EDITORIAL - Jamaica tardy on CCJ

This newspaper remains certain in its view that Trinidad and Tobago must play by the rules and eliminate the barriers to exports from its Caribbean Community (CARICOM) partners, especially Jamaica.

Indeed, a levelling of the playing field by Port of Spain must include a review of the massive energy subsidy provided to manufacturers, but which the Trinidadian government denies on the basis that there is no specific energy cushion for its producers. They enjoy only what is available to the entire domestic economy.

Hopefully, these issues will be raised by Prime Minister Bruce Golding when he holds bilateral discussions with his recently elected Trinidadian counterpart, Kamla Persad-Bissessar.

But while we insist that some of these matters can, and ought to be settled by administrative and political action, including the formulation of a regional energy policy, we nonetheless take the point raised by Guyana's president, Bharrat Jagdeo, regarding the use of legal mechanisms to settle fundamental disputes in CARICOM.

Uncertainty

President Jagdeo, of course, referred to the Caribbean Court of Justice (CCJ), operating in its original jurisdiction in interpreting the Revised Treaty of Chagauramas, which forms the basis for the Caribbean Single Market and Economy (CSME).

Yet, there is some uncertainty over whether Jamaica has access to the court in its original jurisdiction, despite our parliament having passed the appropriate legislation and our taxpayers having long since contributed US$27 million to finance the operation of the CCJ. That there is uncertainty is precisely the doing of the Jamaican government, and more specifically, the Golding administration.

The Jamaica Labour Party, which Mr Golding leads, while in opposition, campaigned against the CCJ, particularly in the criminal and civil jurisdiction, and its replacement of the Privy Council as Jamaica's court of last resort. It was among the complainants in whose favour the Privy Council ruled that the CCJ could not be superior to Jamaica's Appeal Court unless it was first entrenched in the constitution.

While that opinion effectively scuttled Jamaica's participation in the CCJ's criminal and civil jurisdiction, it did not preclude our participation in the CCJ as an international court, interpreting the treaty upon which rests the CSME.

Position softened

Although the legislation, spearheaded by the previous administration, is more than three years in place, the Jamaican Government, or the appropriate minister, has not yet formally declared a date for it to come into force, as is required by the act. It is unclear why the Golding administration continues to be tardy on this matter, especially at a time when the prime minister has seemingly softened his position of the CCJ, in the face of hints by the United Kingdom authorities that the Privy Council has become a burden. Mr Golding has promised a review of Jamaica's position.

Perhaps, though, a formal ratification of the CCJ is not required given the fact that Jamaica is not only a signatory to the treaty establishing the court, but is a fully paid-up member and has the law in place to cover its original jurisdiction. Moreover, the island's solicitor general, Mr Douglas Leys, presented a friend-of-the-court brief on which entities, other than contracting parties, could go directly to the CCJ for ruling.

That seems, at least, an implied recognition of participation in the CCJ at this level. It should be made formal.

The opinions on this page, except for the above, do not necessarily reflect the views of The Gleaner. To respond to a Gleaner editorial, email us: editor@gleanerjm.com or fax: 922-6223. Responses should be no longer than 400 words. Not all responses will be published.