Linton P. Gordon
The pronouncement by Andrew Holness the leader of the Jamaica Labour Party (JLP) in regard to the Caribbean Court of Justice (CCJ) and the retention of the Privy Council should hopefully be the spewing of emotions in the heat of a political conference and not the product of a well thought out policy. In declaring that his party’s decision to hang on to the Privy Council as our final Court because it is a well-recognized Court is to suggest that our Courts and the Judges who preside in our Courts are not trustworthy and further suggests they do not enjoy a reputation and are not competent at the level that would make him accept a final Court in the Caribbean. This is most unfortunate as this attitude of the JLP to belittle our local judiciary and to portray them as less honest, less objective and less competent than members of the Privy Council is a backward colonial view from which we ought to have moved on years ago. The JLP is running the risk of finding that more and more Jamaicans see the party as an elitist party which has a belief that black Caribbean people cannot manage their own affairs and need the “white master” from England to oversee and supervise us in the management of our affairs. Perhaps the time has come for members of the legal profession who are members of the JLP to host a seminar and make some presentations to the public outlining all the arguments they are putting forward in preference of the Privy Council over the Caribbean Court of Justice.
LAWYERS IN THE JLP
In presenting these arguments they should go through a list of Judges of the Supreme Court of Jamaica and the Court of Appeal of Jamaica and show us, in a convincing way, the areas in which these Judges are lesser Judges then the Judges who preside in the Privy Council. Justice Seymour Panton, the President of the Court Of Appeal for example is a very long serving and experienced Judge. He is senior to, and more experienced than some of the Judges sitting in the Privy Council. Mr. Holness needs to tell us what it is about these Judges in England that would make them more competent and capable than the Judges in the Caribbean and in a particular the very experienced and knowledgeable. Justice Seymour Panton. Are we to understand from Mr Holness that should Mr Justice Panton be appointed Judge of the Caribbean Court of Justice, he would not trust him, he would not have confidence in him and believe that he would not give an honest, objective Judgment in matters he presides over? Are we to believe that this is the view of the attorneys who are members of the JLP? The Judicial Committee of the Privy Council is the final Court of Jamaica only in theory and not in practice. Nearly all the cases presented to the Privy Council from Jamaica are either cases of convicts, that is to say, criminal cases or cases for the very wealthy and rich members of the society. Over 99% of Jamaicans are excluded from access to the Privy Council because of the cost of getting matters before that Court and the need to obtain a visa from the British High Commission in order to go to England.
CONVICTS AND WEALTHY
At present the cost of applying for a visa to go to England is £83 (Pounds sterling) which converts to about $14,110 Jamaican Dollars. The cost of the visa for 1 year is £300 (three hundred Pounds Sterling) which converts to $51,100 Jamaican Dollars. The airfare to England is about Jamaican $165,000 and accommodation in London is about £160 (one hundred and sixty Pounds Sterling) per night, that is about Ja$27,200 per person. If one stays for a week that would be Jamaican $190,400 Of course meals, transportation and other miscellaneous expense would be added. The Barrister who you would need to attend and represent you before the Privy Council may charge about £150 (one hundred and fifty Pounds Sterling) per hour. If you hire an Attorney from Jamaica, while he may charge a figure less than that of the Barrister, you would have to pay his fare and pay for about a week’s stay at a hotel in London for him. No poor Jamaican is using the Privy Council and none of them can use it. It is therefore not a People’s Court. It is a Court for convicts and wealthy persons who can afford it.
Mr. Holness and his party are therefore content with a Court that by virtue of its structures, venue and expenses discriminates against the vast major of Jamaicans. It is a court which nearly all the members on the floor of the Conference Mr. Holness was addressing cannot use because they do not have the resources to use that Court. The position taken by Mr. Holness on The Caribbean Court of Justice is inconsistent with the outcome of the Shanique Myrie case. Myrie complained to that Court about the way she was treated in a Caribbean Caricom state and she got justice. Mr. Holness cannot therefore condemn the Court as part of his condemnation of Caricom. It is all well and good to make popular and simplistic statements at a political conference. However one striving to be the leader of a country and who has committed to looking about the welfare of the citizens of that country must be honest and truthful to them. Mr. Holness needs to accept that 99% of us are excluded from the Privy Council and by virtue of this; it is only in theory our final Court.
