John Myers Jr., Staff ReporterTHE LEGAL fraternity, for the most part, has reacted positively to the appointment of Justice Mic-hael de la Bastide, a former Chief Justice of Trinidad and Tobago, as president of the proposed Caribbean Court of Justice (CCJ).
Delroy Chuck, attorney-at-law and Opposition Spokesman on Justice, spoke highly of the integrity and personality of the former Chief Justice.
"I have no problem with the appointment of Michael de la Bastide. He is certainly an outstanding attorney, a distinguished judge and brings a lot of intellect and credibility to the process," Mr. Chuck said.
While he noted that he did not know him personally, Mr. Chuck said Justice de la Bastide was spoken of highly by his tutor at Oxford University who considered him in the 1960s "one of the brightest students he had ever taught."
"Opponents of the Caribbean Court of Justice will take great satisfaction in having him appointed as president," Mr. Chuck stated.
Arlene Harrison-Henry, president of the Jamaican Bar Association, was equally satisfied with the appointment. "What I have seen and from what we have gathered, he seems to be an erudite gentleman and a distinguished member of the legal fraternity," she said.
And further emphasising the point, Mrs. Harrison-Henry noted that the former Chief Justice was appointed a Queen's Counsel in 1975 and served on two important constitutional commissions. The Bar president remembered that he was also an independent member of the Senate from 1976 to 1981 and president of the Law Society for three terms from 1987 to 1990 in Trinidad.
"It is my recollection that he was an independent Chief Justice and we can expect he will perform his duties as president (of the CCJ) in an independent manner," Mrs. Harrison-Henry assured.
George Soutar, president of the Advocates Association of Jamaica, also had no problem with the appointment of Justice de la Bastide. Admitting he didn't know the former Chief Justice personally, Mr. Soutar argued that the fact that he was selected to head the court demonstrated that he possessed the qualities and abilities to operate in the position and would adjudicate in the best interest of the court.
However, Patrick Bailey, attorney-at-law, was not im-pressed with the appointment and maintained his opposition to the principle on which the court was being established. "In the scheme of things, the appointment is of little significance. I am more concerned about the process of establishing the court," he said.
