Bookmark Jamaica-Gleaner.com
Go-Jamaica Gleaner Classifieds Discover Jamaica Youth Link Jamaica
Business Directory Go Shopping inns of jamaica Local Communities

Home
Lead Stories
News
Business
Sport
Commentary
Letters
Entertainment
Profiles in Medicine
The Star
E-Financial Gleaner
Overseas News
Communities
Search This Site
powered by FreeFind
Services
Weather
Archives
Find a Jamaican
Subscription
Interactive
Chat
Dating & Love
Free Email
Guestbook
ScreenSavers
Submit a Letter
WebCam
Weekly Poll
About Us
Advertising
Gleaner Company
Search the Web!

House suspends debate on CCJ
published: Wednesday | May 14, 2003

By Vernon Daley and Garwin Davis, Staff Reporters

THE HOUSE of Representatives last night suspended debate on the Caribbean Court of Justice (CCJ).

However, before the adjournment, several speakers from the Government and Opposition benches locked horns on whether the country should replace the UK-based Privy Council with the CCJ.

Phillip Paulwell, Commerce, Science and Technology Minister, led the Government's charge arguing that the CCJ was critical to settling disputes that would arise in the Caribbean Single Market and Economy (CSME). Also, he dismissed calls for a referendum on the CCJ, noting that "there is no desire for a referendum" from the people in the streets.

Responding to Mr. Paulwell, Delroy Chuck, JLP spokesman on Justice, said there was no need to twin the two layers of the CCJ. According to him, a trade court could be established to deal with disputes within the CSME, while retaining the right of appeal to the Privy Council.

"If the CCJ is the trade court, then we have no problem with it," Mr. Chuck said, while speaking on a resolution calling for the ratification of an agreement setting up the CCJ. "Let it be a trade court and forget the appellate jurisdiction."

Repeating the Opposition's official line, Mr. Chuck argued that the Government should consult the people in a referendum, if it wants to replace the Privy Council with the CCJ.

John Junor, Health Minister, blasted the JLP and human rights groups for advocating a referendum on the CCJ, but not the death penalty. He said that capital punishment, which affected the right to life, was more important than a court of appeal, yet critics had not called for the people to decide whether to retain hanging.

"There is an air of hypocrisy here," he said.

Clive Mullings, JLP MP, advised the Government to move cautiously on the CCJ issue, arguing that an important institution such as a final appeal court should not be born of fractious debate.

Audley Shaw, JLP spokesman on Finance, urged fellow parliamentarians to first seek the approval of their constituents before deciding on whether to have the Caribbean Court of Justice (CCJ) as the country's final court of appeal.

According to Mr. Shaw, something as fundamental as doing away with the Privy Council in favour of the CCJ should not be done without consulting with the people of Jamaica.

"Let us today, on so fundamental an issue, resist the urge to speak for the PNP or the JLP," Mr. Shaw said.

Prime Minister P.J. Patterson, who opened the debate in the House last week, will close it on Tuesday. But, the House will meet today to deal with the report from the Joint Select Committee which reviewed the proposed Municipalities Act slated to pave the way for areas like Portmore to select their own Mayor and Councillors.

More Lead Stories

































©Copyright2003 Gleaner Company Ltd. | Disclaimer | Letters to the Editor | Suggestions

Home - Jamaica Gleaner