As I observed the ceremonial opening of Parliament and listened to the customary presentation of the Throne Speech, I was once again revolted at the persistence of these vestiges of our colonial legacy and how unhurried we are in putting them behind us.

Due to illness, the sitting governor general (GG), Patrick Allen, was not able to deliver the speech, but this was ably done by his deputy, the custos of Kingston Steadman Fuller. I said “ably” because, as is well known, the Throne Speech has to rank as one of the most uninspiring and boring speeches that you can ever listen to.

To begin with, it is a speech crafted by the sitting Government and handed to the GG, The King’s representative in Jamaica, to deliver. It is hardly a speech but a statement or recitation of the Government’s achievements and indications of what they will do in the future, particularly in the new financial year. Given the circumstances of the speech, Fuller equipped himself well, dissipating its built-in boredom, even though it was not his own creation. I asked myself the question as to whether this is part of a tradition that the constitutional reform committee wants to perpetuate in installing a ceremonial president in a new Jamaican republic.

An interesting aspect of the speech is the Government’s assertion of its intention to settle the matter of Jamaica’s final appellate jurisdiction during this financial year by a referendum. Will the matter be put on the ballot for the upcoming parliamentary election due by September? I cannot see the plausibility or practicality of a national referendum on any matter being conducted in the same year as a parliamentary election. If it is going to go beyond September, as the financial year ends March 2026, the Government would obviously be banking on winning the election. This is to read political tea leaves and coming up with a pre-packaged result.

It is not really far-fetched for the matter to be on the parliamentary ballot. What can be called into question is the amount of time that will be allotted to discussing the three options that are on the table. Do we remain with the Privy Council, adopt the Caribbean Court of Justice (CCJ), or make our Supreme Court the final jurisdiction? My position is clear that the national dignity and sovereignty of a people first and foremost have to be the determinants of the court’s location, so it ought to be brought home fully to Jamaica. It should not be left to linger in some halfway house in another part of the Caribbean. This would be tantamount to a prisoner being released from detention and having to spend time in a facility before being released into the general population. For those who believe that Jamaica is not ready because of the state of our justice system, I ask the question: If not now, when? When will we ever be ready?

Such aversion ignores the significant improvements that have taken place in the justice system. It ignores also the fact that over 80 per cent of cases referred to the Law Lords in England are upheld by them. We have some of the brightest legal minds in Jamaica who can hold their own in any legal jurisdiction in the world. Finally, it is a matter of access, and this has to do with cost. Inordinate costs and diplomatic arrangements, like having a visa, should not be allowed to impose burdens on any Jamaican seeking justice in his own country. For me, it is simply a matter of a person driving from St Elizabeth or any other parish to the Supreme Court in downtown Kingston to attend to his or her legal business. Here there is no visa, no airfare, no engagement with lawyers in other jurisdictions that tend to increase costs to worry about. Burdensome costs are a bane to the dispensation of justice.

Stay out, Patterson

When you have no iron in the fire, no horse in the race, no axe to grind, or no hidden agenda that drives you, you are able to say or write things about people and situations which vested parties would not, or perhaps could not, do. The announcement by former Prime Minister PJ Patterson about his willingness to re-enter the partisan political fray leading to the next parliamentary election is a case in point.

Patterson has been blessed with a long life. Apart from certain policies in which he indulged during his stint as prime minister, with which I have vehemently disagreed, he is someone for whom I have a great deal of respect. I remember the many conversations we had at Jamaica House when he was prime minister about several of these policies of which I was very critical in my writings. I was impressed by his values and attitude initiative which, if they were pursued with greater tenacity and purpose, could have arrested much of the social rot that we see today.

He is now an elder statesman and as such sit in an elite club of former prime ministers. From this perch he has the honour of giving the country the benefit of his experience. I do not believe that getting back on the partisan political field is the correct approach. He should stand above the fray. If he feels his experience is not being effectively utilised by just sitting in the pavilion, there are many other ways in which he can lend his expertise to the people of Jamaica. Perhaps he is under pressure by his party to get involved, but he would be well advised against this approach.

Dr Raulston Nembhard is a priest, social commentator, and author of the books Finding Peace in the Midst of Life’s Storms; Your Self-esteem Guide to a Better Life; and Beyond Petulance: Republican Politics and the Future of America. He hosts a podcast — Mango Tree Dialogues — on his You Tube channel. Send comments to the Jamaica Observer or stead6655@aol.com.