IT was a significant coincidence for reflection that the day after Andrew Holness, parliamentary Opposition leader of the Jamaica Labour Party (JLP), declared he was in no mood at this time to support his country’s access to the Caribbean Court of Justice (CCJ) as its final appellate institution, both the Jamaica Observer and the Barbados Nation published editorials critical of his party’s continuing negative positions against this most vital court of the Caribbean Community (Caricom).

In response to Mr Holness’s contention that a combination of prevailing economic problems afflicting Caricom and Jamaica make it inappropriate, at this time, for his party to agree with the governing People’s National Party (PNP) to access the regional institution as its final appeal court, the title of the Nation’s editorial was quite explicit: ‘Now is the time for Jamaica to join the CCJ’.

As the Nation sees it, the JLP leader should be forthcoming in ensuring his party’s support for the

PNP Administration’s current parliamentary initiative to break with the Privy Council in favour of the CCJ as its final appeal court.

On that same day (November 18, 2014), the Jamaica Observer was editorialising in blunt terms that neither the problems afflicting Caricom or this nation could seriously be reason to further delay accessing the CCJ as Jamaica’s court of last resort; the current status being perpetuated with the Privy Council in London.

For its part, the Observer was adamant in its contention as expressed in last Tuesday’s editorial: “We have not seen or heard anything from the JLP that would cause us to review our conviction that one of the problems the party faces on this issue is the fact that it took such a strong position against the CCJ during its previous stint in Opposition that it would lose face were it to now embrace the court in its totality…”

Sad truth

The sad truth is that accessing the CCJ as the final court of appeal remains a problem not only for Jamaica but also Trinidad and Tobago.

Indeed, it is quite distressing to note that in November 2014 — some 52 years after Jamaica and Trinidad and Tobago formally severed the colonial relationship with Britain — they maintain a strange preference for the Privy Council in London as their final appellate institution instead of the Port of Spain-based CCJ.

Consequently, having voluntarily signed the treaty establishing the CCJ in 2001, with commitment to abide by its jurisdiction as their court of last resort, both

countries — which became independent within weeks of each other in August 1962 — continue to dither on ending the colonial relationship with the Privy Council.

The JLP maintains a strange consistency — in and out of government and changing party leadership — by ignoring the reality of its own original commitment to access the CCJ as the country’s final appellate institution.

Question for two PMs

The question of the day is when would be the opportune time for Holness and his JLP to cease referencing problems confronting Caricom to justify continuing failure to adhere to Jamaica’s expressed treaty commitment to access the CCJ as its court of last resort?

Likewise, when does the current Administration of Prime Minister Kamla Persad-Bissessar intend to bring an end to its not-so-clever word game and political choreography in delaying access of the CCJ as Trinidad and Tobago’s final appellate institution?

Both countries, under changing administrations (PNM and UNC), have been less than forthcoming in vigorously pressing ahead with relevant initiatives in parliament to hasten access of the CCJ as their final appeal court — an institution increasngly being recognised by regional and international legal luminaries who continue to sing its praise.

Three and counting

I have been advised that the US$100 million originally raised on the international money market by the Caribbean Development Bank, on Caricom’s request, for establishment and maintenance of the CCJ have been repaid with Jamaica and Trinidad and Tobago as the leading partners to the agreement.

The judgements so far delivered by the CCJ — whether involving intra-regional trade, free movement for Community nationals (recall the case of Shanique Myrie vs Barbados Government) — are still being applauded.

Sadly, though, some 13 years after its ceremonial inauguration, just three countries — Barbados, Guyana and Belize — have fully accessed the CCJ as their court of last resort, with Dominica in the process of becoming the fourth.

Others continue to signal commitment to access it also as their final appellate institution “soon”.

Referendum talk

But exactly when will either Jamaica or Trinidad and Tobago cut the incessant talk and make a reality of the CCJ as their final appeal court?

Well, by last Wednesday, following –coincidentally, maybe — a commentary by this columnist, Prime Minister Kamla Persad-Bissessar was telling parliament that legislation was forthcoming for a national referendum on Trinidad and Tobago scuttling the existing relationship with the Privy Council and installing the CCJ as its replacement final appeal court.

When, exactly, remains unanswered. But she said the proposed referendum would be part of “a package of constitutional reform now being considered by her Administration…”

I recall some similar talk of a referendum on the CCJ previously. Now, with the political dancing by the JLP in Kingston and the UNC-led People’s Partnership Administration in Port of Spain, the teasing question is which would be first in cutting the colonial apron strings with the Privy Council in favour of the CCJ as its final court of appeal — Jamaica or Trinidad and Tobago?

How pitiful that any such question should be asked 52 years after these two Caricom states became independent.

Rickey Singh is a Barbados-based noted Caribbean journalist.