THE Government and Opposition appear to be softening their respective stances on the matter of Jamaica’s final court of appeal, after former Prime Minister Bruce Golding insisted that constitutional reform, and ultimately achieving republic status, will not happen unless both political parties come to a compromise on this contentious matter.

Both parties seem to be willing to hash out their differences and attain consensus so that the constitutional reform process can move forward.

Minister of Legal and Constitutional Affairs Marlene Malahoo Forte, who is leading the constitutional reform process, said she appreciates Golding’s take on the issue, “and how it will either close the door or provide passage is one of the most useful exposés that I’ve heard recently, acknowledging the merits of both sides”.

“What he has done is made the case convincingly for another approach to be taken. And for all who say that so much more needs to be done, we know that. And don’t for one moment think that we are not working on it….one of the concerns that we have been addressing though…is how much can we realistically get done at this stage of the life of the Parliament — when you’ll require collaboration [and in an atmosphere in] which you’re prone to competing.

“It’s something that we will have to look at, and we have to balance it against whether we waste the time. Waste may not be the appropriate word but we have to use every bit of the life of Parliament to get this work done. It is way too important,” she said at a forum last Tuesday held at the Faculty of Law, The University of the West Indies, Mona campus.

The Opposition People’s National Party (PNP) and the governing Jamaica Labour Party (JLP) have been in a deadlock over the issue. The PNP has said it wants both the removal of the British monarch as head of State and dropping the United Kingdom-based Privy Council in favour of the Caribbean Court of Justice (CCJ) as the nation’s final court to be addressed at the same time, and not on a phased basis as the Government has proposed.

During the session, dubbed A Reasoning with Mr Orette Bruce Golding about Reform of the Jamaica Constitution and De-Linking from the British Monarchy, the former prime minister said: “We are at that point where, sadly, the momentum towards constitutional reform has been disrupted by the issue of the CCJ. That is the elephant in the room. That elephant has grown fatter and more boisterous by the way in which the debate about it has been conducted.”

Golding reminded that, “nothing can happen, nothing in terms of constitutional reform, nothing in terms of the CCJ, without consensus”.

“This adversarial approach will never work. Neither side in that argument can browbeat the other side into submission. It has to be consensus, not coercion,” he stressed.

In response to Golding, Malahoo Forte said she was renewing her commitment to “ensuring that, even in the face of disagreement, that we will make progress on the reform of our constitution. We must do it. We cannot afford to raise it again, and let it fall flat…half a loaf sometimes is better than no loaf at all. Let’s continue to make progress”.

PNP President Mark Golding has said that the PNP would not be supporting the move to establish Jamaica as a republic if the CCJ is placed on the back burner.

Malahoo Forte on Tuesday noted, however, that while “we want it all, we may not be able to do it all at once. And it is my hope that with all the distraction, and in spite of our political differences, that we will create some space to be guided”.

Also appearing to be willing to come to a compromise, Opposition Senator Floyd Morris, during the session, said he believes Bruce Golding and former Prime Minister PJ Patterson both have “a fundamental role to play in this consensus-building effort, going forward”.

“And I think that it wouldn’t be foolish to have yourself, former Prime Minister Patterson, Prime Minister [Andrew Holness], the leader of the Opposition, sitting down at Vale Royal, or wherever, to discuss how we move forward and get consensus on some of these critical issues that are needed in terms of constitutional reform,” he said.

In the meantime, zeroing in on an aspect of Golding’s presentation where he said he was “uncomfortable about the fact that the right of appeal to the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council, which is specified in our constitution, is really not a right that our constitution has the power to bestow”, Malahoo Forte said that has to be looked at in the context of The King being the head of State, and that the 1833 Judicial Committee Act which governs Jamaica’s access to the Privy Council also has to be looked at in that context.

“So the question is not whether we have a right that we can enforce in the constitution, but what will happen to it when The King is no longer head of State. That is really how it will have to be assessed because of the link between The King, as head of State; the availability of institutions by virtue of that headship; and when the change is made, what will happen. So, to my mind, some of the things that appear unclear will become clearer once that change is made, because if something rests on a foundation that will no longer be there, then they will go,” she said.

Golding interjected to say that Trinidad and Dominica “seemed to have worked it out”, to which Malahoo Forte responded, “When Trinidad transitioned [to a republic] the CCJ was not in existence, so I have found a reference to the Trinidadian example as going to a certain point and no further. Yes, it does provide precedent that you can continue in a relationship with a Privy Council without having The King as head of State, but you have to bear in mind when that was done,” she said.