In addition to the frequently offered explanation of its relevance to the functioning of a Caribbean Single Market and Economy (CSME), it is felt that even advocates of the CCJ may be guilty of underselling its importance to the Caribbean's development in this 21st century in overlooking other compelling reasons.

For, more than its integral link with the CSME is the CCJ's fundamental value in the region's affirmation of political sovereignty and, relatedly, a third factor of deep significance - the reshaping of a "truly Caribbean jurisprudence".

One Prime Minister of the Caribbean Community who seems willing and able to take on the challenge of helping the region to relentlessly press ahead with the CCJ as an institution whose value goes well beyond the CSME, is Dr. Kenny Anthony of St. Lucia.

And in a most forthright and articulate address to the Grenada Bar Association, he has come down firmly against critics who emotionally, and quite wrongly, seek to blemish the lustre of the CCJ's creation either by defaming it as a "hanging court" for the death penalty.

Or, as an inferior and unnecessary institution to replace the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council in London, which remains the appellate court of last resort for the English-speaking independent member states of the Caribbean Community - other than Guyana.

What the St. Lucia Prime Minister had to say to his Grenada audience is certainly relevant to the rest of the region, including Jamaica, where there remain strong political differences over the issue of a referendum to determine whether the CCJ should replace the Privy Council as the final appellate court.

The Patterson administration has already ruled out the need for any such referendum and, like Barbados, Guyana, Trinidad and Tobago and St Lucia, remain firmly committed to the CCJ as, ultimately, the nation's final appellate court.

Blunt presentation
Anthony, who has lead responsibility among CARICOM heads of government for Justice and Governance, and who previously headed the Office of General Counsel of the Community Secretariat, was quite blunt in addressing the Guyana Bar Association just a week ago:

"If this court is truly to be a court of the peoples of the region", he declared, "then it invites those who support its establishment to argue and convince others, that the CCJ is able to stand on its own merits....

"Anything less than this will not only undermine the legitimacy of and confidence in the court, but will altogether fail to provide a rational and complete answer to some of the more legitimate concerns and reservations about the court which continue in some quarters, and which would persist post establishment, if left unanswered".

Having thrown down the gauntlet, so to speak, Anthony's eloquent discourse, titled. ‘Reshaping Caribbean Jurisprudence -- Prospects and Possibilities of the Caribbean Court of Justice’, was to first make clear that the reasons for the existence of a CCJ transcend the creation of a regional single market and economy.

He recognises the commonsense in having "one authoritative source" to pronounce on matters pertaining to interpretation of the CARICOM Treaty, since competing judicial interpretations could cause confusion, uncertainty and delay.

But these considerations, he stressed, critical as they are, "should not reduce the court's existence to the CSME, as there are both practical and philosophical implications for such an approach".

In what may seem a concession to some critics of the CCJ, Anthony argued that in defending the court on the ground of its importance to the CSME, a more "philosophical point of view" may be overlooked.

That is, that opposition to the abolition of appeals to the Privy Council in London, is not in every case motivated by "sheer stubborn historicism"; but rather, in some cases, as a result of "genuine passion and respect for the rule of law and concern over the integrity of the appellate process".

Consequently, not withstanding his own belief that the framers of the CCJ have adequately answered the more "salient concerns" over the functioning of this regional court - likely to come on stream before year end, initially in at least four CARICOM countries - Anthony conceded that, as he said:

Confronting 'Reservations'
"Reservations about the selection of persons to sit as judges and securing adequate funding for the court are legitimate reasons for apprehension, especially among persons who simply do not know the details of the arrangements which have been made with regard to those matters..."

In that context, therefore, Anthony thinks it has frankly been folly for anyone to think that "repeated invocations" of economic prosperity and Caribbean integration alone -- lofty, desirable and urgent as those imperatives are -- "could serve as sufficient propitiation for those who continue to express deeply rooted reservations about the impact of the abolition of appeals to the Privy Council on the administration of justice in this region".

He thinks that all involved in the process of establishing the CCJ owe it to future generations to make clear that there is no doubt "in our own minds as to the correctness of our course".

And, in turning his attention to what he views as the "more important imperatives" that our constitutional affirmation might give rise to in the creation of the CCJ, the St, Lucia Prime Minister went on to articulate a "more appropriate response" for the CCJ other than its value to the CSME:

First, the issue of "sovereignty", or the need for the Caribbean people to take charge of their own affairs and to assert their right to full constitutional sovereignty that must, logically, bring an end to the dependence syndrome on appeals to the Privy Council in Britain, more than four decades after the dawn of political independence in the English-speaking Caribbean.

Questioning the intellectual reasoning of even some high profile members of the region's legal profession who still seek to make out a case to retain access to the Privy Council, Anthony contends:

"It is fallacious, for instance, to suggest that the establishment of the CCJ is in any way inconsistent with globalisation and all the consequences of the same". In any event, as he said:

"The issue of sovereignty is more compelling than many will be willing to admit... The need for the nations of the Caribbean to assert the constitutional legitimacy of our civilisation, is more fundamental than a mere emotive claim to a theoretical sovereignty, without practical significance, or persuasive symbolism."

This, he feels, is a "hard statement of principle" which should not admit to compromise at this point in our Caribbean history.

He cited some outstanding legal luminaries of the region, among them the retired Chief Justice of Trinidad and Tobago, Michael de La Bastide, and the current Chief Justice of the OECS Supreme Court, Denis Byron, as well as the Grenada-born constitutional expert, Simeon McIntosh, in support of the argument in favour of sovereignty and the relevance of the CCJ in the development of a Caribbean jurisprudence.

Describing as the second ground for the CCJ the opportunity it affords for the "reshaping of Caribbean jurisprudence", Anthony told his audience that this defence in favour of the regional court "deserves far greater importance" in the debate to sever links with the Privy Council.

"As we move nearer to the actual establishment of the CCJ", said Anthony, “we must think of the opportunity to shape in our own image the very laws and jurisprudence which we have, thus far, by and large condemned to import, without question, nearly wholesale into our collective legal consciousness…"