Hold Referendum on the CCJ and Privy Council

Apr 18, 2019 Letters

DEAR EDITOR,

Reference is made to “CCJ celebrates 14 years …” (Apr 17, ’19). The CCJ brags about celebrating 14 years of its existence and rendering 34 judgments. Can people trust the CCJ? The Barbadian Prime Minister Mia Mottley describes the court judges as “politicians in robes” and promises to pull her country out of it and return to the London Privy Council.
Many of the CCJ’s judgments would not pass muster if appealed to the Privy Council. The late Fenton Ramsahoye and Karl Hudson Phillips told me that Law Lords in England laugh at some of the judgments rendered by the CCJ. Other Senior and Queens Counsels I spoke with in Trinidad, Guyana, Jamaica, and Barbados said many of the rulings of the CCJ would have been reversed if appeals were allowed in the Privy Council. Politicians, lawyers, laymen and former judges I spoke with in the region say “thank God for the Privy Council” when referring to some of the judgments of the CCJ. In other words, they are saying their country’s judicial system is best protected with the Privy Council as the final court of appeal.
The CCJ was launched or created without the approval of the people in the region. Of the four nations (Guyana, Barbados, Dominica, Belize) that accept the CCJ as final court of appeal, not one of them held a referendum on accepting its jurisdiction. Referendums held in Grenada, Antigua and Barbuda, and St. Vincent and the Grenadines rebuffed the court as final court of appeal; the people prefer the Privy Council. The Barbados government had promised to hold a referendum before accepting the CCJ as its final court but changed course when public opinions revealed the court would be rejected in a referendum vote. Instead, the government joined the court without the promised referendum.
In opinion polls I conducted in Trinidad and Tobago, Jamaica, Barbados, Grenada, St. Kitts, Antigua, and Guyana, the population overwhelmingly opposed the CCJ as final court of appeal for their country. In a survey I conducted just last week in Trinidad, by two to one, voters rejected the CCJ. Voters say they have greater faith in the Privy Council of London.
The seven judges of the court and their staff should visit the four countries where the CCJ has jurisdiction to get the population’s view on the court. They will be surprised with the findings. If the Chief Justice (President Adrian Saunders) has faith in the court, he should urge the four governments to hold a referendum on whether each should continue with having the CCJ as their final court of appeal or return to the Privy Council.
The people in the region would be looking at the judgments in two upcoming important court cases relating to the appointment of GECOM Chair and the no confidence motion — whether 33 is a simple majority or absolute majority of 65. The CCJ judgments will determine whether long held mathematical concepts have to be redefined and whether amendments to a constitution have legality. Queens Counsels and Law Lords are having a field day in the UK upon learning that two judges say that 33 is not a majority of 65.

Yours truly,
Vishnu Bisram (PhD)

Discover more from Kaieteur News

Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.

Latest News