Latest update September 19th, 2026 10:20 AM
Latest News
- Fear of return to home countries, diplomatic hurdles lead U.S. deportees to Guyana – sources
- Guyana’s 2026 oil earnings forecast jumps from US$2.8B to US$6.5B
- Sod turned for construction of new $1.3 billion New Amsterdam Market
- Iranians rally in biggest show of defiance against U.S. since war began
- APNU says 2020 election fraud trial exposing PPP/C’s own irregularities
The credibility of the CCJ at stake
Dear Editor,
I recently watched an interview with former Opposition Leader, Aubrey Norton in which he disclosed what, if accurately reported, is deeply troubling information concerning the President of the Caribbean Court of Justice, Justice Winston Anderson.
According to Mr. Norton, Justice Anderson contacted him when he was at the office of the President or State House, one assumes in the presence of President Irfaan Ali, attempted to persuade him to agree to the Government’s proposed substantive appointments of the Chief Justice and Chancellor of the Judiciary. One of the arguments reportedly advanced was that at least one of the proposed appointees would be Black.
If this account is accurate, the public deserves a full explanation. Why would the President of the CCJ become involved in negotiations between the President of Guyana and the Opposition Leader concerning appointments to Guyana’s judiciary?
More importantly, why did Mr. Norton wait until now to disclose this information to the Guyanese people? If he believed at the time that the President of the CCJ was improperly involving himself in a political and constitutional matter, why was the matter not brought to the nation’s attention when it occurred?
These questions have become even more important following the extraordinary allegations now emerging from within the CCJ itself, where five of Justice Anderson’s fellow judges have reportedly raised serious concerns about his administration of the Court, including issues relating to judicial independence, panel composition, decision-making and alleged attempts to influence colleagues.
I am not suggesting that the allegations contained in the leaked correspondence have been proven. They must be independently investigated. But the fact that these concerns are reportedly coming from sitting judges of the CCJ itself makes them impossible to dismiss as merely political accusations.
This brings me to what I find to be a serious contradiction in Mr. Norton’s current position.
Mr. Norton has indicated that, while he would not call for Justice Anderson to be fired, he believes that Justice Anderson should step down as President of the CCJ. At the same time, however, Mr. Norton appears prepared to accept Justice Anderson acting as an arbitrator in a matter involving the Government of Guyana.
How can both positions be reconciled?
If Justice Anderson’s conduct has created such a serious perception of bias or compromised confidence in his ability to lead the Court that he should relinquish the presidency, why would that same person be considered sufficiently impartial to arbitrate a dispute involving the Government of Guyana?
This is not about whether one supports Aubrey Norton, the PNC, the PPP or President Ali. It is about a fundamental principle of an independent judiciary.
I am also troubled by what appears to be Mr. Norton’s willingness to contradict the position of the Parliamentary Opposition leadership. If the Opposition’s parliamentary leader has called for Justice Anderson to step down, while the former Opposition Leader takes a different position, what exactly is the official position of the PNC/APNU?
A serious political party aspiring to govern Guyana cannot speak with multiple voices on matters as fundamental as judicial independence and constitutional governance.
The PNC must decide whether it wants to remain trapped in internal divisions or rebuild itself into a modern, credible national political organisation.
That requires a congress, not simply to change personalities, but to establish a clear vision and a leadership team capable of speaking with one voice.
That leadership must be representative of the whole of Guyana: experienced political leaders, young people, women, professionals and people from every region and section of our society.
Guyana needs an opposition that can challenge the government, when necessary, but also one that can demonstrate that it understands the importance of institutions, constitutional conventions and the independence of the judiciary.
The questions surrounding Justice Anderson are too serious for political partisanship.
The credibility of the Caribbean’s highest court—and public confidence in the administration of justice—are too important to be treated as another political football.
Sincerely,
Rawle Blackman
Share this:
Discover more from Kaieteur News
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
Similar Articles
Website Hits
Blunt of the day
Sports
Features/Columnists
Sir. Ronald Sanders
The GHK Lall Column
Weekend Cartoon
