Skip to main content

The CCJ: "the will of the PNP"


  • There has been talk of  behind-the- scenes moves aimed at breaking the deadlock over the three CCJ Bills.
  • A proposed Agreement was to operate on two levels: the Government and the Opposition one one level  and the PNP and JLP on the other.

Deadlock:

The Government wishes the Opposition to support the CCJ Bills by voting in favour of the CCJ Bills, both in the House of Representatives and in the Senate.
The Opposition wishes the issue of whether the Caribbean Court of Justice should replace the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council as Jamaica's final Court of Appeal to be put to the Jamaican electorate by way of a vote.

Proposed solution:

  1.  More than 50% of Opposition Members in the House of Representatives and more than 50% of the Opposition Senators in the Senate will vote in support of the CCJ Bills in the House of Representatives and in the Senate, respectively.
  2. The question to be put to the electorate: "Are you in favour of the Caribbean Court of Justice replacing the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council as Jamaica's final Court of Appeal"
  3. The electorate may vote Yes or No to that question.
  4. All parties to the Agreement would  agree "not  to say or do anything, or allow any of its officers or appointed candidates to say or do anything, whether in media advertising, media interviews, public debates, media talk shows, published articles, platform speeches or other public activities..... that might reasonably be perceived to be inconsistent  with a support of a Yes vote.
  5. The Government would " not bring the CCJ Bills into operation by way of publication in the Gazette of a notice in accordance with clause 1 of each of the CCJ Bills unless and until-- (i) the question referred to in paragraph  1(a) has been put to a vote by the electorate in Jamaica, and (ii) votes Yes are cast in that vote by more than 50% of the voters who vote thereon."
  6. In the event of any material breach occurring after the CCJ Bills have been passed by Parliament with the support of at least two-thirds of members of each House, the Government shall be released from any further obligations and the Government may thereafter cause the CCJ Bills to be brought into operation.
Controversy:
The above was brought to the attention of the Senate by the Leader of Opposition Business, Senator Tavares-Finson. However, Government Senators have countered that it was a personal initiative of the Leader of Government Business in the House of Representative, Phillip Paulwell. 

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

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

DEA: Book Review #1

Three book reviews of   "Dudus: The Extradition of Jamaica's #1 Drug Don" have been published; two in The Jamaica Observer and one in the Jamaica Gleaner. The first was by Rev Dr. Devon Dick entitled 'Devon Dick | Dudus Revisited By Dr Paul Ashley ' published in the Jamaica Gleaner Thursday, September 13, 2018: "Recently, Dr Paul Ashley, attorney-at-law and political commentator, published Dudus: The Extradition of Jamaica's #1 Drug Don, which recounts the "machinations of the Government of Jamaica (GOJ) to delay and frustrate the extradition of Jamaica's premier drug lord, Christopher 'Dudus' Coke." To achieve that goal, Ashley went to primary sources and published transcripts from both the Manatt, Phelps and Phillips and West Kingston commissions of enquiry. There are such documents scattered over the seven chapters. Ashley provides an overview of this watershed 2010 event then examines the confidentiality breach, the delay...
Post a Comment
Read more