WHEN PARLIAMENT resumes next year there are two outstanding issues which must be put in proper perspective and carefully analysed as they can have profound consequences for the freedom of Jamaican citizens. They are the proposed Caribbean Court of Justice (CCJ) and the Anti-Terrorism Bill, both beginning to take on a new life.
In the case of the anti-terrorism legislation, Mr. Seaga, the Leader of the Opposition, has sought the support of the trade unions which he sees as being vulnerable to certain clauses in the Bill, so vaguely and broadly drawn they could be used by government to curtail legitimate trade union activities. They could also be used to neutralize the Opposition by the declaration of a contrived State of Emergency. Attorney General A.J. Nicholson has denied any such intention but we remind him that the road to hell is paved with good intentions.
Even in the United States, the prime instigator of anti-terrorism legislation, the courts, in a recent case have dealt the administration a setback by declaring that American citizens, even those who chose to fight against their country as enemy combatants, are entitled to the services of an attorney and cannot be held indefinitely without charges being laid against them. The issue will undoubtedly go to the Supreme Court by which time we hope that some of the initial hysteria caused by the September 11 attacks will have worn off and the Justices will restore some balance in preserving the rule of law.
In the case of the CCJ, enabling legislation has been brought in the Senate and in doing so Mr. Nicholson, for the first time, has indicated that a compromise may be possible in one aspect of its implementation. He has suggested that the government, having abolished the normal process by which the Jamaican Court of Appeals allows issues to be taken to the Privy Council, might be prepared to retain for a fixed period of years, say six, the special right of direct appeal to the Privy Council, a right outside the Jamaica Constitution. This is a small compromise but an important one because it recognises the principle involved. There are those, and we support them, who will still think that on such a vital issue the people should be consulted by way of a referendum.
Loss of liberty, when it becomes a possibility, does not befall a people in one fell swoop but by degrees and always in the guise of legitimacy. That is why even as we grapple with economic problems we must not lose sight of the fact that the economy is only a means to an end, that man does not live by bread alone.
THE OPINIONS ON THIS PAGE, EXCEPT FOR THE ABOVE, DO NOT NECESSARILY REFLECT THE VIEWS OF THE GLEANER.
