Wesley Gibbings
This year, the Divali holiday falls on November 6. On this occasion, most people here routinely join with Hindus in celebrating "the victory of light over darkness". Few better occasions to contemplate the prospects for the Caribbean Court of Justice (CCJ) which, on that very day, will be the focus of attention for the people of Antigua & Barbuda and Grenada, through referenda on accession to the court.
First, some disclosure. I am a wholehearted supporter of the CCJ. While I was employed at the Caricom Secretariat in Guyana, I witnessed the diligent, technical framing of the CCJ agreement to give it life as an indispensable institution of the Revised Treaty of Chaguaramas. Subsequently, I was also involved in two exercises to gauge public awareness of the CSME—which emerges out of the revised treaty—and the CCJ.
In both instances, it was evident that darkness prevailed in the public space; even among the responsible elites expected to lead public opinion on both subjects. In the latter instance, it was clear that the legal community had abdicated its responsibility, especially in the early stages, to join the public discourse on the CCJ in a rational, committed and informed manner.
One senior attorney shrugged it off as "a hanging court" (the court has since ruled against the mandatory death penalty) while some appeared unaware of the court's dual roles. These people are seen as opinion leaders in such matters, so it was understandable that public opinion would have been way off the expected mark when it was analysed by a team of us.
It is now 17 years since the first group of CARICOM nations affixed their signatures to the CCJ agreement, so there is no excuse for ignorance on the part of people who guide and influence public opinion on such important matters. But it is clear—not because of continuing ambivalence, but because of continuing misconceptions about the court—that the responsible elites have not been considering the CCJ option in any serious manner.
One of the reasons for this (which I have mentioned in this space before) is that the CCJ offers to the region an institution that has the potential to be subversive to the social and political status quo. It is no "baby step", it is a leap into a different set of power arrangements with the potential to shift increasing responsibility for our affairs onto our own laps.
Don't feel too bad about it though. Even the British, whose revered institutions we honour highly, bounced their collective heads on the Brexit vote two years ago. I also happened to be there on the eve of the June 23, 2016, vote and was appalled at ill-informed public opinion leading up to the 52 per cent-48 per cent “Leave” victory.
Today, both the Conservatives and Labour parties are reaping the whirlwind of the decision (made by simple majority), even contemplating a politically risky second referendum now severely constrained by Article 50 obligations that bear a March 29, 2019, timestamp.
On November 6, Grenada is, in fact, having its second shot at a CCJ referendum—having had a problematic seven-amendment poll rejected on November 24, 2016. A relatively muted response from the parliamentary Opposition this time around, together with a simpler, single-question ballot, can help realise the required two-thirds majority to remove the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council as the country’s final appellate jurisdiction.
Over in Antigua and Barbuda, the ride is expected to be a more difficult one to negotiate. Despite an intensive public awareness campaign by the National Coordinating Committee under Amb Dr Clarence Henry, the vote has acquired a clear partisan flavour, not helped by the fact that last weekend the PM called out the Labour Party troops in response to continued opposition machinations.
Like Grenada, the twin-island State will need a two-thirds majority in favour of “Yes.” We shall see. So far, for us in T&T, an absence of light prevails and the Divali lesson remains unheeded.