CCJ optimistic about future – Justice Saunders

…as Court celebrates 17th anniversary

The Caribbean Court of Justice (CCJ) – the apex court for Guyana and three other Caribbean Community (Caricom) Member States – celebrated its 17th anniversary last Saturday.
In a statement to mark the occasion, its President, Justice Adrian Saunders said like a healthy 17-year-old, the Court was optimistic about the future.
“At this time, we give thanks to all who contributed to getting us where we are today. We salute all our Judges and staff, past and present, and we are pleased to fulfil our mission, bearing proudly the values that continue to guide us – excellence, courtesy and consideration, industry, and integrity,” Justice Saunders added.
Since its opening 17 years ago, the Trinidad-based court has pronounced on 249 cases, with the majority – 111 – coming from Guyana; 88 are from Barbados, another 42 are from Belize, and the remaining eight are from Dominica. Here is a breakdown of the cases filed by Guyana per year: 2006 (1); 2007 (3); 2008 (10); 2009 (7); 2010 (2); 2011 (5); 2012 (3); 2013 (6); 2014 (10); 2015 (5); 2016 (11); 2017 (7); 2018 (13); 2019 (13); 2020 (6); 2021 (5) and 2022 (4).
The areas in which most of these judgements were rendered included land, criminal, constitutional, company, and commercial law; practice and procedure; judicial review, and Original Jurisdiction claims.
The Trinidad-based court has an Original and an Appellate Jurisdiction and is effectively, therefore, two courts in one. In its Original Jurisdiction, it is an international court with exclusive jurisdiction to interpret and apply the rules set out in the Revised Treaty of Chaguaramas (RTC) and to decide disputes arising under it. The RTC established Caricom and the Caricom Single Market and Economy (CSME). In its Original Jurisdiction, the CCJ is critical to the CSME and all 12 Member States which belong to the CSME (including their citizens, businesses, and governments) can access the Court’s Original Jurisdiction to protect their rights under the RTC. In its Appellate Jurisdiction, the CCJ is the final court of appeal for criminal and civil matters for Guyana, Barbados, Belize, and Dominica which have altered their Constitutions to enable the CCJ to perform that role.
However, by signing and ratifying the agreement establishing the CCJ, other Caricom countries have demonstrated a commitment to making it their final court of appeal. The CCJ said it was the realisation of a vision of our ancestors, an expression of independence, and a signal of the Region’s coming of age.

Disappointment
Justice Saunders, while delivering the keynote address at the recently-held Guyana Bar Association’s Annual Dinner, expressed disappointment that other Caricom countries continued to have the British Privy Council decide their final appeals.
He, however, noted, “Whether a State chooses to continue having Her Majesty’s Privy Council adjudicate its final appeals is, of course, a fundamental constitutional question for that Government and its people. It is disappointing, however, that any Caribbean country should renege on its treaty responsibilities preferring instead to have British Judges continue to interpret its Constitution and laws”.
And while this is a choice a country has to make, Justice Saunders warned that such a choice has consequences. He explained that one of the consequences is that this choice deprives people of ordinary means of the ability to avail themselves of a level of access to justice that they could and should enjoy. Another unfortunate consequence, the esteemed Judge highlighted, is that it impacts negatively on the full development of Caribbean jurisprudence. The CCJ President commended Guyana, Barbados, Dominica, and Belize for acceding to the court’s Appellate Jurisdiction, noting that the Governments of these countries made “a wise decision”. Last month, the Government of St Lucia signalled its intention to become the fifth Caricom country to have full membership with the CCJ. The Governments of Grenada and Antigua and Barbuda had taken similar steps in the past to sign onto the CCJ. But Justice Saunders noted that the independence constitutional arrangements in these two States have effectively frustrated their deep desire to do what he described as “proper and noble”.