Lead Editor-Politics
akash.samaroo@cnc3.co.tt
Prime Minister Kamla Persad-Bissessar says she hopes the Caribbean Court of Justice (CCJ) can “sort themselves out soon” amid controversy surrounding the regional court’s leadership, but has declined to say whether her Government remains confident that the court can fairly determine the dispute over the reappointment of Caricom Secretary General Dr Carla Barnett.
Persad-Bissessar took this stance yesterday, after being asked by Guardian Media whether Government remained confident in the CCJ’s ability to fairly handle the Barnett matter, given allegations surrounding the court’s internal administration, including claims of judicial “panel-fixing” and attempts to influence judgments.
“I prefer not to comment,” Persad-Bissessar said when specifically asked about her confidence in the court fairly determining the Barnett issue.
However, when asked for her general view on the controversy engulfing CCJ President Winston Anderson, Persad-Bissessar said, “Hopefully they will sort themselves out soon to the benefit of everyone.”
Asked whether concerns about possible interference at the regional court reinforced Trinidad and Tobago’s longstanding reluctance to replace the Privy Council with the CCJ as its final appellate court, the PM said, “My opinions on Trinidad and Tobago remaining with the PC vs the CCJ are well known and haven’t changed.”
In July, Persad-Bissessar ruled out any immediate move for T&T to adopt the CCJ as its final court of appeal.
Although headquartered in Port-of-Spain, the CCJ does not serve as T&T’s final appellate court. That responsibility remains with the Privy Council. However, the CCJ has compulsory and exclusive jurisdiction to interpret and apply the Revised Treaty of Chaguaramas, meaning T&T falls under its jurisdiction on Caricom treaty matters.
Caricom leaders agreed to seek an advisory opinion from the CCJ following T&T’s objections to the process used to reappoint Barnett.
The controversy surrounding the court emerged after private email correspondence between CCJ judges was leaked, revealing concerns about President Anderson’s leadership. However, Anderson has rejected allegations that he improperly manipulated judicial panels or sought to influence the outcome of cases. The Regional Judicial and Legal Services Commission has since moved to investigate matters raised in the correspondence.
UWI prof: No reason to doubt CCJ
Professor of Commercial and Environmental Law Dr Rajendra Ramlogan, meanwhile, says he has seen nothing arising from the controversy that would cause him to doubt the CCJ’s ability to fairly adjudicate the Barnett matter.
Ramlogan, a former Integrity Commission chairman who previously called for the CCJ to provide an advisory opinion on Barnett’s reappointment, yesterday maintained his stance on the court.
“As to the broader question of confidence in the CCJ, I regard that as something of a non-starter in the present context,” Ramlogan told Guardian Media.
“The CCJ exercises both original and appellate jurisdiction, and I have seen nothing that would cause me to doubt its ability to adjudicate an original-jurisdiction matter fairly and according to law.”
Ramlogan cautioned against assessing the controversy solely on the leaked correspondence, saying other information in the public domain must also be considered.
“Considerable emphasis has been placed on leaked emails, but there are also public documents and statements issued by the CCJ, Caribbean judicial heads and the Chief Justice which present a different narrative,” he said.
“Justice is symbolised by a scale for a reason, it requires balance. To focus exclusively on leaked correspondence while disregarding other material already in the public domain risks creating precisely the imbalance that the administration of justice is intended to avoid.”
He said concerns about the CCJ, particularly among sections of the Indo-Trinidadian population, long predated the current controversy.
“There has long been a view in Trinidad and Tobago, particularly among sections of the Indo-Trinidadian population, that justice is more likely to be obtained from the Privy Council than from the Caribbean Court of Justice,” he said.
Ramlogan said dismissing such concerns simply as an attachment to colonialism failed to confront deeper fears about possible political interference in a regional judicial institution.
“The elephant in the room is the fear of political interference in the judicial functioning of the CCJ,” he said.
Ramlogan noted that the Privy Council has existed for almost 200 years compared with just over two decades for the CCJ, arguing more time may be required to overcome entrenched concerns in plural societies such as T&T.
“The Caribbean’s history with regional institutions has not always been stellar and therein lies one of the CCJ’s greatest challenges: it is sometimes burdened by the reputations of institutions other than itself,” he said.
However, he said the current controversy could not reasonably be used to vindicate either supporters or opponents of the regional court.
“The disquiet about the CCJ in some quarters has little to do with the present controversy surrounding leaked emails. These concerns have existed since the court’s inception,” he said.
He also noted that the agreement establishing the CCJ provides mechanisms for addressing allegations of misconduct involving the court’s highest office.
“If there is a genuine issue requiring investigation, the answer is not trial by public commentary. Let the law take its course.”
Caricom preparing documents in Barnett case
Meanwhile, Guardian Media understands that T&T has not yet reached the stage where it is required to make submissions on the Barnett matter, as Caricom is still assembling the documentation necessary to formally advance the issue before the CCJ.
Caricom chairman and St Lucia Prime Minister Philip J Pierre met Persad-Bissessar here in Port-of-Spain last week and updated her on efforts to seek the advisory opinion.
Guardian Media understands that, as chairman of the Conference of Heads of Government, Pierre has responsibility for advancing aspects of the process, with documentation being prepared through the Caricom Secretariat. That material is expected to set out the relevant facts and issues surrounding Barnett’s reappointment before member states are given an opportunity to present their respective positions. Once that stage is completed, T&T would then be able to make its submissions.
The CCJ previously explained that once a request for an advisory opinion is received, its Registrar must serve the request on all Caricom member states and Barnett within 14 days. Those served are then entitled to submit written arguments within 42 days.
There is currently no firm timeline for completion of Caricom’s preparatory process.
The CCJ confirmed in July that it had not yet received Caricom’s formal request for the advisory opinion.
CCJ leadership controversy
The core issue: Leaked internal correspondence published in Trinidad and Tobago newspapers revealed serious rift-inducing allegations among the bench, including accusations of panel-fixing, improper leadership conduct, and attempts to influence judicial outcomes.
Specific allegations & dispute: The leaks highlighted internal friction following the removal of a judge from an interlocutory panel (D’Almada v. Trinidad and Tobago), alongside concerns raised by political figures and judges regarding external interactions over judicial appointments in Guyana.
President’s denials & response: CCJ President Justice Winston Anderson strongly rejected all allegations of panel-fixing or judgment manipulation, explaining that the judge’s removal from the panel was strictly due to a failure to adhere to established court dress codes (wearing traditional national dress instead of business attire). Justice Anderson also condemned the unauthorised leak as “wholly unacceptable” for judicial independence, acknowledged he could have handled certain internal matters less forcefully and announced that going forward, every judge will sit on every panel to ensure complete transparency.
