It is generally agreed that the CARICOM Preparatory Com-mittee that was put in place to see to the establishment of the Caribbean Court of Justice (CCJ) accomplished its task in so far as the integrity of the structure and the independence of the entity are concerned. What remains seriously in doubt is whether that committee, in particular, and the entire CARICOM framework, in general, had effectively prepared the region to accept the institution as its final court of appeal as a substitute for the London-based Judicial Committee of the Privy Council.

The agreement on which the CCJ is structured, including its unique financing framework and the appointment process and insulation of its judges from political and other types of influence, has been lauded in several quarters, from near and far. The Judicial Committee, itself, in its judgment relating to the constitutional procedure that Jamaica is obliged to employ in seeking to subscribe to the appellate jurisdiction of the court, had high commendation for the provisions of the agreement that undergirds the institution.

For Jamaica, like all of the other Commonwealth Caribbean territories which are not yet part of the CCJ in its appellate jurisdiction, the Privy Council has been the final port of call for over 175 years. These countries remain the mainstay of the appellate work of the "Great Imperial Court of the British Empire". The question then is, how has it come to pass that there still exists an almost vehement reluctance on the part of not a few influential persons and entities for us to de-link from that body?

Historic step

In answer, some say one thing, some say another; but we need to remind ourselves that that question has been part of the public conversation for well over a century. Lest we forget, a recent editorial of The Gleaner enjoining the present administration here in Jamaica to take the historic step was by no means the first such call coming from that quarter.

Very early in the 20th century, some six decades before Jamaica became an independent nation within the Commonwealth, an editorial from the same source projected the Privy Council as being "out of joint" with the requirements of the times.

And we need to remind ourselves that over six decades ago, in 1947, issues relating to the free movement of people through-out the Caribbean, and a final court for the region, were strong suggestions coming from British governors for these territories at a meeting in Barbados. Another recommendation coming from that same meeting - a university for the Caribbean - has been firmly acted upon, to the extent that there are now several such institutions within these Caribbean states.

The recent meeting of the heads of government in Guyana continued to struggle with the "free movement of skilled nationals", and there is no report that matters relating to the Caribbean court even came up for discussion.

A visitor from another planet, or indeed, from any other region on Earth, would certainly have been nonplussed as to how a people could have invested some US$100 million in a project which, by all accounts, is highly sustainable and undoubtedly highly desirable, and the heads of government, in the times in which we live, do not see the necessity of addressing the full utility of such an investment.

And such a visitor would surely be appalled to learn that the subject matter of the Guyana encounter was the cementing of the integration movement within CARICOM, and that the base document for that initiative, the report of the West Indian Commission of the early 1990s, saw the subscription by the territories to a Caribbean court in both of its jurisdictions as "one of the pillars of the integration movement".

Recently, matters relating to the qualification for persons to sit in Jamaica's Parliament have led some individuals to describe the constitutional requirements as being "absurd". Try explaining to someone who was born and grew up in the United States or a country of Latin America, for example, how it is that the final court of appeal for these Caribbean territories is to be found on the other side of the Atlantic!

Of course, the matter appears far more ludicrous to such a person, as it should be to every Jamaican, when he is told that, to gain access to appear before that court, both the Jamaican petitioner and his Jamaican attorney have first to obtain entry visas to the United Kingdom, the country in which the court is to be found. And what is more, if the attorney wishes to conduct some research in say, The Hague, to buttress the case on behalf of his client and which requires him to be in transit at Heathrow for two hours, the attorney must first obtain an entry visa to the United Kingdom.

Consensual approach

For us here in Jamaica, to be sure, these issues are part of the required constitutional reform exercise that demands a consensual approach from the two sides of the aisle in Parliament. And more than that, they speak to how we see ourselves as a people in the global village in this 21st century.

They should be seen as an integral part of the reform of our system of the administration of justice. Some have maintained that the compass of our jurisprudence in these countries that are washed by the Caribbean Sea is not an issue that should detain us. Those same individuals see nothing wrong, and would even applaud the countries of Europe, for example, in embarking on the course that they have chosen.

The present administration did not consider it necessary or important to include in its manifesto any pledge, or comment even, concerning its view of Jamaica becoming part of the CCJ's appellate regime. We have not been favoured with any public view coming from the Government. As has been said, the mantra of the party that now forms the Government has long been that this integration movement was to be seen as nothing more than an attempt at "Federation through the back door".

Surely, the public deserves a pointer, even, as to the approach of the administration in this important regard, if only for the fact that Jamaica has US$28 million invested in the institution.

Some of us fully appreciate that there are human-rights groupings within Jamaica and the Caribbean, and elsewhere, which would prefer that the Judicial Committee remain our final court of appeal because, as they see it, that body is their 'trump card' as far as the abolition of the death penalty is concerned. That has been documented by a leading rights advocate in the United Kingdom and the Caribbean Court of Justice projected as an institution that was being put in place so that the death penalty may be carried out.

The oddity of that view, however, stems from the fact that, throughout the years, from The Gleaner editorial of March, 1901, to the report of the West Indian Commission of the early 1990s, matters relating to capital punishment were never in issue.

Of course, recent media reports that the Jamaican Bar Association is exhorting the present administration to become fully involved in the CCJ regime in its appellate jurisdiction is music to the ears of several individuals, right across the Caribbean. For it must be understood that, regardless of the constitutional challenges that our sister CARICOM territories may face to de-link from the Privy Council, be those challenges great or small, some of them are not going to budge until Jamaica decides to embark meaningfully upon that course of action.

Some commentators have recently referred to the present approaches to the integration movement as being in a state of confusion. On the other hand, there are strong voices of encouragement. Space has to be found for hitherto sceptical voices to find their true places at the table. By placing full attachment to the Caribbean Court of Justice at the top of the agenda, we in Jamaica and our partners within CARICOM would begin to beat back the view of confusion within the integration movement.

Seize the moment

For, if we cannot trust our own to render justice to ourselves, how then can we be sanguine about initiatives, such as a single market and a single economy, free movement of our nationals throughout the Caribbean space and, ultimately, perhaps, a common currency?

And, with respect, the time is propitious. Talk about no Jamaican having found a place on the bench of the court at this time as a reason not to engage fully, merely serves to betray the myopic view that has been part of the thinking of far too many for far too long. And, certainly, that is not a situation that can endure for any length of time.

For my part, what is required is for the heads of government to seize the moment of these challenging times, which tell us that we dare not attempt to navigate these economically tempestuous seas on our own. Barbados and Guyana have been the forerunners as full participants in the CCJ regime; we have heard no complaints. Belize, we are advised, is rapidly getting there. The silence of Jamaica's government is deafening.

A.J. Nicholson is opposition spokesman on justice. Feedback may be sent to columns@gleanerjm.com.