Former member of parliament and ex-senator Dr Christopher Tufton agrees with a suggestion for a referendum to be held on issues facing Jamaica, simultaneously with the holding of a national election.

Tufton, in an exclusive interview with the Jamaica Observer recently, was asked specifically if he would support the twinning of a national election with a referendum on the Caribbean Court of Justice (CCJ).

Jamaica’s parliamentarians are haggling over whether or not there ought to be a referendum on this north Caribbean island of 2.8 million inhabitants accepting the CCJ as its final appellate court. Such a move would further gnaw away at Jamaica’s neo-colonial system, which still sees the United Kingdom Privy Council as the final court of appeal.

Tufton, a social scientist who served as minister of agriculture and later industry and commerce minister under the Jamaica Labour Party (JLP) Administration of 2007-2011, said that such a move to find out from the people would be ideal.

“The party’s (JLP’s) manifesto, the committee of which I was chairman a couple of years ago, took a position on the CCJ and it was a position that was considered and discussed collectively,” Tufton told the Sunday Observer.

“While there are some advantages to the CCJ, we feel that the people should have a voice, should lend their voice to the decision. So it’s not that you are saying you object to it, it’s just the extent that some people participate in that process,” Tufton said.

While the JLP has stated repeatedly that deciding Jamaica’s final appellate court should be done by way of a referendum, the ruling People’s National Party (PNP) remains adamant that a simple two-thirds majority vote by both houses of Parliament — the Senate and the House of Representatives — would settle all arguments.

While the PNP has a two-thirds majority in the House of Representatives, the Government needs the vote of one Opposition senator for it to be approved.

Tufton, who has removed himself from the upfront political limelight since the JLP’s bruising internal leadership election last November, insists that the proverbial slaying of two birds with one shot could work.

“It would be a good exercise, because there are still differences of opinion on it, and the truth is that there are still people within our party who support it outright and there are people who don’t. But there is a collective position that says let’s use that to determine as part of the decision-making process. I see that as a valuable exercise that could be done,” he insisted.

Tufton argued that other elements could be brought into play.

“It could be decided and determined as part of a general election. Look at elections in the United States, sometimes the ballot is elaborate… If you had one other ballot for people to make another decision, logistically, I am sure it would be very feasible. We would just have to work out the process. You go to vote, you go through the same identification process, you get two ballots, push one for the CCJ and one for the candidate. It wouldn’t be a difficulty. It would be easy.

“If it is an issue of cost, as opposed to a fundamental issue of principle, then the Government could signal its intention to link that indicative position to the next set of general elections, whether they are parochial (local government) or general. We have a parochial election that is due March 2015, which gives you a year and three months, which would be an appropriate time for a robust debate on issues. The time has come, as part of engaging the populace, for us to identify issues of national importance and give a greater voice to the populace to comment on those issues of national importance, outside of elected representatives in Parliament, who certainly act on behalf of those who vote but don’t necessarily represent the majority view at any point in time,” Tufton said.

Arguing that it could be a good feature of Jamaica’s democracy that could represent a more engaging populace, Tufton said that there are some fundamental positions in terms of governance that could be influenced by that.

“The very issue of the Senate, for example … I take note that some have been arguing for independent senators to be appointed and that may be a good issue.

“You could line up your election schedules, whether there should be a fixed election date, as opposed to a variable date based on decisions, and you link them to an election programme, because it would enrich the democratic process, in that it gives the average man an opportunity to speak,” he said.

“What would be critical is that while parties maintain their stance on the right to support a particular position… the voters will understand that they have an opportunity to support a position that may be contrary, based on their conviction and what they believe in, and they would certainly feel more engaged in the process, in making a decision.

“A position related to Caricom, one related to independent senators and the composition of the Senate, a position related to the CCJ, a position related to gay rights, and more could be introduced,” Tufton argued.

“Those who run from that, or seem to, as the PNP is giving the reason that we don’t need it, opting for a two-thirds majority; should be encouraged to recognise that a two-thirds may not reflect the voice of the majority,” he stated.

Two weeks ago, relatively inexperienced JLP Senator Alexander Williams rehashed a suggestion made public initially by then Prime Minister Bruce Golding, for Jamaica to have its own final court of appeal entrenched in the Constitution as a Jamaican symbol, rather than go the route of the CCJ, or maintain the Privy Council.

Former JLP Senator Arthur Williams, who once led Opposition business in the Upper House, and Tufton, have alleged that senators whom Holness appointed in January 2012, had signed undated resignation letters to be used, should they depart from the party’s position on the CCJ.

The matter is still in court.