Skip to main content

The CCJ: Incisive Interventions

The CCJ Debate will most likely frazzle out being overshadowed by the election campaign and the "dead babies scandal". However are some very poignant interventions; not in the actual debate but in the discussion on the motion to remove the suspension from the service of the Senate imposed on Senator Malahoo Forte.

This motion was moved and passed in the Senate on Thursday, October 29, 2015 in the absence of the Opposition Members.

Senators  Mark Golding and KD Knight gave some indication of the fundamental issues constituting the crux of the debate on the three CCJ Bills.

Senator Golding:

  • "We want them to listen and to hear what we have to say on this important issue. We want to hear what they have to say on this important issue. The people of Jamaica want to hear what all Senators have to say on this important issue..... (Applause)....because it is one of the ironies, perhaps, of history, that an unelected Senate, ultimately will determine whether or not the people of Jamaica who elect their Government will be able to have access to a final court, through legislation , that has been passed by the House of Representative with the required majority of two-thirds."

  • "It is a fundamental Debate as to whether or not we want our final Court to continue, 53 years after Independence and onwards, as the country thinks about such issues of reparations for past horrors of our history, and so on, if we are still holding on to a Court that sits in London, which was set up in 1833 in the era of slavery. (Applause)"

Senator KD Knight:

  • "Now why do I intend to support this Motion? I came to support it because President, this debate is bigger than Senator Malahoo Forte, it's bigger than me, it's bigger than the 21 of us assembled here and extended to all who are in this Chamber now, it's bigger than all of us. This debate is bigger than the PNP, this debate is bigger than the JLP, this debate is bigger than the PNP and the JLP combined because the PNP and the JLP combined formed only a percentage of the society, This debate is about the entire society, anyone in being and those not even en ventre sa mere.
            Mr Nicolson: Explain it, sir.
           Mr Knifght: Those yet unborn, it's about them.
  • "This CCJ could remain for another 182 years too. it may be for a shorter period because we may move to our own local final Court in due course, but it is ---we're looking at years down the line, years down the line. So it's a big debate, which will have a big impact of one of the most important pillars of a society, the justice system, and one of the arms of government, one of the three arms of government, the Judicial Arm"
Labels:

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

"Declaration" Not "Determination"

Both the Prime Minister and the Speaker of the House of Representatives have conveniently confused calls for declaration of citizenship status by Members of either House with the determination of questions as to membership of either House. The Chief Justice of Jamaica has determined that individuals who have renewed their US passports and travelled thereon are disqualified from being validly elected or appointed as a Member of either House. Proponents of the impotence of the Speaker, in the matter of requiring a declaration by individual members, have sought to rely on Section 44 (1) of the Constitution which states: Any question whether - a. any person has been validly elected or appointed as a member of either House; or b. any member of either House has vacated his seat therein or is required, under the provisions of subsection (3) or subsection (4) of section 41 of this Constitution, to cease to exercise any of his functions as a member, shall be determined by the Supreme Court ...
3 comments
Read more

By-Election Predisposition

Introduction A massive amount of time and resources have been devoted to the issue of the course to be properly taken once a victorious electoral candidate has been found to be "disqualified" under S. 40 of the Constitution of Jamaica. Simply put, the crux of the matter is whether the second place candidate should, without more, be accorded the seat by the court; or that the said election be deemed null and void and a by-election ordered to decide the people's representative. This matter consumed inordinate amounts of energy - judicial and otherwise - due primarily to the silence of the Constitution on what recourse should be adopted in such circumstance. A cardinal tenet of democratic government is that the people must decide their representatives and not a select grouping - no matter their qualification or status. The Constitution of Jamaica fully recognized this imperative even though it expressly delegates the determination of questions as to membership of either Ho...
4 comments
Read more

Communication Error!

Jamaica Gleaner Contributor, Martin Henry has written an interesting article entitled “Victory for the rule of law” published on Sunday, April 20, 2008 . In his last paragraph Henry stated: " A troubled citizen's concerns about the legitimacy of laws passed in the past with the participation of MPs who may have been in Daryl Vaz's dual-allegiance position was published as The Letter of the Day by The Gleaner last Wednesday [April 16]. Lawyer Dr Paul Ashley made a great deal out of the same issue when we both appeared on the TV programme Impact on that same day. The Constitution dissolves these fears in the wisely anticipatory provision of Section 51 (2): "The presence or participation of any person not entitled to be present or to participate in the proceedings of the House shall not invalidate those proceedings." Interpreting legal provisions is an exercise fraught with dangers, especially if one is not acquainted with the rules governing interpretation. Without...
2 comments
Read more