CCJ as good as Privy Council

Reginald Armour, SC, says he cannot think of any logical reason for splitting the jurisdictions of the Privy Council and the Caribbean Court of Justice (CCJ). “I can’t understand the reason for splitting the jurisdictions. I can’t think of a logical reason,” he added. Armour gave the response yesterday when asked about the Government’s plan to remove the Privy Council, the final court of appeal, and replace it with the CCJ with respect to criminal matters. However, civil matters will still go before the Privy Council. Former CCJ president Michael de la Bastide noted that death penalty cases would still go before the Privy Council because they were constitutional in nature and therefore, civil matters. Armour said: “I think it is sad we should say we are going to transfer some things to the CCJ and not other things. 

 

 

“We should transfer everything. We must do the whole course but it is a step in the right direction.” He said for years there had been discussions on whether the Privy Council was less inclined to hang convicted murderers than the CCJ. Armour said many death penalty cases went before the Privy Council and some people were freed while the international tribunal ruled the law should have its course in other matters. He said a few death penalty cases went before the CCJ in the short time of its existence, from Belize and Barbados, for instance, and the judgments delivered were no different from those of the Privy Council. In fact, he said, they were equal in quality, if not better. Armour was reluctant to jump into the debate on whether the CCJ would be more inclined than the Privy Council to hang convicted murderers. He said such a discussion should not influence a decision to abolish the Privy Council and replace it with the CCJ. That was tantamount to an insult to Caribbean judges, he added.