Sadly, deadline issues conspired to exclude personal reflections on yesterday’s ceremonial sitting of the Caribbean Court of Justice (CCJ) at Queen’s Hall, Trinidad to honour the service of outgoing President of the Court, Justice Adrian Saunders.
Justice Saunders, who demits office on July
3, has been a member of the Court since its very first sitting 20 years ago,
and has been at the helm for the past seven years.
He is a native of St Vincent and the
Grenadines and is often referred to as a “home-grown” Caribbean jurist, having
graduated from The UWI Cave Hill campus in Barbados in 1975 and the Hugh
Wooding Law School in T&T in 1977.
Getting to know him at the professional
level about 10 years ago brought confirmation to recurring hearsay regarding
his determined commitment to Caribbean development and sovereignty, and his vast
knowledge on matters of law and justice.
As a mere layman with an interest in such
matters, there have been few occasions during which Justice Saunders, even in
casual inter-personal “obiter dicta”, has not provided me and others around him
with instruction on questions of balance, fairness, and accuracy.
These qualities, of course, were also habits
of the predecessors I came to know, including one past President who summoned
me to his chamber over what he assessed to be an inaccuracy surrounding the
status of the CCJ Trust Fund – a unique financial mechanism designed as insulation
against arbitrary behaviour by contributing nations.
Despite this, there are members of the
legal profession and politicians here and in our region, who persist with
silliness over the perceived vulnerability of the Court to parochial financial
whim.
It should also not be that millionaire
advocates with big national and regional reputations are correspondingly
confused about or ignorant of the work and status of the Regional Judicial and
Legal Services Commission (RJLSC) which presides over the independent appointment
of CCJ judges.
Some of these people sometimes scour social
media pages and posts and even contribute to relevant online conversations but never
attempt to correct repeated public ignorance and folly surrounding the Court.
It is also patently untrue to assert that “Trinidad
and Tobago NOT in de CCJ” despite its headquarters being situated in POS. I
have heard this too many times. This is a nonsense built into political
narratives particularly expressive of a lack of support for the CCJ in its discrete
role as a court of final appeal.
For the benefit of proponents of such confusion,
the CCJ is actually a hybrid institution serving both as a “municipal court of
last resort” – its appellate jurisdiction - and as an “international court
vested with original, compulsory and exclusive jurisdiction in respect of the
interpretation and application of the Revised Treaty of Chaguaramas.”
In fact, this country has been the subject of
the largest share of cases before the CCJ with respect to its “original jurisdiction”
role. The last T&T related judgment came on October 22, 2024 (a “CLICO”
case), and the first one involved Trinidad Cement Ltd in July 2008.
It is also not widely acknowledged (or
perhaps known) that the CCJ is an itinerant court – meaning it can convene
hearings in any of the signatory countries.
The question of the appellate jurisdiction
of the Court has also been subject to a variety of nonsenses. The funding issue
and judge selection have been addressed higher up. Don’t just take it from a
journalistic “bush lawyer”, look it up.
But what of the ethnic makeup of the CCJ Bench?
This is among the more egregiously insulting observations about the Court made
by those who have most likely not conducted a corresponding head count in other
apex jurisdictions, including the one of their own lucrative choice.
This year, the Court marks 20 years since
its inauguration on April 16, 2005. Justice Saunders is to be succeeded next
month by Justice Winston Anderson – another committed regionalist with dual
Barbadian/Jamaican nationalities.
He was founding Chairman of the CCJ Academy
for Law in 2010 and, through his work as a panellist contributing more than
once to the work of the Media Institute of the Caribbean (MIC) in our journalism
training, is clearly committed to expanding knowledge not only of how systems
of law and justice work, but about the place of the CCJ in Caribbean life.
Even in the absence of the ideology and
philosophy often cited in support of an indigenous apex jurisdiction, and most
of the countervailing silliness and ignorance, a rational debate can be engaged
on the merits and demerits of a CCJ. I am yet to witness one.