Delroy Chuck
WHEN THE Prime Minister, P.J. Patterson, told parliament that those who wanted a referendum to replace the Privy Council with the Caribbean Court of Justice (CCJ) should 'fagget it', he did not realise he would eat his words. The final court of appeal, the Opposition declares, is of such fundamental importance to
governance, our constitutional arrangement and the structure of government that it is a matter for the decision of the people. Now, in the light of Privy Council Appeal No. 41 of 2004, and the relentless determination of the opposition to take the matter to the people, Mr. Patterson has no choice.
In his meeting with Dr. Kenneth Baugh, when the latter paid a courtesy call on him, Mr. Patterson has raised a number of other constitutional issues for discussion and decision. What Mr. Patterson seeks to do is to soften the telling blow of the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council's (JCPC) ruling on the three CCJ bills by tying other constitutional issues into the mix and, I daresay, to confuse the issues. For the past 20 years and more, both sides have failed to settle the form and substance of the future head of state to replace the queen. For the past three years and more, a parliamentary
committee has discussed and wrangled over the changes for the Charter of Rights and Freedom, without any settlement. The retention or abolition of capital punishment will never be settled, it is a strongly
emotional issue. Why bring them into the mix at this time?
NO HORSE-TRADING
On the issues of justice, rights, freedoms and the constitution, there must be no horse-trading. On each issue, we must seek what is best for the Jamaican people. To the great credit of the former leader of Opposition, Edward Seaga, whenever I
discussed matters of justice with him, he reminded me that when it comes to justice, it is non-negotiable, by which he meant that, when it comes to the dispensing of justice, we must have the courage and vision to seek the best. On important constitutional issues and the form of government, the Opposition holds, we must have a package that is in the best interests and
of maximum benefit to the Jamaican people.
When Mr. Patterson brings in other matters of national importance, therefore, I hope he understands that the Opposition has some, too. For example, will we seek a constitutional restraint on government to print money or to increase the country's indebtedness? Will we demand an impeachment agreement for
corruption and malfeasance of public servants? Will we finally settle on a methodology by which we select or elect persons
to important and sensitive
government posts such as our judges, DPP, police commissioner, etc.? The prime minister cannot expect to present a working list of matters to be discussed and the Opposition simply accepts them without adding more.
ORIGINAL JURISDICTION
OF THE CCJ
I am fully aware that the CCJ is of major significance to the inception and working of the CARICOM Single Market and Economy (CSME), certainly in its original jurisdiction. Rather than bundling a whole menu of constitutional issues for discussion, I would have thought that the government would seek to untangle the CCJ in its original jurisdiction from its role as a final appellate court. As a trade court, most Caribbean territories are agreed. The CSME can be very beneficial to the whole Caribbean and a useful precursor to the Free Trade Area of the Americas (FTAA) and full implementation of the World Trade Organisation (WTO) agreements. Is the government prepared to introduce the CCJ in its original jurisdiction alone, while delaying entry to the appellate jurisdiction?
It seems to me that Caribbean territories want the CSME, of which the CCJ in its original jurisdiction is necessary. As a trade court, let's get on with it. However, in its appellate
jurisdiction, there are some issues that need sorting out. For example, the unwholesome
spectacle of having distinguished lawyers and judges applying for judicial posts cannot be supported. Distinguished legal luminaries should be recognised and invited to serve, with the additional checks and balances that could be devised to make the process open, transparent and acceptable to the Caribbean people.
In essence, the Opposition will want to re-examine the Treaty Agreement and ensure Opposition parties throughout the Caribbean are supportive of the CCJ as a final appellate court, as only then can we secure the trust and
confidence of the Caribbean
people and the court's stability and security of tenure forever.
Delroy Chuck is an
attorney-at-law and opposition member of parliament. He can be contacted by email at delchuck@hotmail.com.
