CCJ curse can be cured

WITH THE recent deaths of Michael de la Bastide, Désirée Bernard, and Jacob Wit, almost half the inaugural members of the Caribbean Court of Justice (CCJ) have died without ever seeing this regional court come into its fullest fruition.

That is a mark of shame. The CCJ, established in 2005, is already the highest court in four of our Caricom neighbours.

But TT is yet to subscribe to it – even though we signed the accord setting it up, submitted to its authority as it relates to treaties, pumped more than $200 million into its funding mechanism, and have hosted its headquarters in our capital city for decades.

The death of Mr. de la Bastide in particular has renewed appeals for the abolition of the Privy Council and signing on to the CCJ.

The former chief justice served as a member of both – he was the CCJ’s first president – but used his good offices to advocate for reform.

People like Israel Khan, SC, have suggested a street should be named after him, but a more fitting tribute would be removing ourselves from under the UK law lords.

And yet there is a sense that the calls currently being made are like flogging a dead horse. The Opposition UNC, whose founder Basdeo Panday was instrumental in seating the CCJ here, looks set to maintain its objection.

The position of the party is that abolishing the Privy Council would somehow undermine judicial independence.

But are these fears borne out by the experiences of countries like Barbados, Belize, Dominica, and Guyana, all of which have made the CCJ their highest court? Are those countries currently falling apart? And should independence not be what matters most, judicial or otherwise?

It is not often appreciated that this country has already partially abolished the Privy Council. The Court of Appeal is our highest court as it relates to election matters.

Has any evidence ever been produced proving interference with the affairs of that court? In fact, it was the Court of Appeal that famously quashed a conviction against Mr. Panday in 2007.

There is a way to break the curse of the non-implementation of the CCJ. For a start, more judges could be appointed; the full complement of the court has never been met. Judgeships could rotate, terms could be fixed, and insulation mechanisms at the regional appointing body bolstered.

At the very least, politicians in this country need to take a page from Mr. de la Bastide’s book and leave judges alone. And the Rowley administration should, as part of its constitutional reform exercise, put politics aside and seriously engage with Opposition MPs.

Consensus on the CCJ might seem, today, like a pipe dream. But it is a dream worth keeping alive.