Questionable jurisdiction
By Leonard St Hill | Tue, April 17, 2012 - 12:00 AM
()
The arrival of the Caribbean Court of Justice for a session of the circuit court in arbitration of an international contention is most welcome.
It dignifies the confidence of the litigants in their integrity as sovereign participants in a regional treaty for resolution of international disputes by a neutral body.
It also reflects favourably the voluntary invitation extended by other countries of the region to international agencies to witness the exercise of fundamental freedom of the individual in the selection process of their legislatures.
On the other hand, in the matter of the supremacy of the nation’s judicature, resort to the CCJ with respect to a sovereign nation’s territorial jurisdiction derogates from the integrity of its Supreme Court, implying a lack of confidence in its ability to interpret that country’s laws to the satisfaction of its citizens.
In defence of prevailing access to Her Majesty’s Judicial Committee of the Privy Council for the function that would be assumed by the CCJ in civil and criminal jurisdiction, it could be said credibly that the process implicated the Sovereign of the State represented by the Judicial Committee to which there has always been the possibility of appointing members of the Barbados Bar.
It appears therefore that unless the president of the CCJ or chairman of CARICOM has had conferred on him or her the status of Sovereign in the establishment of the Parliament of Barbados, the validity of the CCJ’s jurisdiction in any matter other than international disputes covered by the Treaty of Chaguaramus cannot be supported in contention with the authority of Her Majesty’s Judicial Committee of the Privy Council while Her Majesty remains the Sovereign constituent of the Parliament of Barbados.
- Editor's Choice
Recent Comments
- Your Lamen commented on $60M loss
- Tanya Respect Forde commented on Rihanna, wins R&B artist, album
- Tony Webster commented on EDITORIAL: LIME’s $100m investment great news
- Judy Clarke commented on DEAR CHRISTINE: Should I bail out because of disease?
- Frank Husbands commented on Credit unions must pull investments
Your Friends' Activity
What Do You Think?
Some ministers of religion have said a resounding no to same-sex marriages being performed in Barbados. Do you agree?
Stay Connected to Your World
Join Your Friends & Our Community
To view this site, you need to have Flash Player 9.0 or later installed. Click here to get the latest Flash player.
_medium-135x135.jpg)
Share your thoughts
Please sign in or register to leave your comments.
Page 1 of 1 pages
- Posted by J. Payne 1 year, 1 month ago
-
Barbados is a mixture "Parliamentary democracy", meaning Parliament is the centre of our democracy, and also a "Constitutional monarchy: meaning the role of the Monarchy exists so far as the Constitution of Barbados is concerned, but the Monarch has also agreed that their powers are curtailed by the same supremacy of the Constitution. The Constitutional amendment of 2003 spelled out the approval of the jurisdiction of the CCJ (for the Realm of Barbados.) In terms of Jamaica and Myrie a Jamaican using the court to indict a branch of the Government of Barbados, I challenge that jurisdiction moreso. The Treaty of Chaguaramas speak of Free Movement for certain classes of persons (Skill persons): UWI graduates seeking employment elsewhere, journalists, sports persons, entertainers, etc. I have no idea with "Myrie" classifies under and what "minimum level of access" between markets that people should have without a Barbadian parliamentary laws to support such.
Comment LinkPage 1 of 1 pages