Caribbean people and post-colonial justice

Jul 31, 2011 Features / Columnists, Freddie Kissoon

---

In recent times, three developments in the CARICOM region have contributed to the living pessimism one finds among West Indian citizens about the future of the integration movement. In November last year, St. Vincentians voted in a referendum against the changing of the constitution that would have abolished the Privy Council and allow for the Caribbean Court of Justice (CCJ) to be the island’s final appellate court.
Secondly, in June this year, an American pollster, Bill Johnson, found that sixty percent of Jamaicans would have preferred to remain a British colony. And a few months ago, Jamaican PM, Bruce Golding, at a swipe against the CCJ, said that the judges would be susceptible to political pressure. Add to this the colossal disappointment of Caribbean people with the almost moribund integration movement, and you have a region where citizens feel that Independence has no brought justice, freedom and economic development to their lives.
It is left to one person to explain this sadness – the sociologist.
The Caribbean Community is as old as the European Union, yet the ordinary citizen does not have recourse to a human rights court as European citizens do. Even asylum-seekers can appeal for justice to the EU Human Rights Court.
Everyday, Caribbean people see how closer European countries are drawing to each other in a fast-going integration movement while Caribbean islands with a population of less than 80,000 want to have their own ambassadors etc.
What is the answer for the contents of the Bill Johnson poll? Among the factors, three stand out. One is that Caribbean people have seen their immediate post-colonial expectations melt in the tropical sun faster than butter. The Promised Land failed to live up to the promise.
The most horrific and horrible example is Guyana. In 1960, Guyana was ranked above Malaysia in both GNP and GDP. Comparing the two in 2001 is like matching Usain Bolt and a 90-year-old cripple.
The levels of poverty weren’t wiped out, and economic development was slow to come. The slowness soon ground to a halt. The performance of the post-colonial leaders angered the masses. Between holding the Summit of the Americas and the Commonwealth Heads Meeting, Prime Minister Manning of Trinidad & Tobago spent around US$300M. Can a small state like Trinidad & Tobago afford that enormous sum on just two international conferences?
Dashed expectations by the masses led to authoritarian power and that in turn led to violence. In 1970, there was an attempted coup in Trinidad. Years later, there was a violent capture of the Parliament while it was in session.
Prime Minister Shearer of Jamaica experienced bloody riots after he banned Walter Rodney. Grenada had to contend with serious conflicts between opposition and Prime Minister Eric Gairy.
In Guyana, Mr. Burnham’s rule was eventually weakened by the radical Working People’s Alliance. Nothing (this writer purposely uses the word, “nothing”) has changed in the Caricom region since those implosions. The region’s income disparities are worsening.
This columnist has never seen poverty in his own country as he sees today.
Secondly, Caribbean people probably believe that the white ruler, white judge, white teacher, and white policeman were a more honest and decent people who were less vindictive and biased. West Indian people think that the European mind was driven by its long association with philosophy and human rights crusades but that West Indian politicians, judges and administrators are crude, uncouth and insensitive.
I attended the University of Toronto which had 28,000 students and thousands of employees. It was like a paradise without serious conflict. UG has five hundred employees and five thousand students and it is a virtual mess.
Caribbean people seldom trust the administration of justice. They are reluctant to accept that the local judges will be as fair as the white judge in the Privy Council. Caribbean people feel that law always operates on the side of the ruling masters, and that decisions will favour the government rather than the small man.
There is the feeling that English judges are less afraid of the government. That may not be true but the perception exists.
Trinidad and Jamaica plan to hold a referendum on the replacement of the Privy Council with the CCJ.
My own feeling is that, like St.Vincent, the CCJ will be rejected. My own opinion about law and justice in my own country is not an elevated on.
Thirdly, with small populations, the fair dispensation of justice always carries a danger (see A. Singham, “The Hero in the Crowd.”) When countries have tiny populations, relations are inevitably personal. Judges know rulers, rulers know public servants. Public servants fear rulers, judges fear rulers, policemen fear rulers.
The tragedy goes on.

Writer’s note: I thank the KN management for removing the publisher’s note at the end of my Friday piece in the online edition. Though I welcome an early hearing, I never instructed my lawyers to ask Justice Ian Chang for an early date in the libel case with President Jagdeo. As far as I know my lawyers didn’t either. Let’s see how this unfolds.

---

---