Privy Council to go

[RedVEVO]

No for CCJ ..

Does anyone know how CCJ Judges are selected ?

[The_Honourable]

In Defence of the Privy Council

By Kiel Taklalsingh - Attorney At Law

The question of replacing the Privy Council is ultimately an issue of trust between the people of our country and the Caribbean Court of Justice. A NACTA poll in 2019 purported to quantify the levels of this level of trust and confidence and reported that 17% of those polled had trust in the CCJ. The CCJ is not our final court of appeal currently (except in treaty matters) so I don’t quite understand what the pollsters measured or upon what basis those polled could have provided an informed view. Still, 17 % says something. If I had to guess, I would say that the figure reflects a general distrust in our own local institutions and is not necessarily an outright indictment of the CCJ.

Respectfully, trust cannot be earned by half-baked arguments and politicizing the issue. In my view, some of the arguments I have heard in support of abolishing the PC are unconvincing;

Prohibitive Cost

It is not mandatory that you retain a Queens Counsel or Senior Counsel to represent you in the PC. The lawyer that represented you in the High Court and Court of Appeal can also represent you in the PC. Replacing the PC with the CCJ will not somehow require lawyers to charge reduced fees; both are third tier apex courts and would predictably require the same levels of preparation, hours spent and administrative expense. To put it simply, the legal cost for a Privy Council Appeal should ordinarily be equivalent to an appeal at the Caribbean Court of Justice. There is a relatively inexpensive fee of approximately 500 pounds (from my recollection) in order to access the PC (I am not sure if the CCJ has such a cost) but the service a litigant receives from the Registrar and staff of the PC is worth it in my view. The PC, even before the pandemic, offered virtual hearings/attendance and therefore you no longer have to incur the costs of travelling to London in order to have your matter heard at the PC.

Relic of Colonialism

Is this even a real argument? The modern commercial world uses London for legal services as the premier seat of arbitration and dispute resolution. In other words, people from legal jurisdictions all over the world continue to utilise jurists from England to resolve complex contractual and other commercial legal disputes. In a recent lecture by Lord Reed, on the occasion of London International Disputes Week, he noted the following: “The UK is one of the world’s largest centres for legal services, ranked second by revenue only to the US. According to two studies published last year it is the world’s leading centre for international dispute resolution by litigation and, equally with Singapore, by arbitration”

Is there some neo colonialist threat that the entire world has succumbed to which we must fend off by abolishing the Privy Council? Off course not. Quite frankly, some of the anti-colonial rhetoric I have heard on this topic sounds more like sophisticated fascism than a genuine desire for a Caribbean Court. Branding the English as evil colonisers in modern times rings hollow in my respectful view in a context where it is this Government’s preference to keep in place laws such as Sedition and maintain other colonial laws which England has long abolished. The Government was quite happy to regulate our lives, lock fellow citizens out of their country, close down businesses, continue to force us to wear masks (with no current justification) for the past two years through the use of an antiquated colonially conceived Public Health Ordinance, but suddenly has a problem with the Privy Council?

Different Values and Culture

Exactly whose culture and values are being frustrated by the Privy Council? Is it Senator Vieira’s? (the mover of the motion in the Senate to abolish the PC) or is it the governing PNM’s culture and value system? If we are going to make a decision on our apex court based on “values” and “culture” then, respectfully, I need some more particulars before I subscribe to that reasoning. Should we also do away with the Separation of Powers because its origins could be traced to Montesquieu’s Spirit of Laws? Or, should we also throw out the entire Rule of Law concept because its origins could be traced to a place called Runnymede in England where the Magna Carta was conceptualized and signed?

The problem with this argument is that it is Lilliputian thinking. Our very own Lilliputians, lurking in their sinecures, prefer to tie down our ideas of constitutionalism and democracy to what they say it is and not recognize that these concepts are the product of thousands of years of global history and scholarship. The proponents of this argument, as far as I am aware, cannot point to a single PC decision where there was some radical departure from the culture and values inherent in Trinidad and Tobago society that could justify abolishing the PC. In fact, very recently, the PC was asked to consider the controversial issue of the death penalty in our society. In England, the death penalty is considered to be cruel and unusual punishment; had an Englishman been sentenced to death in modern times the Supreme Court of England would not hesitate to strike down any law which imposed a penalty of death upon him. The very same judges, who sit as judges on the PC, did not overreach on this issue; they did not take the opportunity impose those values on us through a judicial edict and abolish the death penalty for us. Instead, the PC, among other things, felt that it was a matter for our parliament to decide because the death penalty was saved by a constitutional provision known as the savings law clause. If anything, it seems that the PC is perhaps more deferential to our local context, values and cultural norms than we give them credit for.

Sovereignty

We are a sovereign democratic state. Section 1 of the Constitution enshrines that. Accessing the PC as our final court does not derogate from sovereignty; in fact, I think it enhances it. Sovereignty, in the context of our democratic state, is less about preserving territorial boundaries and more about ensuring that power resides with the people of this country as opposed to the Government or ruling political party. In reality, it is permanent declaratory injunction against totalitarianism and authoritarianism. When sovereignty truly resides with the people of a country, dictators and autocrats are kept out and democracy flourishes. Edmund S. Morgan, in his work “The Rise of Popular Sovereignty in England and America” describes the requirement of popular sovereignty in this way: “What popular sovereignty did require, in the eyes at least of those who thought seriously about it, was a means by which some body or bodies capable of doing so could speak decisively and authentically for the people, so as to contain government, whether monarchical or otherwise…” True concern for our sovereignty is less about keeping everything within Trinidad and Tobago and more about ensuring that those who govern us remain accountable and subject to the will of the people of this country and not the other way around.

Modern day dictatorships around the world have thrived because various regimes have taken control of indigenous judicial systems and judicial officers within their borders. In their book “How Democracies Die”, Steven Levitsky and Daniel Ziblatt, studied several dictatorships in modern history and observed that elected autocrats “subvert democracy” by packing and “weaponizing” the courts and other neutral agencies. They found that many government efforts to subvert democracy are “legal”, in the sense that they are approved by the legislature or accepted by the courts. They may even be portrayed as efforts to improve democracy – making the judiciary more efficient, combating corruption or cleaning up the electoral process.

In my view, there is a 0% chance of any Government in Trinidad and Tobago exerting influence and control over the Privy Council. That is not to say that our current judiciary is not independent or robust in its protection of constitutional rights and freedoms. What I do say, given recent events such as the Police Service Commission scandal- where, in my view, the Government manipulated the process of appointing the Commissioner of Police- I prefer more insulation of our apex court from any potential executive interference.

I do not in any way deprecate the work of the brilliant and remarkable judicial officers who currently occupy the CCJ and indeed our own Judiciary. That is not my intention. If we are to build trust then we must have frank, open, honest and rigorous debate.

https://www.facebook.com/kiel.taklalsin ... AcKeJCkPcl

[De Dragon]

^^ Well said. If we're not up to snuff by virtue of our immaturity as a democracy/Republic, then we retain the use of people who do like the PC.

[The_Honourable]

For those interested...

Inaugural Seminar - Significance of the Final Appellate Court of T&T

Should The Caribbean Court of Justice (CCJ) replace the Privy Council as T&T final appellate court?

Date of Seminar: Saturday 25th June, 2022.

Speakers: Kiel Taklalsingh, Karen Nunez Tesheira, Anand Beharrylal QC, Ramesh Lawrence Maharaj SC.

Time: 3:36:15

Broadcast by TV Jaagriti

Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/watch/live/?re ... 4046557022

Youtube: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ut_YO3nX6Xk

[pugboy]

don’t forget one of the ccj jefe is the one who tried to pull a stunt with a fake amnesty for abu bakr and it backfired so abu and them get away scot free

[RedVEVO]

[flash=][/flash]

don’t forget one of the ccj jefe is the one who tried to pull a stunt with a fake amnesty for abu bakr and it backfired so abu and them get away scot free

The Law was applied .

He committed no crimes .

Even today he is free .

[The_Honourable]

AG Armour said last week to honour Michael de la Bastide by replacing the privy council with the CCJ

Seems most don't trust the CCJ at the moment

[wing]

AG Armour said last week to honour Michael de la Bastide by replacing the privy council with the CCJ

Seems most don't trust the CCJ at the moment

From reading the article, it's just the opinion of a single lawyer as opposed to the president of the law association and a former presidential candidate. I fail to see where the "most" comes from.

[j.o.e]

Time to embrace the CCJ. Privy council is just a loophole for lawyers to drag out proceedings

[wing]

Time to embrace the CCJ. Privy council is just a loophole for lawyers to drag out proceedings

"UNC lawyers" it should read. How else those self appointed SC going to eat ah food?

[The_Honourable]

AG Armour said last week to honour Michael de la Bastide by replacing the privy council with the CCJ

Seems most don't trust the CCJ at the moment

From reading the article, it's just the opinion of a single lawyer as opposed to the president of the law association and a former presidential candidate. I fail to see where the "most" comes from.

Most as in the population, one of the media houses did a survey some time ago. Will look for it.

[wing]

AG Armour said last week to honour Michael de la Bastide by replacing the privy council with the CCJ

Seems most don't trust the CCJ at the moment

From reading the article, it's just the opinion of a single lawyer as opposed to the president of the law association and a former presidential candidate. I fail to see where the "most" comes from.

Most as in the population, one of the media houses did a survey some time ago. Will look for it.

A TV poll isn't a real or credible gauge. A referendum could be held, not sure if the constitution allows it.

[Habit7]

A referendum will solve this. It is obvious there is a political and ethnic divide on this topic. But a popular mandate could either maintain the PC as the apex court for a few decades, or a popular mandate for the CCJ will cement them as apex forever.

[pugboy]

rowlee would never accede to follow a referendum
he would think it makes him look weak
just like he won’t fire heinz

[The_Honourable]

AG Armour said last week to honour Michael de la Bastide by replacing the privy council with the CCJ

Seems most don't trust the CCJ at the moment

From reading the article, it's just the opinion of a single lawyer as opposed to the president of the law association and a former presidential candidate. I fail to see where the "most" comes from.

Most as in the population, one of the media houses did a survey some time ago. Will look for it.

A TV poll isn't a real or credible gauge. A referendum could be held, not sure if the constitution allows it.

A poll can be credible and so far, it seems nothing has changed in the populations mind. Many don't trust the local court system but do have a level of trust in the Privy Council.

I agree, many in the legal professions are for a referendum when it comes to this topic but we don't have that in our constitution (to my knowledge). Hopefully the topic of referendums will be part of the current constitutional reform talks.

[The_Honourable]

Correction, not a media house... NACTA in 2019

NACTA poll: Limited Judiciary confidence linked to CJ issues

A North American Caribbean Teachers Association (NACTA) opinion poll conducted last month found only 27 per cent of Trinidadians have confidence in the Judiciary. This, they said, has been linked to issues involving Chief Justice Ivor Archie.

"Respondents said his actions (allegedly) seeking political favours for friends have compromised the independence of the Judiciary as a separate branch of government. People said he has brought the Judiciary into a state of disrepute and that it would be best if he were to demit office to restore some level of confidence in the court. Some people feel a judge should serve in the court for a limited period so as to reduce the chance of him or her being compromised."

NACTA in a release said the 27 per cent confidence in the court is lower than the percentage (31 per cent) of the population who approve of the performance of the government, but much higher (17 per cent) among those who have faith in the Caribbean Court of Justice (CCJ).

"People have greater faith by 10 per cent in the TT (appeal) court system than the CCJ. If a referendum were to be held on whether the nation should assent to the CCJ as its final court of appeal, replacing the Privy Council, the vote would fail by a landslide."

NACTA continued: "Virtually no TT lawyer, including those who practice before the CCJ, have expressed any support for the court. Lawyers feel if the CCJ’s decision were allowed an appeal at the Privy Council in London, many of its rulings would have been overturned. Some lawyers say the CCJ’s judges have not developed strong courage to reject political influence of their elected bosses."

NACTA said the findings mark the lowest level of confidence people have had in court system of the nation and the region.

https://newsday.co.tt/2019/05/07/nacta- ... cj-issues/

[Habit7]

NACTA continued: "Virtually no TT lawyer, including those who practice before the CCJ, have expressed any support for the court.

Meanwhile, TT Lawyers

[alfa]

A referendum will solve this. It is obvious there is a political and ethnic divide on this topic. But a popular mandate could either maintain the PC as the apex court for a few decades, or a popular mandate for the CCJ will cement them as apex forever.

Personally I would never get rid of the PC for simple reason that Trinidad is too small and everyone knows everbody else. It's not unheard off to go a big shot all inclusive and see politicians, members of the judiciary, govt contractors and everyone else under the same roof. I'd be an idiot to believe they don't mingle and 'take care of business'. There's a reason why people in the legal system refer to each other as 'friend ' even they opposing sides. The client is the only one to lose and after everyone else can and probably do go and knock glasses

[Habit7]

A referendum will solve this. It is obvious there is a political and ethnic divide on this topic. But a popular mandate could either maintain the PC as the apex court for a few decades, or a popular mandate for the CCJ will cement them as apex forever.

Personally I would never get rid of the PC for simple reason that Trinidad is too small and everyone knows everbody else. It's not unheard off to go a big shot all inclusive and see politicians, members of the judiciary, govt contractors and everyone else under the same roof. I'd be an idiot to believe they don't mingle and 'take care of business'. There's a reason why people in the legal system refer to each other as 'friend ' even they opposing sides. The client is the only one to lose and after everyone else can and probably do go and knock glasses

I don’t know if you know that the judges in the lower courts, High courts and Appeal are all locals. And if it goes to the CCJ the judges are regional which is a pool of a couple million ppl.

It will be multiple judges from different islands adjudicating a case. One would have to relationship which each one so close that they won’t report attempts to induce them. That is near impossible.

The legal system tries to be fair but it is not. Ppl who can afford better lawyers have an advantage. And when you are fighting someone who can afford a more experienced PC lawyer either resident in UK or can afford to send their Trini lawyer for several weeks to UK, they have an advantage. Having a regional and nearer court evens that playing field. That should be more of a concern for you more than if their lawyer knows one of the 5 CCJ judges adjudicating your case.

[redmanjp]

A referendum will solve this. It is obvious there is a political and ethnic divide on this topic. But a popular mandate could either maintain the PC as the apex court for a few decades, or a popular mandate for the CCJ will cement them as apex forever.

Personally I would never get rid of the PC for simple reason that Trinidad is too small and everyone knows everbody else. It's not unheard off to go a big shot all inclusive and see politicians, members of the judiciary, govt contractors and everyone else under the same roof. I'd be an idiot to believe they don't mingle and 'take care of business'. There's a reason why people in the legal system refer to each other as 'friend ' even they opposing sides. The client is the only one to lose and after everyone else can and probably do go and knock glasses

is the CCJ all trini judges? i would think if its for the whole caribbean it would have judges from different islands

[eliteauto]

https://ccj.org/about-the-ccj/judges/

[paid_influencer]

Correction, not a media house... NACTA in 2019

NACTA poll: Limited Judiciary confidence linked to CJ issues

A North American Caribbean Teachers Association (NACTA) opinion poll conducted last month found only 27 per cent of Trinidadians have confidence in the Judiciary. This, they said, has been linked to issues involving Chief Justice Ivor Archie.

"Respondents said his actions (allegedly) seeking political favours for friends have compromised the independence of the Judiciary as a separate branch of government. People said he has brought the Judiciary into a state of disrepute and that it would be best if he were to demit office to restore some level of confidence in the court. Some people feel a judge should serve in the court for a limited period so as to reduce the chance of him or her being compromised."

NACTA in a release said the 27 per cent confidence in the court is lower than the percentage (31 per cent) of the population who approve of the performance of the government, but much higher (17 per cent) among those who have faith in the Caribbean Court of Justice (CCJ).

"People have greater faith by 10 per cent in the TT (appeal) court system than the CCJ. If a referendum were to be held on whether the nation should assent to the CCJ as its final court of appeal, replacing the Privy Council, the vote would fail by a landslide."

NACTA continued: "Virtually no TT lawyer, including those who practice before the CCJ, have expressed any support for the court. Lawyers feel if the CCJ’s decision were allowed an appeal at the Privy Council in London, many of its rulings would have been overturned. Some lawyers say the CCJ’s judges have not developed strong courage to reject political influence of their elected bosses."

NACTA said the findings mark the lowest level of confidence people have had in court system of the nation and the region.

https://newsday.co.tt/2019/05/07/nacta- ... cj-issues/

true

[pugboy]

ever read the judgement on marcia caesar

[ProtonPowder]

Link to the Ayers-Caesar judgement
https://www.jcpc.uk/cases/docs/jcpc-201 ... dgment.pdf

[The_Honourable]

LATT members in tiff over Privy Council position

A senior ordinary member of the Council of the Law Association of Trinidad and Tobago (LATT) says comments by the association president on replacing the Privy Council as the country’s highest appellate court with the Caribbean Court of Justice (CCJ) were not sanctioned by the membership.

Saira Lakhan, who is also president of the Assembly of Southern Lawyers (ASL), issued a statement yesterday in response to comments by LATT president Lynette Seebaran-Suite SC in a published report. If true, she said, the president’s comments were extremely unfortunate as they “may not be reflective of the general membership of the organisation”.

Lakhan said, “Her statements were not endorsed nor sanctioned by the council nor the membership of the LATT.”

She added that on July 10, 2015, when Attorney General Reginald Armourer SC, was the association president, a Special General Meeting (SGM) was called at the Convocation Hall, Hall of Justice to discuss this issue, but a motion to adjourn the meeting was passed and deliberation was adjourned until the new law term began to allow for information to be distributed to the membership.

Following the adjournment, Lakhan said, information was sent regarding arguments for and against replacing the Privy Council with the CCJ. A symposium was also held on February 26, 2016, at the Convocation Hall with 65 attendees including the Chief Justice and the Director of Public Prosecutions.

She added, “Almost nine years have since elapsed, and LATT is yet to reconvene the adjourned SGM despite the membership being provided with a plethora of material and information.”

She explained that LATT’s general membership was invited on March 23 to submit suggestions to the National Advisory Committee on Constitutional Reform on matters which require constitutional reform.

“Several members responded to LATT and their views on the issue of the abolishment of the UKPC were put forward. Some of the members of LATT have expressed the view that the UKPC should remain until a decision is made by the people of Trinidad and Tobago. Indeed, many of the leaders of the Bar in Trinidad and Tobago have publicly expressed this view over the years. Be that as it may, it is clear that there is a need for a consensus on this position from LATT’s general membership.”

Lakhan said the issue remains a live one and has to be considered and voted on by the membership.

She called on the LATT council to promptly reconvene the Special General Meeting to address the issue of whether this country should adopt the CCJ as its final appellate court.

In an immediate response, LATT president Seebaran-Suite said there is not a scientific sense of what the profession’s response is to the abolition of the Privy Council. But she said there has been an outpouring of support for the abolition of the Privy Council on the part of many senior members of the profession and civil society generally, who have spoken out on the occasion of the death of former CJ and CCJ president Michael de la Bastide.

She added, “The last position of the Law Council on this issue before we were overtaken by COVID was that the association would embark on a sensitisation process on the pros and cons of abolition of the PC. In my view that’s the course we should be embarking on at this time.”

https://guardian.co.tt/news/latt-member ... 44ac859ed7

[maj. tom]

What are the arguments against the CCJ? I see it as moving forward and establishing the reputation as the region's highest court and authority. Why we still have to use the English Privy Council?

[wing]

What are the arguments against the CCJ? I see it as moving forward and establishing the reputation as the region's highest court and authority. Why we still have to use the English Privy Council?

White is right... basically.

[Habit7]

What are the arguments against the CCJ? I see it as moving forward and establishing the reputation as the region's highest court and authority. Why we still have to use the English Privy Council?

One of them includes:


Although there have been ppl of Indo descent serving as CCJ judges.

[wing]

Let's appoint Seepersad to the ccj, the UNC will support.

[paid_influencer]

What are the arguments against the CCJ? I see it as moving forward and establishing the reputation as the region's highest court and authority. Why we still have to use the English Privy Council?

local courts and judges are prone to the same corruption as the rest of the island. you might not believe that, because you don't have that life experience yet. I'm sure you are right though, a very smart one, you. You have very smart points of view, excellent. Don't take it personal.