Freddie wrong on CCJ as being better than U.S. Supreme Court

Aug 13, 2026 Letters

---

Dear Editor,

I write in response to Freddie’s claim that Guyanese and CCJ judges delivered ‘better’ judgments than the Privy Council and US Supreme Court. The CCJ is experiencing internal destruction. The discredited columnist had assailed me for writing that in USA, there is almost absolute freedom of expression and association that is backed by judgments in US Supreme.

He disagreed, stating that CCJ and Guyanese judges delivered ‘better judgments”.  Freddie also disagreed with other statements of mine like the American dollar is the strongest currency and USA is the most powerful country in the world. Freddie stated that the Chinese currency (trading at 6.5 Yuan to the American dollar) is better and American power is finished. These statements were made by Freddie before Donald Trump assumed the Presidency in Jan 2025. Since Trump became President, he invaded and or bombed countries and threatened regional blocs as well as leaders of countries of sanctions if they attempted to undermine American global dominance and the dollar. He also threatened to make several territories part of USA. Freddie had not penned a word critical of Trump or USA over the last 20 months; visa is on the line.

American power has been dominant over the last century, the most powerful country militarily and economically and will remain so long into the future, regardless of what Freddie thinks. And so would the American dollar. No Guyanese or anyone in the world seeks to hoard the Chinese Yuan, not even Freddie. One can’t use the Yuan to purchase goods (other than from China) and or to pay foreign tuition or for vacation purposes. Chinese vacationers traveled with the dollar. Everyone seeks the greenback dollar or some kind of Western currency to travel or to hoard.

In terms of military dominance, unlike what Freddie and his anti-American left-wing colleagues think, no country dares to challenge USA power. The Europeans are unhappy with Trump’s leadership. But they dare not challenge him. They find ways to work with or around him.

On judicial rulings, hardly any court globally, certainly not those in Guyana or the Caribbean, made more profound judgments than the American Supreme Court. The Indian American lawyer, Neal Katyal, a Punjabi, who won the tariff case against Trump two months ago, described the US Supreme Court as the most powerful court in the world with renowned judgments. I can’t think of which Guyanese or Caribbean court judgments are precedent setting, similar to the US Sup Court. The Privy Council overturned several judgments from the Caribbean. The CCJ is the final court of appeal for four nations. If their judgments were ‘appealable’ to Privy Council, several would probably be overturned. Senior and King Counsels in the Caribbean prefer the Privy Council over the CCJ. Several told me up till Monday gone that they prefer not to appear for cases in Guyana or appeals at the CCJ; judgments are too politicized as opposed to say the Privy Council. Some American Supreme Court cases are politicized because the majority party appoints them, but they did give informative, precedent setting judgments. Ask any lawyer and they would say judgments emanating from the Supreme Court or Privy Council are superior to those delivered in Guyana and any Caribbean court. It is not that our judges are intellectual inferior; some indeed are. Judgments are constrained by politics. Judges rule as politically directed or else they don’t get promotion.

Jurisprudential quality is much better in USA and at the Privy Council; those courts have institutional prestige, longevity, quality of reasoning, and protection of natural rights when compared with rulings in Guyana and the Caribbean. They don’t fear politicians. The US Supreme Court has been interpreting the American Constitution for more than two and a half centuries, while the Privy Council has accumulated an enormous body of Commonwealth jurisprudence. Their libraries of precedent, intellectual resources and institutional experience are formidable. And judges are not fearful to deliver judgments that opposed views of politicians unlike in the Caribbean where one thinks of career first and judgments as secondary.

Rulings must be judged by the quality of reasoning. Some of the CCJ reasonings in ruling were outstanding. But how does one defend that 33 is not a majority of 65. Or the ruling by our courts that the President could select his own chair of GECOM when the language is clear – chosen from among the six nominees of the Opposition Leader.

Courts should function independently and free from political, executive and other forms of direction and control. That constitutional principle is fundamental to the legitimacy of the judiciary. It is not clear that Guyana or the Caribbean has reached that level as in the Privy Council and American Supreme Court.

Yours truly,

Vishnu Bisram (Student of US Const’l Law)

---

• CCJ, Letters, U.S. Supreme Court, Vishnu Bisram

---