LIVINGSTONE THOMPSONLIVINGSTONE THOMPSON
I AM appalled that the recent ruling by the United Kingdom-based Privy Council on the attempt of the Jamaican Government to establish the Caribbean Court of Justice, as the country's final appellate court, is being hailed as a victory for Jamaica. It seems that as a consequence of this ruling, Jamaica will have to go a different route than the simple majority of the Parliament, in seeking to establish the court in its appellate jurisdiction. Clearly, it is a victory for the Jamaica Labour Party (JLP), the Jamaican Bar Association, the Independent Council for Human Rights and the pressure group Jamaicans for Justice.
However, I do not regard a victory for these groups as necessarily a victory for Jamaica. These groups, with the exception of the JLP, are not peoples' organisations. They are élitist pressure groups, which seem more committed to controlling the elected people's representatives that any thing else. They are not interested in the masses of the Jamaican people. The Jamaican people did not name them as their spokespersons. The JLP, for its part, is always looking for political mileage because they seem unable to convince the broad electorate that that party is still capable of providing adequate leadership for the Jamaica people.
NOTION OF REFERENDUM
They hoped that by raising the referendum flag they would conjure up the failed West Indies Federation, in which that party gained political capital. They have always used the notion of referendum to frighten the People's National Party (PNP) and they in turn seem to believe that the Jamaican people are too foolish to make a distinction between the experiments of the 1960s and now.
Only the Lord in heaven knows what got into the heads of the PNP leadership to have gone down this track in arguing that there is no need for a referendum before the court is established. The thing they fear the most may be the thing that will cost them the most.
But let's get back to this idea of victory for the Jamaican people. When the children of Israel left Egypt, according to Bible (Numbers 14: 2 and 4), all the Israelites complained against Moses and Aaron saying, "Would that we had died in Egypt ... So they said to one anothe. Let us choose a captain, and go back to Egypt." It seems to me that that is the kind of victory that has been won by the Privy Council's ruling.
The victory is a victory for those who want to go backwards. It is a ruling in favour of retardation. It is a ruling against progress towards self-determination. It is a ruling that plays nicely into the hands of those who have no confidence in the people of the region to be fair and just.
It is a ruling that reinforces the notion that justice that is given by those who regarded (and may still regard) themselves as our masters is the best because they know how to be impartial and they know what is best for us. It is a ruling that smacks of the same paternalism that we have come to know from Britain. It is a ruling that people like Mutty Perkins will rejoice in because they seem to hold the view that the state has failed, that we have made no progress since 1962 and also that things were better for us as a people under the colonial governance of Britain. In their view, it is better that we go back.
Sadly, the ruling by the Privy Council has to be accepted because we still have that court as our final court of appeal. We would be fools to think, though, that because they have made this ruling that they are correct. Worse than that, it would be foolish of us to think that these law lords are free from bias and self-interest. In their interpretation of the constitution, they have found the case put forward by the pressure groups and the JLP to be more convincing. This has challenged the government to rethink its strategy and maybe even to rethink its personnel.
TESTING REAL COMMITMENT
The ruling is also an opportunity to test the real commitment of the JLP and the other groups, whether they are truly interested in cutting the knot that has tied us to 'Mother country'. If the suggestion made by the former leader of the Opposition is any thing to go by, I do not believe that anyone of the victorious groups is in favour of severing ties with the United Kingdom-based Privy Council. According to Mr. Seaga, the appellate jurisdiction of the CCJ should be established for ten years on a trial basis, during which time the Privy Council would remain the final court. However, one cannot see why one would bother to approach an intermediary court when it is not a final court. That idea is simply rubbish and is only a camouflage for a half-hearted commitment to a regional integration process.
The JLP and the pressure groups can go ahead and gloat over a ruling that delays the advance towards full self-determination. It is only a pity that the ruling came at a time when we are looking again at the contribution that people like Bob Marley have made to the mental emancipation of the Jamaican people. I hardly think that the Rastafarians and those who appreciate their anti-Babylon position will rejoice in this ruling of the Privy Council, unless off course I misunderstand what Marley meant when he sang "emancipate yourself from mental slavery, none but ourselves can free our mind."
Rev. Dr. Livingstone Thompson is
president of the Moravian Church in Jamaica. Emails may be sent to
moravianchja@colis.com
