Attorney-at-law Valerie Neita-Robertson cannot be credibly described as reactionary, backward, anti-regionalist, or any of the other derogatory terms used to described people who argue that it is not time to exit the United Kingdom-based Privy Council.

Ms Neita-Robertson has earned her spurs as a vaunted Queen’s Counsel (QC) on the basis of a high-level professional career that has set her apart in the Jamaican justice system. Even when we disagree with her, it is with all respect due.

We are therefore likely to pay attention when she advises about the shortcomings of the justice system to which she has given the best of herself, and especially when she counsels us not to dispense with the UK Privy Council.

Justifiably exultant after saving an ex-cop from a very long sojourn in prison for the heinous crime of murder that was never proven, Ms Neita-Robertson declared on her Twitter page Monday:

“Justice lives. Justice delivered for an innocent man by the Privy Council. It’s heart-[rending] that the land of your birth did not — long live the Privy Council! I live for justice which has no race or colour.”

The attorney, along with colleague QC Mr Patrick Atkinson, was savouring the joy of seeing her client, Mr Lascene Edwards’ case succeed when the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council quashed his 2013 conviction for the 2003 shooting death of his girlfriend.

The legal team had lost the case in the Jamaican Appeal Court which, for its part, had reduced his 35-year sentence to 20 years. On Monday, the Privy Council, in delivering judgement in the case, said a substantial miscarriage of justice had occurred and that the conviction of Mr Edwards cannot stand.

It further said that the former constable’s right to a fair trial within a reasonable time under Section 16 of the Constitution of Jamaica had been breached by a 10-year delay between arrest and trial.

Ms Neita-Robertson told a radio interviewer of another case in which her client had been convicted of murder in Jamaica but had been found not guilty by the UK Privy Council after looking at a video used against the client, but in which he did not appear, upon closer examination.

We do not argue that the Caribbean Court of Justice (CCJ) could not have arrived at similar judgement in both cases had Jamaica joined the Trinidad-based court as our final court of appeal. Neither would Ms Neita-Robertson, we suspect.

Our fear is, as we have stated before, our regional politicians, at least a good number of them, are predisposed to interfere in the legal process, using their extensive links and personal contacts to frustrate nearly every system, including the justice system.

Moreover, as we have said before, and it bears repeating: “To a greater or lesser extent, the people of the Caribbean have no confidence that they will get justice when they need it. Witnesses are intimidated at will; court files routinely disappear; evidence is frequently contaminated or compromised; cases are sabotaged by corrupt officers; and there is a never-ending backlog of cases, causing people to take justice into their own hands.”

Let’s work on making our justice system in Jamaica and the region a model of efficiency, objectivity, fairness, and a safe space for our people to take their grievances with utmost confidence.