Peter EspeutTHE LOGIC of the Government with respect to a referendum for the so-called Caribbean Court of Justice is now becoming clearer to me. The Government is refusing to hold a referendum to determine the will of the people on whether Jamaica should put aside the Judicial Committee of the UK Privy Council as Jamaica's final appeal court, and to replace it with a Caribbean court created by the CARICOM heads. "I am not inna dat" says the Prime Minister referring to a referendum, and our Attorney-General never misses an opportunity to defend the government's anti-referendum policy.
It all became clear last weekend when I saw the Attorney-General quoted in the newspapers saying that the government "might decide whether to hang or not to hang" based on a referendum. A conscience vote in parliament would come first, but "it could, at some point, come to a referendum beyond that". He said, "If we decide that the death penalty should be no more, I think we should just have a vote and put it to the people and let it be done." Exactly! This is precisely the argument pro-referendum advocates make about the much more important decision of whether at this time to put aside the Judicial Committee of the UK Privy Council as our final appellate court.
Clearly the Attorney-General is not against referenda, for he is quite prepared to have one on the death penalty. For some reason it is a referendum on the so-called Caribbean Court of Justice that he is specifically against. Cock mout' kill cock! What might that reason be?
PUBLIC OPINION POLL
This is what is coming clearer to me. Every public opinion poll I have ever seen on the subject says that the vast majority of Jamaicans favour the death penalty. There is absolutely no doubt what the result of that referendum would be. But the polls do not indicate similar public support for putting aside appeals to the UK Privy Council. Therefore, the government supports a referendum on the death penalty, but is firmly against a referendum on halting appeals to the UK Privy Council. Very clear! They will only support a referendum they think they can win; and if they think they will lose, no referendum!
In a true democracy what is important is the will of the people. The Government as the implementers of democracy should be scrupulous about the will of the people. If the referendum shows that the people want to replace the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council with the so-called Caribbean Court of Justice, then so be it! But if the government believes the people will say "NO!", how can they proceed headlong down the opposite path? To me, that seems to be spitting in the face of democracy.
The Most Honourable Prime Minister and the Honourable Attorney-General from time to time couch the argument for the Caribbean Court in nationalistic terms: we must throw off the trappings of colonialism, and become a Jamaican or Caribbean state, and so on. If we really wanted to throw off the trappings of colonialism, then we would have already thrown off these ridiculous and meaningless pseudo-honorific titles based in the notorious British class system as the US and France and South Africa did when they liberated themselves. Have you ever heard the President of the United States or of France referred to as the "Most Honourable"? Or the US Secretary of State called "Honourable"? Cock mout' kill cock! No! They definitely want the trappings of colonialism.
MORE POWER
This "Most Honourable" business was introduced just last year. I am not fooled! They want to get rid of appeals to the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council because they want more power over you and me: they want a court of their own making. They have not so far proven themselves trustworthy by having their security forces respect our human rights; or by having their teachers actually teach our children to read, never mind to discover new vistas or new inventions; they have not so far proven themselves trustworthy even to ensure that there are fire engines in our towns to save our burning homes. How can they be trusted to create a Caribbean Court where justice is not only done but is manifestly seen to be done?
There is no one more nationalistic than I, wanting our young nation to paddle its own canoe. But we have to face facts: in our political system, many politicians are linked with unsavoury characters and with political garrisons where the only justice is barrel justice - from a gun barrel or stuffed in a barrel. We have not really been faithful in small things, and it is foolish and imprudent to reward our ramshackle democracy with more power concentrated at the top. The CSME will need a court to resolve trade disputes. Let the Caribbean Court be that, and leave intact our ability to appeal to the Judicial Committee of the UK Privy Council. We will be ready for more in time.
THAT TRINIDAD COUP
Yesterday was the fifteenth anniversary of that Caribbean Jihad, the eventually unsuccessful coup d'etat in our sister isle. The coup plotters still walk free, for they negotiated a Presidential pardon while they held their hostages, the validity of which was later upheld by a local court. Although the Judicial Committee of the UK Privy Council ruled that the pardon was obtained under duress and was therefore invalid, they were never re-arrested.
Peter Espeut is a sociologist and is executive director of an environment and development NGO.
