Letters & Opinion

Citizens Can Certainly Confide in a Capable Caribbean Court

The CCJ and the Court of Caribbean Public Opinion - Part 3

Image of Earl Bousquet
Chronicles Of A Chronic Caribbean Chronicler By Earl Bousquet

Twenty-years-old and after 17 years of experience on its bench, Judges of the Caribbean Court of Justice (CCJ) have repeatedly demonstrated why Caribbean citizens can and should confide in them.

But their solid judgments are not sufficiently communicated and explained to the region’s citizens, whether by the Court, the Caribbean Community (CARICOM), Bar Associations or national Judicial and Legal Service Commissions.

Submission One: The CCJ ruled ahead of a Barbados General Elections in favour of an appeal by CARICOM citizens working in Barbados for several years who qualified under law, but were disallowed from registering to vote; and in a more-recent Barbados case, the judges ruled that a man can be raped.

Submission Two: Several rulings in Guyana have been either overturned, disallowed or adjusted by the CCJ.

Submission Three: In Dominica, CCJ judgments have caused discomfort to both Government and private litigants.

But there’s an obvious disconnect between the capacity of lawyers in the four CARICOM member-states that have the CCJ as their Final Appeals Court and those in the ten that haven’t kissed the British Privy Council goodbye.

So then, how do lawyers in states that haven’t acceded to the CCJ’s Appellate Jurisdiction get up-to-speed on how to present cases within the context of the Treaty of Chaguaramas (TOC)?

The answers are in a March 13, 2018 report on the CCJ’s website entitled ‘Norman Manley Law School Wins 2018 CCJ International Moot Competition’, the CCJ’s 11th.

But then, what’s a ‘Moot’, how does it work and how does it help better deliver justice in the court of Caribbean public opinion?

The Moot competition started in 2009 as an in-person activity to orient law students in the processes and procedures of the court, while helping them become more familiar with the court’s Original Jurisdiction (OJ); and it focuses on the Interpretation and Application of the Revised TOC.

In its Original Jurisdiction (OD), the CCJ is an international court and the only one that has the authority to interpret the Treaty when there are disagreements concerning Freedom of Movement, Trade Services and Movement of Money Within CARICOM, allowing Countries, Businesses and Individuals to ask the court to interpret the Treaty; and its Appellate Jurisdiction (AJ) makes it the region’s highest Appeals Court.

The Moot competition is intended to familiarize law students with the TOC and the workings of the CCJ’s OD, provide young jurists with opportunities to hone their talents and familiarize them with courtroom settings.

The CCJ Moots involve CARICOM’s six top law schools: UWI Cave Hill (Barbados), University of Guyana, Norman Manley Law School (Jamaica), Anton de Kom University (Surinam), UWI St. Augustine and Hugh Wooding Law School (Trinidad & Tobago).

President Sir Dennis Byron, (addressing the 2018 ceremony in his final year in office) said the CCJ was “poised to contribute to positive change in the social order of our Caribbean societies by delivering justice which is accessible, efficient and reflective of our values and mores”.

He also mentioned “The positive difference the use of technology has made in the operations of the CCJ”, saying “This increased efficiency has resulted in a tremendous improvement to access to the Court.”

For instance, in 2016, only 18 cases were filed in the CCJ’s Appellate Jurisdiction, but that number almost-doubled a year later (2017) to 35 — a dramatic increase by 94%.

Besides, most CCJ cases are disposed of by its competent judges within six (6) months — from Filing to the Final Judgment.

One of the members of the winning Jamaica team (Kimberly Blackwood) explained: “Having not acceded to the Appellate Jurisdiction of the Court, our [Jamaica-based] attorneys seldom get the opportunity to appear before judges of the CCJ; and being able to do this was just tremendous for us, and we had to seize that opportunity.”

Four years later, after a two-year hiatus caused by COVID-19 pandemic restrictions, the CCJ decided to host a Virtual Moot, in keeping with its current practice of hearing matters virtually – and notwithstanding the feelings of Digital Meeting Fatigue often experienced by most students, six institutions competed in this year’s competition.

Current CCJ President Adrian Saunders told the 2022 ceremony that hosting the annual Moot “is one way the Court can deliver greater awareness of the processes designed to promote regional integration within the framework of the RTC.”

He also hoped that by bringing the law students “face-to-face with the nuances of the Revised Treaty (TOC) with the procedures for pursuing the rights bestowed by it and with the Court that interprets and applies the Treaty, that this will ignite your passion as practitioners and scholars for the advancement of (Caribbean) Community law.”

The 2018 ‘mooters’ debated a hypothetical situation: A CARICOM state imposed a tax on imported sugar-sweetened beverages and a ban on advertisement of such beverages on TV and radio.

The 2022 Moot’s scenario concerned Article 214 of the RTC, dealing with referrals from national courts to the CCJ, where the matter in question requires the interpretation and application of the RTC.

The proceedings – and much more – can always be viewed on the CCJ’s website at www.ccj.org

But, here again, there’s a dire need to avoid a dangerous region-wide overemphasis on the level of access available to the average Caribbean citizen with no residence online, a number that’s grossly overlooked and underestimated by those living according to the Internet of Things.

Here too, it’s important that the CCJ recognize that there’s a world-wide-web of a difference between making information theoretically ‘Accessible to All’ and the number of people who actually have the devices to practically access the information meant to be at their fingertips.

Access requires Accessibility, which requires Availability — which then requires the Personal Motivation to Choose to use the tools at the fingertips to Access Knowledge more than Entertainment – which, in this case, is a totally different matter.

And again, I rest my case…

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Send this to a friend