Views of CCJ in Guyana, Trinidad and Caribbean

Dear Editor,
Oscar Ramjeet reminded us (July 11, 2016) that “After ten years only four countries accept the CCJ” – Guyana, Barbados, Belize, and Dominica. He has not explained why more countries don’t want to be under the jurisdiction of the CCJ.
Guyanese don’t have a choice but to accept the CCJ because Dr Jagan did not want to return to judicial oversight under the neutral British Lords.
If a vote were held, the Privy Council would have been accepted by a landslide. Dr Fenton Ramsahoye had suggested how Guyana could have fallen under the jurisdiction of the Privy Council, but Jagan was not interested. Dr Jagan and the PPP did not take necessary institutionalised measures to protect their supporters from poor racialised judgments. They learned nothing from the judicial abuses that occurred after independence under the PNC.
The PPP left their supporters overexposed to a biased court.
In Trinidad, unlike in Guyana, Indian politicians have been opposed to replacing the Privy Council with the CCJ because they don’t trust any Caribbean Court. They learned that the Privy Council is the only court they can depend on for fair justice. The PPP did not learn that lesson failing to understand and accept political reality.
As an aside, it is noted that no nation held a referendum on the CCJ, as the UK did for Brexit last month. All the territories should have allowed a referendum for people to decide on such a critical issue relating to justice, especially that people don’t trust Caribbean judges who tend to be influenced by self-serving corrupt politicians; judges tend to do the bidding of some politicians. Some judges even have politicians and lawyers write judgements. The PPP/C should have given voters a voice on which court to accept.
In my travels in the region, I have found that Caricom nationals feel justice has not improved under the CCJ, as compared with the Privy Council. Dissatisfaction with CCJ’s rulings is very high and growing.
Caribbean justice has and will not be fair because of politicisation of the judicial system especially in multiethnic nations like Guyana and Trinidad.
Lawyers complained that judges in the region have been making decisions since independence to please political bosses and/or on ethnic loyalty; it is noted there are no Indian judges in the court.
Lawyers also note that very little jurisprudence and legal traditions go into decision-making; thus, lawyers have greater faith in the English Privy Council, the final court of appeal for the UK and several Commonwealth countries.
The law lords are not subject to outside political pressure or bribery as judges in the Caribbean are. In addition, the Lords do thorough research and use legal precedents from rulings in advanced democracies.
Although the CCJ is located in Trinidad, the people have been resisting its jurisdiction. Judicial rulings, according to lawyers, are politicised in T&T as they are in Guyana with race playing a major role in rulings.
Lawyers also complain about judicial and clerical incompetence in the CCJ and point out that standards of adjudication are different in the CCJ from what prevails in the Privy Council.
Not surprisingly, most Trini lawyers are adamantly opposed to replacing the Privy Council with CCJ because they feel they get fair rulings from London and not from CCJ.
Unlike the PPP in Guyana, the opposition UNC in Trinidad has not and will never support the CCJ because its Indian base is opposed to it, complaining about the history of biased or racialised rulings in Trinidad.
Jagan and the PPP should have learned a lesson from the UNC and find a way to return to the Privy Council or some neutral court.
In Jamaica, a majority is opposed to the CCJ. There, when in government, parties call for the replacement of the Privy Council with the CCJ and the Queen with a President. But when in opposition, they advocate the reverse, fearing the government’s influence on jurisprudence that would affect rights.
Lawyers throughout the region, particularly in Belize and Barbados, are unhappy with CCJ’s rulings because opinions lack depth, logic and rationality. They don’t follow established precedents and are not race neutral.
Lawyers throughout the Caribbean lack faith in the CCJ for fair justice.

Yours truly,
Vishnu Bisram