Privy Council slams 'wasted time': Jeremie 'embarrassed'

by Juhel Browne

Source: trinidadexpress.com

September 30, 2009

"The Privy Council is an excellent court. I've been closely watching the Caribbean Court of Appeal; that's a developing and ever more confident court," added Starmer.

Starmer was responding to questions in relation to reports in the British media last week that Lord Nicholas Phillips, who is set to become the first president of the Supreme Court of the United Kingdom, has raised concerns about the amount of time the Privy Council spends on Caribbean legal issues.

He said the Caribbean and other Commonwealth countries needed to establish their own final court of appeal and questioned the need for some cases, including Jamaica's death-row appeals, to be brought to the Privy Council.

On the weekend, Jamaica's Court of Appeal President Seymour Panton, who has been an ardent advocate for Jamaica to sever ties with the Privy Council, agreed with the British judge, noting that Jamaica deserved the bashing.

Starmer, however, took a different approach when asked if he agreed with Lord Phillips' statements.

"...I would not want to influence the decision one way or the other," said Starmer.

"I'm sure if [Jamaicans] chose to retain the Privy Council that would be an excellent service for them. I'm equally confident that if they decide on the Caribbean Court of Justice that would provide the service that they need. For me, it's very much a question that Jamaicans need to decide...," he added.

Justice Minister Dorothy Lightbourne on Sunday reiterated that Government intended to put the issue to a referendum.

However, when pressed, Lightbourne said no timeline had been set for the referendum, given the cost associated with such a venture.

DECISION ON APPELLATE COURT RESTS WITH JAMAICANS, SAYS BRITISH DPP

BY PAUL HENRY Jamaica Observer staff reporter

Wednesday, September 30, 2009

BRITAIN'S Director of Public Prosecutions Keir Starmer, QC, says the decision as to whether or not Jamaica should retain the London-based Privy Council as its final appellate court rests with its citizens and should not be influenced by external forces.

"My view is very simple and that is, that it's for Jamaica and the Jamaican people to decide which court they want to have as their final court of appeal," Starmer told the Observer Monday night during a reception in his honour at the British High Commission in Kingston.

"The Privy Council is an excellent court. I've been closely watching the Caribbean Court of Appeal; that's a developing and ever more confident court," added Starmer.

Starmer was responding to questions in relation to reports in the British media last week that Lord Nicholas Phillips, who is set to become the first president of the Supreme Court of the United Kingdom, has raised concerns about the amount of time the Privy Council spends on Caribbean legal issues.

He said the Caribbean and other Commonwealth countries needed to establish their own final court of appeal and questioned the need for some cases, including Jamaica's death-row appeals, to be brought to the Privy Council.

On the weekend, Jamaica's Court of Appeal President Seymour Panton, who has been an ardent advocate for Jamaica to sever ties with the Privy Council, agreed with the British judge, noting that Jamaica deserved the bashing.

Starmer, however, took a different approach when asked if he agreed with Lord Phillips' statements.

"...I would not want to influence the decision one way or the other," said Starmer.

"I'm sure if [Jamaicans] chose to retain the Privy Council that would be an excellent service for them. I'm equally confident that if they decide on the Caribbean Court of Justice that would provide the service that they need. For me, it's very much a question that Jamaicans need to decide...," he added.

Justice Minister Dorothy Lightbourne on Sunday reiterated that Government intended to put the issue to a referendum.

However, when pressed, Lightbourne said no timeline had been set for the referendum, given the cost associated with such a venture.

Caribbean govts chided for not pushing for CCJ

Source: Radio Jamaica

September 28, 2009

Attorney at-law and Consultant at the University of the West Indies, Cavehill Campus in Barbados, Jeff Cumberbatch has chided Caribbean governments for failing to move toward a final regional appellate court without their former colonisers pushing them toward it.

The visiting attorney weighed in on the debate that Caribbean governments including Jamaica should make the Caribbean Court of Justice (CCJ) their final Court of Appeal.

The People's National Party (PNP) last week called on the government to re-table legislation to establish the CCJ as the final appellate jurisdiction after an embarrassing comment from the new President of the UK Supreme Court.

Lord Nicholas Phillips was quoted in the London Financial Times last Monday that UK Privy Council law lords were spending too much time on cases in the former colonies, mostly the Caribbean.

Mr. Cumberbatch says the decision for Caribbean governments to move their countries forward should not have come down to such a 'motherly' shove.

He says all that is required is political will.

"I know that certain jurisdictions have to go through certain processes, parliamentary votes and referenda but there needs to be the political will to get these things moving,"

"Day by day you can hear it as a matter of political opportunism people saying ‘we are not ready for that yet' but the justice system in the Caribbean is as far removed under the CJJ- as far removed from political influence as it could be now," Mr. Cumberbatch said.

Political commentators in the other Caribbean countries have called Lord Phillip's comments a "proverbial slap in the face that should not be taken lightly".

Guyana and Barbados are the only two countries that have already made the CCJ their final appellate court.

Mr. Cumberbatch is in the island at the behest of the Media Association of Jamaica to review the Hugh Small report on local defamation laws.

HOMAS, GONSALVES MAKE CASE FOR CCJ

THOMAS, GONSALVES MAKE CASE FOR CCJ

Tuesday, September 29, 2009

Source: Jamaica Observer

BRIDGETOWN, Barbados (CMC) - Two Caribbean Community (Caricom) leaders last week endorsed a recent statement by a prominent British jurist that regional countries need to abandon the long-standing practice of having the London-based Privy Council function as their highest court.

St Vincent and the Grenadines Prime Minister Ralph Gonsalves said Lord Phillips, the president of the new British Supreme Court, "essentially delivered a notice to quit colonial premises to countries like St Vincent and the Grenadines, which still send their final appeals to the Privy Council".

Lord Phillips, in an interview with the Financial Times, said he was searching for new ways to curb the "disproportionate" time he and other senior justices spent hearing legal appeals from independent Commonwealth countries, like those in Caricom, to the Privy Council.

He said he was concerned that judges who staff the Supreme Court could end up spending as much as 40 per cent of their working time on Privy Council business.

"It's a huge amount of time. I personally would like to see it reduced. It's disproportionate," Lord Phillips told the Financial Times.

Grenada Prime Minister Tillman Thomas, who is in New York attending the United Nations General Assembly, welcomed the announcement but said the region is well aware of the need to set up institutions to deal with its own affairs and stressed that the Caribbean Court of Justice (CCJ) must be fully established.

"I'm very happy to hear it being said. But we did not have to wait for the British judge to tell us that. I believe we have to set up our own institutions to deal with our own affairs. I see no strong reasons why it's difficult in setting up our own courts," Thomas told the Caribbean Media Corporation (CMC).

The CCJ, established by regional governments in 2001, has both an original and appellate jurisdiction. But, while most Caricom countries are members of the original jurisdiction that functions as an international tribunal, hearing disputes arising from the interpretation and application of the Revised Treaty under the Caricom Single Market and Economy, only Barbados and Guyana have signed on to the appellate jurisdiction.

In recent weeks, there have been increased calls for Caribbean governments to fully endorse the CCJ, with St Lucia's former prime minister Kenny Anthony, a lawyer, welcoming the decision by Belize and Dominica to move away from the Privy Council.

Some regional jurists have, however, expressed misgivings about the CCJ, alleging that it may be open to political interference, a criticism dismissed by the CCJ itself and the Regional Judicial and Legal Service Commission.

Prime Minister Thomas said Caribbean governments should not be deterred from turning to their own court.

CJ needs to become the regions highest appellate court – Franklyn

Source: Radio Jamaica

Published: September 28, 2009

Delano Franklyn, attorney-at-law and former State Minister of Foreign Affairs and Foreign Trade has joined in the calls for the Government to re-table legislation related to the Caribbean Court of Justice (CCJ).

Last Monday, the London Financial Times quoted the new president of the United Kingdom Supreme Court, Lord Nicholas Phillips, complaining that the Law Lords have been spending too much time on cases in the former colonies, mostly in the Caribbean.

According to Mr. Franklyn, this statement shows that it is high time CARICOM becomes more proactive and institute the CCJ as the region's final court.

"We have persons with the capacity, capability and the intellectual ability to drive the Caribbean Court of Justice. It's time we got our act together (as) the British judicial system feels a little bit burdened by the fact that 40% of their time is taken up dealing with cases out of Jamaica.

"We need to see this criticism as something we can do without and become proactive and institute and put into action the Caribbean Court of Justice to be our highest appellate body," Mr. Franklyn said on RJR's RJR's PalavSunday.

The former State Minister of Foreign Affairs and Foreign Trade added that one of the reasons why the CCJ has yet to become the regions final court of appeal is because many in CARICOM believe that the court will be subject to manipulation by individual countries.

Mr. Franklyn does not share this view.

"I am simply amazed that there are individual who would be of that view (at this time) and if they looked at the bill which introduced the CcJ, it insulates us from, being interfered with, the political directorate and it insulates us from the political directorate being able to manipulate the system by holding back resources. In my view, it's a system which will be able to work," he said.

SERVES US RIGHT!

Appeal Court president says Jamaica deserves 'boof' for sticking with Privy Council

BY Paul Henry Observer staff reporter

Monday, September 28, 2009

Court of Appeal President Justice Seymour Panton on Friday sided strongly with his counterpart in England, Lord Nicholas Phillips, in his reported broadside against Jamaica and other Commonwealth countries over their dependence on the London-based Judicial Committee of the Privy Council as the final appellate court.

Panton, who has been a staunch advocate of Jamaica cutting ties with the Privy Council, said the country deserved to be "boofed", while again stating his position on the matter.

Panton made the remark as he was about to hand down judgement against GraceKennedy, which had been seeking leave to appeal a point in its lawsuit with Paymaster Jamaica Ltd.

At least one attorney, Lord Anthony Gifford, rose to support Panton.

During a frank interview with the Observer following Friday's adjournment, Panton agreed that Jamaica has long overstayed its welcome with the Privy Council.

He did not mince words in describing opponents, some being lawyers, of a move away from the Privy Council.
"The only people who are interested in keeping the Privy Council are the very wealthy, murderers, and the ones with colonial mentality," said Panton.

"It's just backward thinking, man, backward thinking. It's high time we realise that we are independent," Panton added.
He also expressed confidence in the ability of the judges of the Caribbean Court of Justice (CCJ), noting that they are far more experienced than some Privy Council judges.

The appellate court judge also knocked the fact that appellants needed to secure visas to plead their cases in England.

According to reports in the British media last week, Lord Nicholas Phillips, who will become the first president of the Supreme Court of the United Kingdom when it comes into being in October, said Caribbean countries and other Commonwealth nations needed to establish their own final court of appeal and questioned the need for some cases, including Jamaica's death-row appeals, to be brought to the Privy Council.

Lord Nicholas Phillips, according to the Financial Times, has said that the Law Lords on the Privy Council were spending a "disproportionate" amount of time on cases from former colonies, mostly in the Caribbean.

Reacting to the British judge's comments, AJ Nicholson, justice minister in the People's National Party administration that was voted out of office in 2007, called on the Government to table the required legislation making the Caribbean Court of Justice the country's final court of appeal instead of the Privy Council.

Although the CCJ was inaugurated in April 2005, Barbados and Guyana are the only two countries that have formally adopted it as their highest appellate court. Other countries in the Caribbean are struggling to overcome legal and political obstacles to shedding their dependence on the Privy Council.

For instance, in February 2005, the Privy Council, on a case mounted by the then Opposition Jamaica Labour Party and civil society groups, ruled as unconstitutional, the route taken by the Jamaican Government to establish the CCJ as its final court.

The law lords held that while the Government could end appeals to the UK-based court by a simple parliamentary majority, it required special procedures to entrench the CCJ as a court superior to the Jamaica Court of Appeal.

The implication is that establishment of the CCJ as Jamaica's final court will require either a two-thirds majority in both houses of Parliament and/or the winning vote in a referendum.

Time for rational discourse on CCJ

Time for rational discourse on CCJ

Source: Jamaica Gleaner

Published: Sunday | September 27, 2009

We have previously called for a new and mature dialogue on Jamaica's participation in the civil and criminal jurisdiction of the Caribbean Court of Justice (CCJ) with, up to now, no obvious reward for our efforts.

Hopefully, recent events in London will serve to rekindle the debate, but without the politically opportunistic bombast, emotionalism and shrillness than when the issue was last seriously on the national agenda. Which is why we advise A.J. Nicholson, the minister of justice and attorney general in the former People's National Party - who has given much thought to the CCJ, has expended great effort in its establishment and is convinced of its practical and psychological worth - to adjust his rhetoric as a contribution to this re-engagement.

Britain, as too few of us are aware, is on the cusp of significant judicial reform. Shortly, it will launch a new Supreme Court to replace the judges of the House of Lords as the country's court of last resort, completing, of a fashion, what is substantially defined in Jamaica's Constitution - the separation of the judicial and legislative arms of government. Lord Nicholas Phillips, a House of Lords judge, is to head the new court. He also hears cases at the Privy Council, the final court for a clutch of former British colonies, including Jamaica, as well as the UK's overseas dependencies.

Last week, in an interview with the Financial Times newspaper, Lord Phillips lamented that over 40 per cent of the time of Britain's most senior judges is spent on Privy Council cases. "I personally would like to see it reduced," he said.

ideal world

In an "ideal world", Lord Phillips said, the independent countries that send cases to the Privy Council would establish their own final courts - perhaps like the CCJ. But in the absence of this, he is thinking of how he might draft UK Appeal Court judges to help with the Privy Council workload, although how this would work legally and practically, is not clear.

While Lord Phillips might have expressed a personal opinion, the message would not have been lost to the higher reaches of the British establishment and it is quite possible that his comments represented a first step towards the framing of policy. That makes a civil discussion about the CCJ relevant.

This is a court to which Jamaica contributed a quarter of its US$100 million trust fund to ensure its long-term financing and political independence. Jamaica, however, does not participate in the court because of political disagreements and a ruling by the Privy Council four years ago that the law for Jamaica's accession was unconstitutional.

While a simple majority of Parliament could end appeals to the Privy Council, the law lords held, it required a special majority and a referendum to establish a new court of superior jurisdiction to the island's Court of Appeal. There, of course, are those who campaigned against the CCJ on the grounds that the jurisprudential qualities of a Caribbean court would not be good enough.

Jamaica, like others in the region who do not participate in the court, faces a conundrum. Its money is tied up in an institution from which it derives limited benefit and now there is this signal from Lord Phillips. Clearly, it is time for rational discourse on the matter.

St Vincent PM welcomes comments by London's new judicial head

St Vincent PM welcomes comments by London's new judicial head Source: Caribbean net News Published: September 25, 2009
KINGSTOWN, St Vincent and the Grenadines -- The Prime Minister of St Vincent and the Grenadines, Ralph Gonsalves, has welcomed remarks attributed to Lord Phillips head of the newly-created Supreme Court, which replaces the Judicial Committee. The Financial Times has quoted Lord Phillips as stating that he is searching for ways to curb “disproportionate” time he and his fellow senior justices spent hearing legal appeals from independent Commonwealth countries. Gonsalves has latched on to Lord Phillips' comments, to further press his case for persons to vote Yes in a Referendum in St Vincent on November 25 2009, to change its present Constitution. The parliamentary opposition New Democratic Party (NDP) has already started a campaign asking people to vote No and its former leader and founder, Sir James Mitchell, says he would like to see the Privy Council being retained as St Vincent's final court of appeal. Gonsalves called a media conference on Wednesday, after reading the Financial Times article, and blasted those who want to vote against the proposed Constitution and keep the Privy Council as the country's final court of appeal. If the referendum is passed in November, St Vincent and the Grenadines will become a full signatory to the Caribbean Court of Justice (CCJ). St Vincent and the Grenadines' current Constitution, which was handed down to the country in 1979 after it gained political independence from Britain, stipulates that the London Privy Council should be the final court of appeal. This could only be altered by two thirds of the persons voting yes in a Referendum, to change the Constitution. Gonsalves feels Lord Phillips’ comment is a “notice to quit colonial premises” and he was not willing to overstay his time. “I shall not loiter on colonial premises for one moment than is necessary. “We are a free and independent people and our judges are excellent; every single day our judges deliver the oxygen of justice. We have excellent judges on the CCJ and it is an excellent body,” Gonsalves said. Gonsalves said being part of the CCJ is like one having its own home. “We will not be tenants; we are owners.” The Financial Times states the Privy Council judicial committee is now used as a London-subsidised top court by about 15 independent nations, most of them small islands in the Caribbean and Pacific. “Those in St Vincent and the Grenadines who hanker for the continuation of appeals to the Privy Council have now received a proverbial slap in the face,” Gonsalves said

Guyana continues to waive CET despite CCJ ruling

Source: Kaieteur News

SEPTEMBER 25, 2009

…Trinidad and Tobago, Barbados objected to waiver

It is now more than five weeks since the President of the Caribbean Court of Justice, Justice Michael A. de la Bastide, ruled against Guyana in the case against the Trinidadian Cement Company and TCL Guyana Incorporated.

Justice de la Bastide had ordered that Guyana reinstate the Common External Tariff (CET) that sparked the fiasco, within 28 days, and as such, Guyana is in breach of the ruling by the CCJ.

This newspaper has been reliably informed that Trinidad and Tobago and Barbados had both objected to the waiver of the CET that Guyana had applied for on the grounds that their producers could adequately supply cement to Guyana.

The CARICOM Council for Trade and Economic Development had reportedly denied Guyana’s request.

Attorney General and Legal Affairs Minister, Charles Ramson, is reported in other sections of the media as saying that Guyana is still to get a response from CARICOM on its request to waive the CET for the purpose of locals’- dealers importing cement extra regionally.

The Attorney General is reported as saying that should Guyana remove the waiver and apply CET then it would adversely affect the local importers that had ordered cement on the premise that the tax would be waived.

The Caribbean Court of Justice had, at the time, declared that Guyana has since October 2006 been in breach of the provisions of Article 82 of the Revised Treaty of Chaguaramas (RTC) by failing to implement and maintain the CET.

It was also ruled that TCL is entitled to the benefit of having the CET maintained by Guyana, subject to Guyana’s right to make an application to COTED or the Secretary-General in accordance with the RTC.

According to the final judgment that was handed down to the litigants, none of the witnesses called by Guyana could explain the continued unwillingness or refusal by Guyana to honour its treaty obligations by seeking the prior approval of COTED.

“This flagrant breach has persisted throughout the pleadings down to the commencement of the hearing….Counsel had no instructions from his client to give an undertaking that the breach would be brought to an end, and the CET implemented and maintained in accordance with Articles 82 and 83 of the RTC.”

According to the CCJ ruling, “In those circumstances there would be grave consequences for the rule of law in the CARICOM Single Market if a coercive order were not made.”

It was pointed out also that the Court did not doubt that TGI lost the opportunity of increasing its level of sales as a result of the illegal conduct of Guyana but it is a cardinal principle, however, that suffering loss is not enough to ground a case in damages against a Member State or the Community before the Court.

Following the ruling, TCL and TCL Guyana Incorporated (TGI) reported that it was pleased with the judgment declared by the CCJ in their proceedings brought against the Government of Guyana in relation to the implementation of the Common External Tariff (CET) on imported cement into the country.

It was noted that in 2006, the TCL Group invested US$10.4 million in its first bagging terminal, ensuring that Guyana always has an adequate and reliable supply of cement.

And that the establishment of this facility also fulfilled TCL’s objective of supporting the overall economic and development plans of Guyana.

Hanging on to Colonial coat-tails

Hanging on to Colonial coat-tails

25.SEP.09

Source: Searchlight Newspaper - SVG

We have heard it all before - in the fifties, sixties and seventies - “We are not ready”(for independence, then). It was a song not just sung in the Caribbean, but repeated all over Africa and Asia as well. In spite of this chorus, independence came, but the song continued, much like a warped record. The only change was that in place of independence, post-colonial Caribbean society is refusing to shoulder its burden, so we complain that we are still not ready for unification or for our own regional Court of Final Appeal. Various excuses ranging from affordability to lack of impartiality are advanced, in the case of the Final Court, to justify this contradiction.

The latest exposition of this position has come from former Prime Minister Sir James Mitchell in his argument for rejecting the proposed new Constitution for St. Vincent and the Grenadines. For him, the British Privy Council appears to be the proverbial sacred cow. Don’t touch that aspect of our ties with Britain seems to be his own passionate appeal. “Once we get rid of the Privy Council”, he is quoted as saying, “we can’t get it back. Some time in the future we will be able to go there, but I am not sure that we have the checks and balances in our society to match what we have up there.”

However, just as if in refutation of Sir James’ comments, the former Chief Justice of Britain, soon, interestingly, to be President of the Supreme Court of that country, to be established next month, has called on Caribbean countries to take up their legal beds and walk. Lord Nicholas Phillips, in an interview with the Financial Times, cast doubts about the very future of the Privy Council where the Caribbean is concerned. He lamented the fact that the law lords were having to spend “a disproportionate amount of their time on cases from former colonies, including those from the Caribbean. Lord Phillips questioned the need for the Privy Council to have to sit on some of these cases and said that, ideally, the Caribbean countries should set up their own final courts.

CARICOM countries have established their own Caribbean Court of Justice (CCJ), but some have balked at going all the way to have it as a final appellate Court. Only Guyana and Barbados have gone that far. All sorts of reasons have been advanced for not following in the footsteps of these two, ranging from the supposed “free” access to the Privy Council to concerns about maintaining the independence of the judiciary. But a noted Caribbean legal luminary, former Governor of St.Kitts/Nevis, Sir Probyn Inniss, has come out strongly and called for the Caribbean to “get its house in order and do what it has to do” to establish its judicial independence from Britain.

Stating that “enough is enough is enough”, Sir Probyn advocated bold steps forward in setting the seal on a Caribbean-wide Final Court of Appeal, but opined that much effort will be needed to awaken our leaders from their slumber. It is not the competence of our judges which is in question, is his view, but rather our own lack of confidence in our own. He conceded that the CCJ has itself been a victim of partisan politics in the region.

The comments of Sir Probyn and Lord Phillips virtually call for severing the judicial umbilical chord to the Privy Council, and are both timely, given the current constitutional debate. The old bugbear of “not ready” must be cast aside for good. We cannot continue to hang on to the coattails of one whom we once mistakenly considered “our mother” but whom historical experience has proven otherwise. We must also disabuse ourselves of the mistaken notion that it is colonialism which has brought us “civilization”, and must stand proudly ready to proclaim our own Caribbean civilization of which the CCJ, as our Final Court of Appeal, is very much a part.

Privy Council hampers Supreme Court

Privy Council hampers Supreme Court

By Michael Peel and Jabe Croft

Published: September 20 2009

Source: The Financial Times Limited 2009.

Top judges charged with a landmark modernisation of the British legal system will be diverted from their task by an unlikely and perverse duty: serving on a court that is one of the country’s fustiest jurisprudential relics.

Lord Phillips, president of the new Supreme Court, said he was searching for ways to curb the “disproportionate” time he and his fellow senior justices spent hearing legal appeals from independent Commonwealth countries to the Privy Council in London.

The concerns highlight how the Supreme Court’s creation is a quintessentially British constitutional fudge, separating the judiciary from parliament for the first time but leaving intact a sister chamber widely seen as a post-imperial anachronism.

Lord Phillips said in an interview that he was concerned that the judges who will staff the Supreme Court from next month would – as during their previous incarnations as House of Lords justices – end up spending as much as 40 per cent of their working hours on Privy Council business.

He said: “It is a huge amount of time. I personally would like to see it reduced. It’s disproportionate.”

The president questioned whether some Privy Council cases, which have ranged from Jamaican death row appeals to fights over press freedom in Bermuda, needed to be heard by a panel of five of Britain’s most senior judges.

He said he was looking to take some of the pressure off the Supreme Court by drafting in Court of Appeal judges to help out, although he added that “in an ideal world” former Commonwealth countries would stop using the privy Council and set up their own final courts of appeal instead.

A creature of Britain’s 19th century colonial pomp, the Privy Council judicial committee is now used as a London-subsidised top court by about 15 independent nations, most of them small islands in the Caribbean and Pacific.

Many independent observers say this is both an ideological stain and a financial drain on the newly-created Supreme Court.

The Council judicial committee shares both the court’s handsome Parliament Square headquarters and access to the dozen judges whose £200,000-a-year day job is supposed to be resolving Britain’s most important criminal and commercial cases.

Robert Hazell, director of The Constitution Unit at University College London, said it was a “minor public scandal” that judges in the country’s top court spent almost half their time on business “of no interest to anyone in the UK”.

He said: “If they didn’t spend time in the Privy Council, the justices of the Supreme Court could hear almost twice as many cases coming up from the UK legal system.”

The Ministry of Justice declined to respond Lord Phillips’ comments, saying that how he ran the Supreme Court was a matter for him.

'Have we no shame?'

'Have we no shame?' Nicholson calls UK comments on the Privy Council reason enough to move to CCJ

Published: Friday | September 25, 2009

Source: Jamaica Gleaner

Statements attributed to a high-profile judge in the United Kingdom (UK) have given the parliamentary Opposition renewed fillip to push for the Caribbean Court of Justice (CCJ) to be used as Jamaica's final appellate court instead of the London-based Privy Council.

The Opposition is calling on the Government to table the required legistion in Parliament to revive the process of delinking from the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council and to have the CCJ as our final court of appeal," former Justice Minister A.J. Nicholson said at a press conference yesterday.

Nicholson was spurred by comments made by the soon-to-be president of the Supreme Court in the UK, Lord Nicholas Phillips.

Establish own court

The British judge has reportedly called on Caribbean countries to establish their own final court of appeal and questioned whether some Privy Council cases, including Jamaica's death-row appeals, needed to be heard by a panel of five of Britain's most senior judges, who have to spend disproportionate time on these matters.

The report out of the London media said many independent observers, presumably British taxpayers, say the privilege of continued pro bono (free) use of the appellate body is both an ideological stain and a financial drain on the newly created Supreme Court.

Declaring that he shares in the shame of the nation overstaying its welcome in the Privy Council, Nicholson characterised his call as urgent and regrettable, but stressed that this was no time for recriminations.

"It is unflattering for us as a people of an independent country to have placed ourselves in a situation to be told in quite measured but certainly unambiguous terms that surely the time has come for the imperial apron strings to be finally cut," Nicholson declared.

Nicholson was justice minister and attorney general in the P.J. Patterson administration which had spearheaded the thrust for the establishment of the CCJ as the country's final court of appeal.

Ironically, the then PNP administration was thwarted in its efforts by a ruling from the Privy Council.

He said in light of this week's reports in the UK media, the Government could no longer hold fast to the requirement that an indicative referendum be held to determine whether Jamaica should retain the Privy Council as its final court of appeal.

Nicholson, who had always been a passionate advocate for a regional appellate body, made an impassioned appeal to the Bruce Golding administration to set the machinery in motion to embark on the judicial course to replace the Privy Council with the CCJ. "I feel the shame," he declared yesterday.

PC overworked while CCJ under-utilized

UK’s top judge complains about the Privy Council case load
Source : www.radiojamaica.com

Published: Monday, September 21, 2009

The future of the Privy Council for the final court of appeal for most CARICOM member states has been placed into doubt after comments by the UK's top judge. Lord Nicholas Phillips, formally the Chief Justice, will become the first president of the Supreme Court of the United Kingdom when it comes into being next month.

He has told the Financial Times newspaper that the law lords have been spending too much time on cases in the former colonies, mostly in the Caribbean

He said in an ideal world these countries would stop using the Privy Council and set up their own courts of final appeal instead.

He did say that he was looking to take some of the pressure off of the Supreme Court by drafting Court of Appeal judges to help out.

The Caribbean does have its final appellate court, the Caribbean Court of Justice, but as of now it only judicates cases from Guyana and Barbados other countries have not signed on for a variety of reasons.

According to the Financial Times there have been efforts to launch a senior type of court to take on cases that reach the Privy Council.

Some countries, perhaps understandably, don't seem to be in a great hurry to end their access to a sort of pro bono judicial expertise in London.

Glimmer of Hope for the CCJ

The Caribbean Court of Justice

Source: CaribWorldNews, BELMOPAN, Belize,

Published: Wed. Sept. 16, 2009

By Oscar Ramjeet

There seems to be a glimmer of hope for a few more countries to join the Appellate Jurisdiction of the Caribbean Court of Justice.

After five years and five months since its establishment on April 12, 2004, no other country has joined Guyana and Barbados to make the CCJ the final court.

However Belize`s Prime Minister, Dean Barrow, tabled a Bill in Parliament three months ago to remove the Privy Council as the final court and to replace it with the regional court. And the government has been sensitizing the public on the move by holding consultations throughout the country.

Under the Belize constitution, no referendum is required to amend the constitution to remove the Privy Council and the Barrow administration has the required number of votes in Parliament for the amendment.

Last week I spoke with Grenada Prime Minister, Tillman Thomas, and he said that he will soon put mechanism in place to join the regional court. In fact he spoke to officials of the Grenada Bar Association on the issue and they are supporting the move.

While attorneys general and senior law officers were meeting in St. Georges, two regional luminaries in the region Professor Simeon Mc Intosh, Dean of the Cave Hill Campus of the University of the West Indies and Professor Winston Anderson of the Caribbean Law Institute, were educating Grenadians on the benefits of the regional court.

Dominica Prime Minister, Roosevelt Skerrett has also announced his intention of joining and it appears that the St. Lucia government is heeding a call from opposition leader, Kenny Anthony, for that country to join.

St. Lucia`s Attorney General, Nicholas Frederick, indicated to me that he is in the process of taking steps to put the required machinery in place to remove the British based Privy Council as the final court.

Meanwhile, in St. Vincent and the Grenadines, Prime Minister Ralph Gonsalves, is pushing for his country to join the regional court, but the multi-island state needs a referendum on the present constitution in order to remove the Privy Council as the final court.

However, the government has decided to overhaul the entire constitution in order to facilitate the court, and at the same time they have decided to make some rapid changes, including replacing the prime minister by an executive president and introducing proportional representation among other changes.

But it is very unfortunate that there has been no word from the two big countries, Trinidad and Tobago and Jamaica, which were in the forefront when the regional court was first advocated for 20 years ago.

Suriname`s Ambassador to Caricom, Manorma Soeknandan, who was in Grenada for the law conferences, told me that Suriname has to put several things in place before it can join. While an eminent Caribbean lawyer, Dame Dr. Bernice Lake, an Anguilla attorney, said that the regional governments disenfranchised the public when they set up the CCJ without referenda.

One wonders why the powers to be sought to establish the Court when there were uncertainties in most of the jurisdictions to join the Court.

The CCJ was established by CARICOM member states not only as the final Court of Appeal replacing the Privy Council, but to resolve disputes between Caribbean countries which are parties to the revised Treaty of Chaguaramas.

Although Antigua and Barbuda, Bahamas, Grenada, Dominica, Jamaica, Trinidad and Tobago, St. Kitts and Nevis St. Lucia. St. Vincent and the Grenadines and Suriname have not yet accept the CCJ as their final court, they can nevertheless use the CCJ to deal with treaty matters and international legal issues, but after 65 months only about three CSME issues reached the CCJ.

I sincerely hope that before too long, nearly all the states which signed the treaty, will make full use of the regional court.

EDITOR`S NOTE: Oscar Ramjeet is a well known Caribbean journalist and attorney. He has recently taken up an appointment as solicitor general for Belize.

OECS Lawyers back CCJ

OECS lawyers back Caribbean Court

Source: Dominica News

Published: September 14, 2009

ROSEAU, Dominica, CMC – The Organisation of Eastern Caribbean (OECS) Bar Association says it is satisfied with the independence of the Trinidad-based Caribbean Court of Justice (CCJ) and called for a public education programme ahead of any referendum to decide on whether or not to make the CCJ the final court of the sub-region.

“We have looked at matters which relate to the question of the Caribbean Court of Justice and whether we should move from the Privy Council because the OECS territories are still with the Privy Council,” President of the OECS Bar Association, Tapley Seaton told reporters at the end of the sixth regional fair over the weekend.

He said that the CCJ, established in established in 2001 to replace the London-based Privy Council as the region’s final court of appeal, has proven to be a reputable and competent court having already deliberated on regional matters.

Barbados and Guyana are the only two Caribbean Community (CARICOM) countries that joined the appellate jurisdiction of the CCJ.

The CCJ, which has both original and appellate jurisdictions, also functions as an international tribunal hearing disputes arising from the interpretation and application of the Revised Treaty under the CARICOM Single Market and Economy (CSME).

“We are satisfied that the independence of the CCJ would be assured, we are satisfied as to the integrity of the court and we are satisfied with the judges,” Seaton said, adding “we looked at examining what it means, is it really going to mean the final step in independence”.

More than 80 lawyers from the Caribbean and North America participated in the fair that also included a symposium and book exhibition.

Participants included the Chief Justice of the Eastern Caribbean Supreme Court, Hugh Rawlings.

President of the Dominica Bar Association (DBA), Michael Bruney said a public education programme must be conducted in the sub-region before any steps are taken to hold a referendum on whether the nine-member OECS should adopt the CCJ as their final court of appeal.

“There needs to be public education…there were attempts by CARICOM (Caribbean Community) to do public education on the CCJ but everything started and stopped,” he said, even as he acknowledged that the global financial crisis was making it difficult for some countries to put in place mechanisms for the court.

“A referendum is a must, it is called for in the constitution and it’s an expensive exercise…all the governments are caught up right now in the economic crisis and so it doesn’t appear that the CCJ is a priority at this time but sooner or later it would have to become a priority,” Bruney said.

Meanwhile, Seaton is also urging sub-regional governments to enact the Legal Professions Act that “would regulate and discipline lawyers”.

“We recognise we suppose to be self-regulatory but there is the need for the law to be put in place to discipline lawyers. We recognise that there will be errant lawyers and who will not be dealing in their client’s interest and so the legal profession gets tardy by that because a few lawyers do that.

“We are trying to have a uniform act so that we can have the same provisions or similar provisions throughout the entire region even in the non-independent territories and maybe have a sub-regional disciplinary body because it is difficult sometimes to find senior lawyers within a particularly territory who can sit on disciplinary matters...”

“It is a matter of priority for the OECS Bar Association,” the St. Kitts-born Seaton said.

Endorsing the CCJ

Endorsing the CCJ Rickey Singh Source: Trinidad Express Sunday, August 30th 2009

THIRTY years after becoming an independent nation, the Eastern Caribbean island of St Vincent and the Grenadines is gearing for a national referendum that could also remove a constitutional burden to access the Caribbean Court of Justice (CCJ) as its final appellate institution instead of clinging to the apron string of the British Privy Council. This could well be seen as a case of finally putting the proverbial cat among the pigeons. Setting, as it does, the political precedent for other countries of the Organisation of Eastern Caribbean States (OECS), as well as Jamaica and Trinidad and Tobago to do likewise. Some of these countries also require either a two thirds parliamentary majority or endorsement by a national referendum to facilitate ditching the Privy Council in favour of the CCJ. The Vincentian parliamentary opposition New Democratic Party (NDP) of Arnhim Eustace, a former short-term Prime Minister, has already vowed to vigorously campaign against a "yes" vote at the referendum scheduled for this coming November. For his part, Prime Minister Ralph Gonsalves, whose governing Unity Labour Party (ULP) already holds a dominant 12-3 parliamentary majority, has warned of a "spirited campaign" to win endorsement of a draft new constitution that provides for a two thirds majority to amend entrenched constitutional provisions. For different reasons, neither the government of Jamaica's Prime Minister Bruce Golding nor that of Trinidad and Tobago's Patrick Manning, is in the mood at present to consider a referendum to endorse constitutional changes to replace the Privy Council with the CCJ-an issue over which members of the legal profession in both countries are also in disagreement. In the case of Jamaica, the opposition People's National Party (PNP), which has always been supportive of the CCJ, will pose no problem whenever the Golding administration chooses to demonstrate serious interest in ending the dispensation with the Privy Council in favour of the now more than four-year-old regional court. However, in Trinidad and Tobago, where there continues to be controversies-some quite fierce and disturbing for a parliamentary democracy-the government of Prime Minister Patrick Manning cannot look forward to any support from the parliamentary opposition United National Congress-Alliance (UNC-A) to have the CCJ as the country's final court of appeal. For even in their current bitter internal conflicts the warring factions of the UNC-A continue to harbour deep reservations over the independence of the local judicial system and, regrettably, seem disposed to extending such concerns-without evidence-to the CCJ which, ironically, has its operational headquarters in Port of Spain. This scenario clearly suits Prime Minister Manning, affording him the comfort to openly lament the country's failure to cut ties with the Privy Council, while pursuing no serious initiative to have the CCJ as the country's final appellate institution, for example, in forcing opposition parties to vote for or against the CCJ, or making it a national referendum issue-as now being done in St Vincent and the Grenadines. More than four years ago, on April 16, 2005 to be precise, the CCJ was inaugurated amid pomp and pageantry in Port of Spain, following settled arrangements for its service to Caricom as a final court of appeal for participating countries as well as serving with original jurisdiction in resolving trade disputes arising from interpretation of the Revised Treaty of Chaguaramas. At the time of its ceremonial inauguration, Barbados and Guyana were the only two member countries no longer tied to the Privy Council, even as Trinidad and Tobago, the operational headquarter of the CCJ, continued to engage in mere platitudes about its importance. Today Barbados and Guyana are still the only two Caricom countries that are members of the CCJ, soon to be formally joined by Belize now under the leadership of Prime Minister Dean Barrow. Now seems a good time to ask whether it is fear of not obtaining required parliamentary majority approval or-as is also necessary in a few cases-the endorsement of a national referendum that stands in the way of accessing CCJ membership as their final court? Or is it more a case of lack of conviction by some governing political directorates to terminate an inherited colonial dependence on the Privy Council, in favour of the competence and integrity of the CCJ? There are examples, and not only involving penalty cases, where both governing and opposition parliamentary parties have expediently referenced to prolong vacillations in accessing CCJ membership. In so doing, they can hardly be unaware of a preference to demonstrate more faith in the judges of a dwindling Privy Council than in the independence, competence and integrity of the judges of our regional court.