In 1970, at the Sixth Caribbean Heads of Government Conference held in Jamaica, that country’s delegation proposed the establishment of a Caribbean Court of Appeal. Arguments for and against such a Court have been discussed and debated by both Bench and Bar of the Region for the past thirty years. In February 2001 the last bold step was taken to ensure the establishment of the Caribbean Court of Justice when the agreement establishing the Court was signed by the Heads of Government of the Caribbean Community. It will now embrace an original jurisdiction which was not conceived earlier, but is vital today when the Caribbean Single Market and Economy becomes a reality.
You have heard over the last two days of progress made in the establishment of the Court which optimistically will no longer be a dream but come into being later this year. Inevitably the main question will be – are we ready for it? We have been assured that the financial aspect of its establishment and continuance has been taken care of.
However, are we as judges and magistrates of the Region prepared for its advent? Is the legal profession as a whole willing to accept its existence and make every effort to ensure that it works? Are the people of the Caribbean convinced that the quality of justice they expect will not be diminished? These are questions which must be answered if the Court is to fulfil its mandate of ensuring justice between citizen and citizen and citizens and States.
We have moved beyond the debates of the Court’s acceptance as our final court. It is now very close to being a reality. It will come into being sooner rather than later. The judiciary of the Region (and here I include the Magistracy) must be prepared to take up the challenge of producing judgments and decisions which are well-reasoned and can bear international scrutiny.
The theme of this Conference was “The Magistracy and the Caribbean Court of Justice: Challenges, Prospects and Opportunities for Judicial Enhancement.” There are indeed and will be many challenges, the chief among these being an attitudinal challenge.
We have to wake up to the realisation that we will no longer be dependent on a court thousands of miles away as the final arbiter deciding and determining legal issues which affect our every day affairs. We hold our destiny in our own hands. We have to be prepared to give judgments which reflect our own scholarship and ethos while at the same time applying well-established legal principles and adhering to time-honoured precedents.
One of the doubts expressed by nay-sayers of the establishment of the Court is that it will not and cannot attain the same level of excellence as the Privy Council since we do not have within the Region at present judges or academics of equal scholarship. This is a serious indictment, and it demonstrates total lack of confidence in the judiciaries of the Caribbean. Whether this assessment of our judges’ capabilities is justified or not it is an indication of the esteem in which we are held by our own people. It should also serve as an incentive for our judicial personnel at all levels to dedicate ourselves and renew our efforts to raise the standard of justice which we deliver to our people.
A high degree of professionalism is a sine qua non of any court which administers justice, and is even more important when you are doing so within your own jurisdiction. You do not have the luxury of being far removed from the problem; you are intimately involved in the society and familiar with the mores of your people. Objectivity is therefore vital when dealing with persons close to you. One has to free oneself of the pressures of affinity, kinship and politics no matter how subtle these pressures may be.
Over the days of this Conference you have been told of the structure and function of the CCJ in both its appellate and original jurisdictions, the harmonisation of procedures in the magistracy, regionalisation of the judiciary and the potential impact of the CCJ, harmonisation of procedures in our various jurisdictions, and legal education in relation to the magistracy and the CCJ. You also had the benefit of hearing about the magistracy in a civil law jurisdiction from our colleague from Suriname. There was much discussion on each of these topics out of which there were conclusions which you adopted. These include the following:
(a) Establishment of a database on current case law.
(b) Development of a programme of continuing legal education for magistrates.
(c) Consideration of the establishment of a co-ordinating committee of regional magistrates.
(d) Title of judicial officers operating as magistrates should reflect the nature of the office with the exact designation varying from territory to territory.
(e) Magistrates should enjoy similar security of tenure.
It is hoped that these will be taken into account by those responsible for establishing the CCJ. The way ahead is fraught with difficulties of one kind or another; we are a collection of fledgling nations with a very short history of independence; of necessity mistakes will be made, maybe very grave ones with far reaching effects, but it is only out of these mistakes that we can build a strong court and develop a jurisprudence which is truly ours.
It is an immense challenge, but the longest journey begins with the first step, and we must be bold and courageous to take that step.
