KINGSTON, Jamaica (CMC) – The opposition Jamaica Labour Party (JLP) has warned the government it should not expect support from opposition legislators in the Senate as Jamaica moves to have the Trinidad-based Caribbean Court of Justice (CCJ) as its final court of appeal.

Leader of Government Business in the House of Representatives, Phillip Paulwell, said recently that he believes some members of the JLP could have a different position on the matter and would give the support required when the matter is brought to the Senate for debate.

But the Leader of the Opposition Business in the Senate, Arthur Williams, has dismissed Paulwell’s views reminding the country that the opposition remains united on its position with regards to the CCJ that was established in 2001 to replace the London-based Privy Council as the region’s highest court.

“There is absolutely no such likelihood. The opposition has a position which has been recently restated by the Opposition Leader. That is the party’s position…the opposition’s position.

“Let me make it clear that I know of no talks being held between the government and the opposition in respect of the CCJ and we will maintain the position that we have stated over many years,” Williams added.

The government needs a two-thirds majority to pass the CCJ Bills.

Opposition Leader Andrew Hollness last week said the JLP remained steadfast in not supporting the legislation, arguing there were more important issues to be dealt with in the country.

The JLP wants a referendum on the CCJ, which the government says it does not support. 

Last week, president of the Jamaican Bar Association (JBA), Ian Wilkinson called on the political parties to intensify their discussions regarding the CCJ. He also dismissed the notion of a referendum.

“Why should we have a referendum, when the JLP, the second major player in the Parliament says it supports and accepts the CCJ? Of course, I want my people to choose its court, but the two major parties right now who represent the people have agreed that the court should be the final court. Why then should we need a referendum?” argued Wilkinson.

He said the referendum could become a political tool and fail to fulfil its purpose.