Dear Editor,
With regard to your several news items (SN, Apr 27, 28) on Trinidad’s announced plan to replace the Privy Council with the CCJ for criminal matters, there are mixed views from the country’s legal luminaries and intellectuals and widespread opposition from the common man to such a move. Even the ruling coalition is divided with the COP announcing on Sunday they want a referendum on the issue and individual MPs of the UNC saying privately they are opposed to such legislation and action.
If there is a secret vote, almost all of them would vote against the announced plan. People seem to have greater faith in the Privy Council than in the CCJ.
The ruling coalition, during the election campaign in 2010, promised to consult with the nation in a referendum on any movement to replace the PC with the CCJ. Even a month ago the government reiterated that any move to replace the PC would be done via a referendum to get the views of the nation. Instead, suddenly, the government announced last Wednesday it would introduce legislation to abolish appeals to the PC on criminal matters. There is not any reasonable explanation for the sudden change of heart or the expediency of the announcement.
The government, fearing defeat, did indicate that putting the matter to the vote in a referendum is too risky. In fact, if it is put to the vote, the backers of the CCJ are likely to suffer a humiliating defeat as the nation overwhelmingly opposes the replacement of the PC with the CCJ.
At any rate, legal minds say partial replacement of the PC is not constitutional and it would be impractical to implement even if it is constitutional, because criminal matters involve rights which can become civil in nature. And the opposition PNM, though it welcomed the move, said it wants to completely abolish the PC as T&T’s final court of appeal, not just for criminal matters. Since it is a rights issue, replacing the PC would require a three-quarters majority in parliament. The PNM has not stated whether it would lend support to the coalition government although it favours the CCJ as final court of appeal on all legal matters. And the COP which has seven seats in parliament has not indicated whether it will go along with the UNC dominated government on the issue. The COP leader, Prakash Ramadhar, is known to oppose the CCJ as the final court of appeal.
Former Attorney General Ramesh Maharaj and former Prime Minister Basdeo Panday feel the government is playing “politics” with the issue. They feel the government’s announcement is a red herring to distract attention away from other matters. They are opposed to the move describing it as a major “blunder.” They say the PC is a protector against rights abuses and fascism. They point to the abuse of rights in Guyana when Forbes Burnham abolished the Privy Council and proceeded to deny people basic rights.
They also feel that the PC gives confidence to potential foreign investors. However, Trinis are angry with the PC’s decision to end hanging and as such there is some support for the government’s move to end appeals on criminal matters to the PC. People want to wipe out violent criminals.
But legal luminaries point out that the judges of the CCJ are also against capital punishment and so criminals who were sentenced to death may still not face the gallows. And even if the judges have a change of heart and allow the resumption of hanging, appeals to the PC could stymie the death penalty from being carried out. So replacing the PC with the CCJ would not lead to any meaningful judicial change in the country to carry out its preferred policy of implementing the death penalty as a deterrence to uncontrollable crime.
Yours faithfully,
Vishnu Bisram
