Source: Antigua Sun

Attorney-General Justin Simon has again made a case for the Caribbean Court of Justice (CCJ) to replace the British Privy council as the court of final appeal, saying that sufficient safeguards have been put in place to protect against political interference.

He said that the main concerns have been addressed in the agreement which established the CCJ, and argued that the region is also developing politically and evolving away from the restrictive thinking that would stimulate such interference.

Simon however acknowledging that continued apprehension that the CCJ could find itself subject to political pressure and influence are not unfounded.


“The concern is legitimate, understandable and, in a lot of quarters, genuine,” he said, responding to query on the matter.

“Let us take our own experience here in Antigua and Barbuda. A number of pieces of legislation which were passed here in Antigua and Barbuda were overturned by the Privy Council.

"It took the system to go right up to the top for the laws to be struck down as unconstitutional.

“Our history shows that our High Court, which was the first court which dealt with those various matters, ruled (them) unconstitutional, but the Court of Appeal overturned and it took the Privy Council to reverse the decision of the Court of Appeal and reinstate the decision of our High Court.”

He cited the Tim Hector case which challenged legislation that the truth was not a defence to libel and a number of other cases where the value of the Privy Council was proved. Nevertheless, said Simon, “There are a number of areas which have been addressed in respect of the CCJ which would, to my mind, have removed that sort of political overshadowing in respect of that court.”

He pointed out that a trust fund has been established at the Caribbean Development Bank for financing the operation of the CCJ, so that its expenses are not part of the budgetary estimates of governments.

This means that governments cannot withhold or withdraw funds as a means of manipulating the decisions of the court.

Ain addition to this, the attorney general pointed out that judges are appointed by a regional legal and judicial commission, with representatives from various civil institutions.

“Only the appointment of the president must meet the approval of the heads of governments and only a majority of the heads (is needed). With us here in the OECS Court, the chief justice has to meet with the approval of all of the OECS prime ministers.

"For that very reason, Justice Byron remained acting as chief justice for a good five years before he was appointed.

"Justice Alleyne, who has just left the court, was appointed acting chief justice and remained acting for two years because we could not get the unanimous approval,” he said.

Simon was making a case for judicial independence during last week’s Conference for Academic Research and Development, organised by the Antigua State College.

Caribbean Court of Justice: Are we ready yet?

Godfrey Smith

Source: www.flshpointbelize.com

Date of Publication: April 3, 2007
Posted by: Godfrey Smith
Tuesday, April 03, 2007

In an interview in May 1999 Lord Browne-Wilkinson, the then President of the Privy Council, intimated that appeals to that Court from the Caribbean should end. He urged the Caribbean to establish its own final court on the ground that the ultimate court of appellate jurisdiction of a state, should be in the state, staffed by citizens of that state and not by outsiders.

Persistent prevarication

The Caribbean Court of Justice (CCJ) was inaugurated on April 16th 2005. The historic first sitting of the CCJ took place on 8th August 2005 at the Court’s offices in Port of Spain, Trinidad and Tobago. The sitting was to consider an application for special leave by a Barbadian company to appeal from a decision of the Barbados Court of Appeal. Since then about five cases have been brought before the CCJ, three more from Barbados and two from the Cooperative Republic of Guyana. The court is now firmly established and fully operational for those Caricom member states that have subscribed to it. As the second anniversary of the inauguration of the CCJ approaches, it is perhaps timely to review where we are with the CCJ and to ask: is Belize now ready to fully sign on?

The idea for the setting up of a Caribbean court to replace the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council (Privy Council) in England was first seriously raised at a Caricom Heads of Government meeting in Kingston, Jamaica in 1970.

More than thirty years later, on February 14th 2001, ten Caricom countries finally signed unto the Agreement in Barbados, establishing the Caribbean Court of Justice: Antigua and Barbuda, Barbados, Belize, Grenada, Guyana, Jamaica, St. Kitts and Nevis, St Lucia, The Republic of Suriname and the Republic of Trinidad and Tobago.

The passionate debate in Caribbean countries that preceded the signing of the Agreement is rivaled only by the persistent prevarication by some countries over how tightly – if at all- the CCJ should be embraced.

Belize & the CCJ

In Belize, the government attempted to fully embrace the CCJ. The CCJ has two distinct aspects. The first is called the original jurisdiction. This refers to the court’s power to deal fully with all trade disputes and trade-related issues that might arise between two or more member states of Caricom. This is considered to be a sine qua non for the successful operation of the Caribbean Single Market and Economy (CSME).

The second is called the appellate jurisdiction. This refers to the court’s power to fully and finally determine appeals from decisions of Courts of Appeal in the Caribbean. In this regard, the CCJ was in conflict with the British Privy Council which, under the national constitutions of the majority of Commonwealth Caribbean countries, was the court empowered to dispose of appeals from Courts of Appeal throughout the region.

For Belize to replace the Privy Council with the CCJ required a constitutional amendment supported by no less than three-quarters of the members of the House of Representatives. The ruling PUP had lost its three-quarter majority shortly after its general election victory in 2003 with the untimely death of its Cayo South representative, Mr. Agripino Cawich.

The government was able to pass legislation introducing the CCJ in its original jurisdiction because this required only a simple majority. But the Opposition blocked the legislation abolishing the Privy Council and introducing the CCJ as the final court of appeal for all criminal and civil matters. The Opposition copycatted the Trinidad & Tobago Opposition by withholding support for the legislation unless the government agreed to certain “political reform” proposals and financial support for Opposition constituencies. The government refused and the legislation floundered.

Retain the relic

The case against replacing the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council with the CCJ has four essential arguments. First, that judges of the CCJ will not be as insulated from political interference and may therefore not enjoy the Olympian aloofness of their British counterparts in the Privy Council. Second, that financial resources which are vital for the permanence and continuity of a CCJ are scarce and may not be forthcoming from undisciplined and profligate Caribbean governments. Third, that the money would be better spent improving magistrates courts which deal with 80% of cases in Caribbean countries. Fourth, that retaining the Privy Council as the final court of appeal is more attractive to foreign investors and costs less since it is paid for by the British.

A question of sovereignty

Ranged on the other side of the debate are also four basic arguments. First, that a CCJ is more consistent with our status as independent, sovereign states. Why should we be self-governing in all aspects but yet have a foreign court as our final court of appeal? Second, that the CCJ is more conducive to the development of a regional jurisprudence that is sensitive to the history, culture and ethos of Caribbean people. Third, that in relation to foreign investors, the majority of Caribbean cases going up to the Privy Council are criminal cases and only a handful are civil cases. Fourth, that the Privy Council is far removed from the Caribbean both geographically and in its appreciation of local circumstances.

Competence, independence, permanence

With two years having passed since its inauguration, the court is manned by competent judges some of whom held the highest judicial offices in their respective countries. These judges of the CCJ enjoy security of tenure and hold office until they attain the age of seventy-two years and can only be removed for inability to perform the functions of office or for misbehaviour.

They were appointed by an independent Regional Judicial and Legal Services Commission comprised of representatives from the Organization of the Commonwealth Caribbean Bar Association and the Organization of the Eastern Caribbean States Bar Association, a rotating Chairman of the Judicial and Legal Services of a member country, a rotating Chairman of a Public Service Commission of a member country, two persons from civil society nominated jointly by Secretary-General of Caricom and the Director-General of the OECS, two distinguished jurists nominated jointly by a Dean of one of the Faculties of Law and the Chairman of the Council of Legal Education, and two persons nominated jointly by the Bar or Law Associations of the member states.

Caricom governments have contributed to a US $100 million trust fund the interest of which fund the operations of the CCJ. There is therefore no need for the court to go cap in hand to politicians for its upkeep, thereby opening it to the possibility of political interference.

While we have been intently focusing on the comparative advantages of the CCJ through the prism of the Privy Council for several decades now, we may well have missed an important if embarrassing point. In an interview that was published in the May 1999 issue of The Lawyer, Lord Browne-Wilkinson, the then President of the Privy Council, intimated that appeals to that Court from the Caribbean should end. Browne-Wilkinson complained that appeals related to death row prisoners in the Caribbean had created a burden on the time and resources of that Court. He urged the Caribbean to establish its own final court on the ground that the ultimate court of appellate jurisdiction of a state, which has to make important policy decisions on legal principles, should be in the state, staffed by citizens of that state and not by outsiders.

Yet, in Belize, during the debate on the Bill to abolish the Privy Council, Her Majesty’s Loyal Opposition shamelessly hung onto the coattails of the Privy Council and questioned the brainpower of Caribbean judges vis-à-vis their British counterparts. It’s time for the government to reintroduce the Bill and flush out the Opposition on this crucial issue of sovereignty and regional identity. Belize should abolish the Privy Council and bring on the CCJ.

Owen Arthur calls for support of CCJ

Colonial attitude to CCJ
Source: radiojamaica.com - Jamaica
June 4, 2008

Former Barbadian Prime Minister Owen Arthur said greater power must be given to CARICOM institutions to allow them to implement decisions made at the regional level. Mr. Arthur, now an opposition Member of Parliament said the failure of all but two CARICOM countries to identify fully with the Caribbean Court of Justice is a symbol of a continuing colonial attitude.

He was speaking recently in Trinidad and Tobago at the launch of a new forum on policy and leadership.

Freed of the responsibility of holding Prime Ministerial office, Mr. Arthur said the region must not be timid in taking political and economic decisions. He said there is a new world of international trade which requires reciprocity.

Mr. Arthur said the old, one way free trade arrangement has vanished around the bend in the river.

Public Opinion

The single market and economy needs to be promoted among ordinary people in a more practical way

Source: Stabroek News - Letters

June 2, 2008

Dear Editor,
It is unfortunate that at this juncture of our history as a Caribbean region, a sister country would callously disrespect the citizens of another sister country. I refer to the incident where some twelve Guyanese were refused entry by the Trinidad immigration authorities last week. This unwelcome act comes at a most inappropriate time when Guyana is slated to host Carifesta X, to which I am positive Trinidad, like other Caribbean countries, hopes to send its contingent.

This is also a time when great emphasis is placed on the Caribbean Single Market and Economy (CSME), which seeks to encourage the free movement of skills throughout the region; a time when the Caribbean Court of Justice has emerged as the final court of appeal for certain member states; a time when foreign affairs ministries are issuing Caricom Skilled Certificates to their citizens in order that skills are easily transferred or exchanged within the region, thereby aiding in the efforts to collectively tackle some of the new and emerging challenges of globalization.

The actions of the Trinidadian immigration authorities, clearly, do not augur well for this spirit of ‘oneness’ which we in the Caribbean have been dying to achieve since the signing of the Treaty of Chaguaramas in 1973.

It is regrettable that while Caricom as well as governments within the region continue to promote policies aimed at fostering greater cohesion, unity, economic co-operation, etc, not much work is being done at the local level to ensure that the people subscribe to the ideals which will help to achieve the objectives of those policies. From what transpired at the Piarco Airport, it is obvious that there is a big disconnect between the immigration officers, junior level government employees, and the Manning cabinet. Imagine what might be the extent of the disconnect between the people at the grassroots level and the cabinet? This disconnect might not be a situation peculiar to Trinidad but might very well be a common thread that runs through countries of the region.

Guyanese have been experiencing this kind of unwelcoming treatment from various countries of the region, in particular Barbados, but it was hoped that with all these new initiatives by Caricom that the situation would have changed. However, it now seems that might not be the case. It is therefore fitting that Caribbean governments and the Caricom Secretariat take on a more proactive role in meeting the ordinary people in the community to aggressively promote the single market and economy concept in a practical way. Special training should be given regularly to immigration officers and airport workers to sensitize them to the critical role they have to play in this process, since in most instances they are the first to have contact with these new workers or migrants.

I hope that Caricom, through its secretariat, does not allow this matter to fester, but that it will take urgent measures to ensure that the Guyana government and the Trinidad government settle this matter.

Yours faithfully,

Lurlene Nestor

Privy Council/ CCJ

The Reporter Sunday, 11 May 2008

Harry Lawrence - Publisher

A British court in London ruled this week that it has jurisdiction to decide disputes between the Government of Belize and the Belize Bank Limited. In doing so, the court simply ignored the jurisdiction of the Supreme Court of Belize.

The British court claimed jurisdiction on the strength of an agreement signed between the Prime Minister of Belize, Mr. Said Musa, and the Belize Bank. The agreement stipulates that any dispute between the government and the Belize Bank would be determined not by a Belize court but by a British court.

This is only one of several bizarre arrangements which Mr. Musa made while he was Prime Minister of Belize. He signed another agreement stipulating that Belize Telecommunications Limited, the monopoly utility company now under Mr. Ashcroft’s control, is to be allowed to make a profit of 15 percent on its operations, and that the Government of Belize would make up the short-fall when profits fell below 15 percent.

He also signed an agreement guaranteeing government secrecy about this and other agreements he had signed.

These secret arrangements have allowed a few favoured companies to exploit consumers in Belize by making immoral profits. They are also being used now to frustrate the legitimate resolve of the new government and limit the jurisdiction of the Supreme Court.

Any arrangement by any Prime Minister to limit or in any way circumscribe the jurisdiction of the Supreme Court in Belize is unconstitutional and ought to be resolutely resisted. The Prime Minister has no authority to do anything which would have this result.

The Prime Minister’s office combines administrative and executive and legislative powers but he had no authority over the judiciary and no powers to limit the jurisdiction of the Supreme Court.
We believe that the arrangement to keep certain agreements secret and hidden from public view is a corrupt practice which will have the most serious consequences. The practice of guaranteeing certain favoured companies a minimum profit of 15 percent on their operations is also a corrupt practice - exploitative in nature and intrinsically unjust.

This is a case which should quite definitely go before the Caribbean Court of Justice and not the Privy Council because it deals with a conflict between British jurisdiction and the Belize jurisdiction.

Belize should pursue its case vigorously before the Caribbean Court of Justice and not be intimidated by the British court.

Race and CCJ

MP pulls up UNC-A over ethnic talk
Ria Taitt Political Editor

T&T Express
Saturday, May 10th 2008

The UNC-A cannot speak about ethnic balance in the panel of judges at the Caribbean Court of Justice, when its own parliamentary bench is hardly reflective of this kind of balance, Information Minister Neil Parsanlal said yesterday.

Speaking in the House of Representatives on the CCJ bill yesterday, Parsanlal stated: "Before I can take out the beam in anybody else's eye, I have to take out the mote in my own. Is the ethnic composition, because that is what they are talking about, is the ethnic composition of that bench reflective of the people of Trinidad and Tobago? I submit it is not," he said.

He said on the PNM side, there were "cocoa payol, some half-Chinese, some Indian, some African and me, the quintessential dougla".

"The PNM is reflective of the face of Trinidad and Tobago," he declared. Parsanlal also criticised the constant references by UNC-A speakers to African dictators.

"When references are made to dictators, it is always about Zimbabwe and Mugabe. All the references speak to people who look a particular way and who live in a particular place. There is absolutely no reference to any other countries where there might be dictators. MP for Mayaro (Winston Gypsy Peters), how is it that no references are made, for instance, to dictators from Pakistan?" Parsanlal waxed poetic as he quoted the "quintessential Caribbean man", Black Stalin. He said if he were an East Indian judge, he would feel insulted if he was appointed to the CCJ just because of his race. That would amount to "tokenism" and "patronage", he said.

On Ramesh Lawrence Maharaj's charge that CCJ judges had no work to do and were sipping coffee and reading papers, Parsanlal said he would not be surprised if citizens mistook that for rumshop talk.

"I want to assure the national community that no alcohol is served in the tea-room." Parsanlal also dismissed allegations that CCJ judges were being favoured, saying that some allowances given to local judges were not given to CCJ judges.

COTED or CCJ?

Taking Jamaica's case to COTED

Jamaica Gleaner Editorial

published: Friday May 9, 2008

This weekend, Caricom's Council for Trade and Economic Development (COTED), the ministerial group that oversees broad economic issues within the 15-member community, holds a regular meeting in Barbados.

However, it is unlikely that this session of COTED will be taken with the routine dispensing of issues. It could be a rather contentious gathering of ministers. And Jamaica will be at the forefront of the arguments, pursuing what it sees as a critical point of national interest: ensuring the security of food supplies.

COTED is an important forum; it is the ministers who sit in this forum who, generally, decide on any varying of Caricom's Common External Tariff (CET), that is, the rate of duty that member states apply to imports from third countries to protect regional production.

Opposition to suspension

At issue is Jamaica's application for the suspension of the 25 per cent CET on the importation of up to 34,000 tonnes of rice so as to cover what Kingston insists is a shortfall in supplies from with the community. Guyana, Caricom's major supplier of rice, opposes the suspension. According to Georgetown, its producers can meet all of Jamaica's demands.

A substantial part of the problem, it appears, is that Jamaica does not like the fact that Guyana will not commit to forward contracts beyond a month, given the global spike in commodity prices, including that for rice. So, to put it bluntly, Jamaica's trade minister, Karl Samuda, feels that with the Guyanese hoping to maximise returns from purchasers who are willing and capable of paying higher prices, Jamaica is being shafted. And rice is a staple in Jamaica, even though we do not - having a long time ago abandoned the effort - grow the stuff.

There are a number of things that must happen in Barbados, not least of which is that Guyana must come clean on the supply issue. Kingston needs to be satisfied that Georgetown is abiding by both the letter and spirit of the rules.

Single economy pretensions

This, after all, is no arbitrary trade arrangement. Caricom is a single market, with pretensions towards a single economy. In that regard, we expect Jamaica, or any other member of the community, to be subject to the same pricing terms in the purchase of rice as any Guyana buyer - except for the cost of shipping. Trying to squeeze higher prices out of Jamaican purchasers, if that is what Guyana is attempting to achieve by insisting only on short-term contracts, will not do. Jamaica has to be assured, in so far as possible, of a certainty of supply.

But by the same token, Kingston has to take on board the fact of the rise in the price of rice on the global market, and to consider this matter of food security in the broader regional context rather than a purely domestic issue. For, as Mr Samuda will be aware, we have in the past undermined domestic agriculture and weakened food security by the full embrace of cheap and subsidised imports. The revival of a Regional Food Plan, which foundered in the 1980s, is important.

But if Jamaica feels that Guyana is playing games and it gets no satisfaction at COTED, it should test Georgetown's behaviour at the Caribbean Court of Justice which, in its original jurisdiction, interprets the Caricom treaty.

China Supports CARICOM Integration

Premier Wen: China supports Caribbean integration process
Source: www.chinaview.cn

2008-05-06

BEIJING, May 6 (Xinhua) -- Premier Wen Jiabao said on Tuesday that China supported the Caribbean integration process.

"China will strengthen dialogue with the Caribbean community based on mutual respect, reciprocity and equality to promote south-south cooperation and achieve common prosperity," said Wen.

He made the remarks during a meeting with David Thompson, prime minister of Barbados, who arrived in Beijing on Monday for a four-day official visit to China.

Wen said China and Barbados had maintained good cooperation in the areas of trade, technology, and personnel training as well as in such international organizations as the United Nations.

"Both China and Barbados are developing nations and enjoy common interests," Wen said. He vowed to expand cooperation with Barbados on trade, tourism, architecture and sustainable development.

Thompson expressed gratitude for China's support to his country's economic and social development.

He said Barbados attached importance to relations with China and would continue adherence to the one-China policy. He also said that Barbados supported the Beijing Olympic Games and China's participation in the Inter-American Development Bank.

CCJ Michael De La Bastide defends CCJ

More than just sipping coffee

Source: Trinidad Express

Sat, 03 May 2008 9:29 PM PDT

It is not true that the judges of the Caribbean Court of Justice have no work to do and spent their time "drinking coffee and reading papers".

President of the CCJ Michael De La Bastide, in a interview at his Henry Street, Port of Spain, office, said the court has been receiving cases from Guyana and Barbados, which have approved the CCJ in both its original and final jurisdiction.

The interview was done shortly after the debate on the CCJ bill in the House of Representatives.
De La Bastide said 14 appeals were filed in 2007 -12 from Guyana and two from Barbados. He stressed, however, that it was the experience of all newly established courts -regional, international and domestic-that it took time for the volume of cases to build. He said this was the case with Canada, when its Supreme Court was established in 1949 and that the same thing happened in New Zealand and the International Criminal Court.

"I have no doubt that as time goes out, even without the accessation of other states, the workload of the court would increase. And I have in mind, the original jurisdiction," De La Bastide stated.

Businesses were beginning to recognise that they have a possibility of getting redress for breaches of the Treaty of Chaguaramas, he said. And, he contended: "If the feeling is that the Caricom member-states are not getting full value for their money from the court, then the answer is to use it."

De la Bastide said it was unfortunate that the decision on whether to transfer appeals from the Privy Council to the CCJ had become so highly politicised. "Fundamentally it should not be a party/political view," he said.

De La Bastide said he was "flabbergasted" by a idea he heard on television (during the debate on the CCJ bill in the Parliament two weeks ago) of using the CCJ as a second appeal court, allowing for final appeals to the Privy Council.

"Is this going to be an act of kindness to litigants? To interpose yet another stage of appeal en route to the final appeal? Is the CCJ to be put on probation and depending on how accurate it can forecast the way in which each case is decided by the Privy Council ... it would then be trusted to make a final decision? he asked.

Speaking in a Jamaican dialect, he quipped that this was "bias against local in favour of foreign".
The CJ president also dismissed statements made during the same debate that the local Court of Appeal generally got it wrong because the Privy Council overturned over 50 per cent of its decision.

"It is based on an irrebuttable presumption that the Privy Council gets it right every time. Despite the great respect I have for their Lordships, that is a presumption that is totally irrational," said De La Bastide, who is himself a member of the Privy Council.

"Apart from the possibility that there may be more than one 'right solution' to a legal question, what may establish one's preference for one (solution), rather than the other, is the extent to which it would favour or be favoured by local conditions," he said.

He noted that some of the Privy Councillors had a knowledge of the handicap they operated under when determining cases for a society with which they were entirely unfamiliar.

De La Bastide, who has been a defender of judicial independence throughout his career, stressed that he remained unrepentant in this regard and pointed to the measures taken to protect judicial independence in the establishment of the CCJ.

He complimented Caricom states and the Heads of Government on the quality of the arrangements made to protect the court from political and other extraneous influence and noted that many judges of regional and international courts were "envious" of these arrangements.

"No member of the Regional Judicial Legal Service Commission owes his seat to any politician or to political connections. The president is appointed by the majority of Heads (of Government). But their choice is restricted by someone recommended by the RJLSC," he stated.

Similarly, he noted, judges can only be removed after an enquiry by a independent tribunal.

Suggesting that the CCJ judgments were of a high quality, De La Bastide said that the West Indian Law Report published by Butterworth in England, which has tended to report only Privy Council judgments, had been reporting many of the judgments of the CCJ. In Volume 69 of last year, five judgments of the CCJ have been selected for reporting, he said.

De La Bastide also said it would be nothing short of a "regional tragedy" were the CCJ not permitted to achieve its full potential.

He stressed that this potential involved the Court fulfilling its "two-fold function of supporting regional integration and of administering justice effectively and appropriately to the peoples of Caricom.

"If the opportunity which the establishment of this court has now created is thrown away, then I fear it may be a long, long time, if ever, it comes again," he said.