From the Office of the Ambassador of Caricom – The CCJ REVISITED

david_comissiong

DAVID COMISSIONG, Barbados’ Ambassador to CARICOM

I suspect that the primary reason why the people of Grenada and Antigua & Barbuda voted on 6th November 2018 not to accept the Caribbean Court of Justice (CCJ) as their highest national Court of Appeal is because – fundamentally – most of our people do not really know much about the Caribbean Court of Justice!

And the truth is that we Caribbean people do not really know very much about the CCJ simply because the institutions and officials that should have been consistently informing and educating us about the CCJ and our other significant regional institutions over the years have not done enough.

It is important that we fully grasp the fact that the CCJ is our organization! The Caribbean Court of Justice was established by the fifteen member nations of our Caribbean Community (CARICOM) – inclusive of the said Grenada and Antigua & Barbuda – and is therefore an “institution” of CARICOM.

Indeed, the CCJ is one of the twenty odd institutions of CARICOM – a group of institutions that includes the Caribbean Disaster Emergency Management Agency (CDEMA), the Caribbean Agricultural Research and Development Institute (CARDI), and the Caribbean Examinations Council (CXC) among others.

Many of these CARICOM institutions are outstanding organizations, but if I was challenged to select THE very best and most excellent CARICOM institution of them all, I would have to go with the Caribbean Court of Justice (CCJ)!

And let me now list the many reasons why – in my opinion – the CCJ stands head and shoulders above not only every other CARICOM institution, but also way above the British Privy Council:-

  1. First of all, the finances of the CCJ are as secure as the proverbial “Fort Knox”!  You see, the CCJ is financed out of the income generated by a permanent US$100 Million Trust Fund that is administered by a highly professional Board of Trustees drawn from or including the Heads of the Insurance Associations of the Caribbean, the Caribbean Institute of Chartered Accountants, the Association of Indigenous Banks of the Caribbean, the Organisation of Commonwealth Caribbean Bar Associations, the Caribbean Congress of Labour, the Caribbean Association of Industry and Commerce, the University of the West Indies and the CARICOM Secretariat.  This excellent state of affairs is a tribute to the collective foresight of the CARICOM Secretariat, then Barbados Attorney-General, Mia Amor Mottley, and former St. Lucia Prime Minister, Dr. Kenny Anthony, who undertook responsibility for setting up the Trust Fund at the time of the establishment of the CCJ.
  2. This fulsome and secure funding explains why the CCJ has been able to establish and maintain a first class, modern, state-of-the-art headquarters and Court in Port-of-Spain, Trinidad & Tobago and – unlike the Privy Council – to also institute the modus operandi of an itinerant Court, travelling and taking its services to Caribbean citizens in Barbados, Jamaica, Belize, Guyana and other CARICOM nations.
  3. The CCJ also employs and maintains a panel of absolutely first class, experienced, and highly professional judges who – to date – have been drawn from the nations of Trinidad & Tobago, St. Kitts & Nevis, Jamaica, St. Vincent & the Grenadines, the United Kingdom, Barbados, the Netherland Antilles, Guyana and Belize.  Indeed the Presidents of the Court have been such outstanding legal luminaries as Hon. Michael de la Bastide of Trinidad & Tobago, Sir Dennis Byron of St. Kitts & Nevis, and Hon. Adrian Saunders of St. Vincent & the Grenadines.
  4. The CCJ judges are all appointed by a broad-based non-political “Regional Judicial and Legal Services Commission” (RJLSC), comprised of selectees or representatives of the Council of Legal Education, the University of the West Indies and University of Guyana Law Faculties, the private sector Bar Associations of the CARICOM nations, the OECS Bar Association,  the Organization of Commonwealth Caribbean Bar Associations, one CARICOM Public Service Commission and one Judicial Services Commission, and the Secretaries General of CARICOM and the OECS.  You really cannot get more broad-based and politically independent that this!
  5. The CCJ – unlike the Privy Council – is a final Court of Appeal for all types of civil and criminal cases – from the smallest civil claim of the average working-class Caribbean citizen to the high finance cases of the corporate elite.  The British Privy Council, on the other hand, basically functions as an Appeal Court either for the murder appeals of persons on death row or for big civil cases.  The Privy Council is not – in effect – a court that deals with the typical legal matters of ordinary Caribbean citizens!
  6. And one of the reasons why the British Privy Council – unlike the CCJ – is not really a Court for the masses of Caribbean people, has to do with costs.  In order for a Caribbean citizen to take a case before the Privy Council in London, England, he or she not only has to get permission to do so, but he/she also has to pay expensive filing costs; retain expensive UK based lawyers; and undertake the expensive venture of travelling to the United Kingdom.  Indeed, legal experts estimate that a Caribbean citizen has to look for somewhere between US$57,000 and US$87,000 in order to pay for a civil appeal before the Privy Council!  With the CCJ there is no such prohibitive cost.  Furthermore, rather than the Caribbean citizen having to travel to the CCJ in Trinidad, the CCJ will often come to the citizen in his or her home territory, or permit the appeal to be heard via video conferencing!
  7. Finally, unlike the Privy Council, the CCJ makes it a point of duty to “get on the case” of inefficient or dysfunctional national Courts of Law in our individual CARICOM member states – constantly subjecting them to constructive criticism, advice, and even training, in order to get them to improve their standards.

Clearly, the CCJ is one of the greatest accomplishments of our regional integration Movement!  Moreover, it is an achievement that we collectively accomplished through the application of our own initiative and native intellect, and that our citizens and taxpayers have independently underwritten and financially supported.  It therefore goes without saying that we should all feel very proud about this outstanding Caribbean success story.

At present, the CCJ serves 14 CARICOM member states as a Court of original jurisdiction with responsibility for interpreting and applying the Revised Treaty of Chaguaramas, but it only serves four (4) CARICOM states as a final national Court of Appeal – Barbados, Guyana, Belize and Dominica.

Surely it is time for all of us in the Caribbean Community (CARICOM) to make full use of this first class Caribbean institution!

56 comments

  • What a load of drivel. Has this CCJ magically found some Caribbean lawyers who are not thieving scum? I doubt it very much.
    I stopped reading when this fool opined that his CCJ ranked way above the British Privy Council. What is the moronic parasite smoking?

    Liked by 1 person

  • Colonialism has passed, the tenets of that system adds no viable worth to our way of culture being a former exploiters.
    Have you not learned the lessons from the WINDRUSH chronicles, SLAVERY?
    Are you not aware of the implications of Brexit maneuver?

    CCJ was a bold move, a sensible move, but why has only 4 subscribed thus far?
    It tells a story, not one of faith in the system OR one that renders justice in corrupt communities without fear of compromised. Darkness has no place in the light and it has to be pursued.

    Which of you as leader of your own household venture to a foreigners’ house (BPC)..( not of your culture) to acquire a judgement in the management of your private affairs?….
    Keep family business within family. It was never our way or our culture.

    CARICOM should make mandatory the CCJ as the highest Court of Appeal.
    Beyond that, INTERNATIONAL COURT.

    CONFLICTING ARGRUMENTS.
    Sovereign Independent Nation States are still technically govern by British constructs
    The chains of bondage are broken, but the locked cuffs still remain on their wrists… BUSSA .

    Work to be done come 2019

    Like

  • I will paraphrase my comments , with the statement that” I am not a lawyer”. If one of the functions of the CCJ is to ” get on the case” of inefficient or dysfunctional National Courts of Law etc. I guess it forgot that Barbados was a member?

    Liked by 1 person

  • @ Robert
    …” I guess it forgot that Barbados was a member?”

    No, certainly not.
    As recent as the voting rights case days prior the May General elections.

    Liked by 1 person

  • “Finally, unlike the Privy Council, the CCJ makes it a point of duty to “get on the case” of inefficient or dysfunctional national Courts of Law in our individual CARICOM member states – constantly subjecting them to constructive criticism, advice, and even training, in order to get them to improve their standards.”

    How successful so far have they been in Barbados???…Fruendelfool wanted to dump the CCJ because he did not like their sensible judgements..they were not discriminatory enough for him and his fellow nuisance lawyers. …who destroyed Barbados’ Supreme Court..

    “but why has only 4 subscribed thus far?”

    Because Caribbean leaders are only NOW realizing that they are supposed to EDUCATE THEIR PEOPLE…and stop keeping VITAL INFORMATION FROM THEM.

    Like

  • I would love to see Caricom make anything mandatory for Barbados- won’t ever happen, and a good thing too.

    Like

  • “I guess it forgot that Barbados was a member?”

    The CCJ tried their best with Barbados and were VERBALLY ABUSED for their troubles…just like ya get on BU when you try to tell them they are in this mess, because they refuse to change their anal and disgusting ways..

    Like

  • I stopped reading when this fool opined that his CCJ ranked way above the British Privy Council. What is the moronic parasite smoking?

    @ 45govt – I take it therefore that you have read and analyzed the jurisprudence of both courts? Or do you just believe English judges are better because…?

    Like

  • CARICOM should make mandatory the CCJ as the highest Court of Appeal.

    @ nine nine – No, that would be to do precisely what Britain did with the abnormally deep entrenchment of the Privy Council in the Antigua & Barbuda and GrenadaConstitutions, for example…

    Like

  • Commissiong articles is loaded with sour grapea
    Tried as he must have to get Antigua Grenada and Barbuda to vote for the CCJ he failed
    It is obvious the people of those countries cannot be controlled by political theatrics and would rather prefer to take control of all that interest their country in terms that serve them best

    Like

  • Per usual you attack the person. What is your view on the substantive matter outlined by the Ambassador? Do you have a view?

    Like

  • Drawing judges from jurisdictions that are not members of the CCJ is flawed, but that is by the by. The real issue is that Ambassador Commissiong seems to be a loose cannon.

    Liked by 1 person

  • Leading statements 45.
    Then the body should take it to vote, Surely, the Head cannot recluse/abstain.
    While they are at it, the should make provisions for ANY SOVEREIGN COURT which FAILS its jurisdiction MUST subject itself to the under the aegis of the CCJ. Its not a mountain to high to climb.

    Like

  • Drawing judges from jurisdictions that are not members of the CCJ is flawed, but that is by the by. The real issue is that Ambassador Commissiong seems to be a loose cannon

    @ Hal, A most cogent thesis against the retention of the JCPC where not one of the judges is from a CARICOM state!

    Liked by 1 person

  • Jeff
    Don’t disregard the stronghold of the British in the Constitutions of Caribbean Sovereign States and those that are still British colonies.

    Like

  • Don’t disregard the stronghold of the British in the Constitutions of Caribbean Sovereign States and those that are still British colonies.

    Au contraire, Sir, that is my point exactly. CARICOM does not punch at that weight…

    Like

  • I support the CCJ. It is a logical development in the self governance of Caricom states. So far the CCJ has proven to be accessible, efficient and sound in its deliberations. So it is curious that the citizens of three states on four occasions rejected the CCJ. Mr Commissiong’s obseervations about the CCJ have not been refuted. The question then is: why did the people of Antigua, St. Vincent and Grenada (of revolutionary government fame not so long ago) vote AGAINST their self interesr?

    Liked by 1 person

  • @Jeff

    Enjoy the long hops Jeff!

    Like

  • @Ping Pong

    Clearly the people of those countries are not attuned to the benefits that come with self governing on all fronts? If Barbadians had a say in whether we should have signed up would it have been the same outcome as those countries?

    Like

  • If Barbadians had a say in whether we should have signed up would it have been the same outcome as those countries?

    @ David, I believe so. Who has yet discovered what informs personal political choice?

    Liked by 1 person

  • @ Jeff,

    That is a good argument if you are looking back and is fundamental to anti-colonial rule. But moving forward with self-determination the underlying assumption must be that we have quality judges.
    As I have previously said, these things are best explained with an example. Some time ago myself and a Trinidadian-born friend spent an evening with a senior Barbadian lawyer and his wife.
    Until then (and I still do) I had assumed this man was as good a lawyer an advocate as anyone found in the courts of England and Wales. But he spent the entire evening telling us how good a lawyer he was and naming names of popular England and Wales lawyers. I was so disappointed. I think it showed his lack of self-confidence.
    Where is our jurisprudence? Where are our world-class jurists? By the way, I still think the CCJ is flawed, as I have said before, being a court of first instance and a final Appellate court. The argument against the Privy Council is silly. It is like arguing why slavery or colonialism were wrong. That much must be assumed.

    Like

  • Jeff
    In my first comment…
    “Sovereign Independent Nation States are still technically govern by British constructs”

    In my fourth comment..
    “Don’t disregard the stronghold of the British in the Constitutions of Caribbean Sovereign States and those that are still British colonies. (repeated)

    You said and I quote.. “CARICOM does not punch at that weight”…

    Why is it not punching above its weight?
    A body that is well structured, financed and articulated.

    Hit this one as far as you can.

    Like

  • Some years ago, the Owen Arthur administration proposed to take Barbados into Republican status. The DLP led by David Thompson made it clear that it would oppose such a development. The same DLP opposed the CSME. Yet once in power the DLP reversed its attitude on both issues. Remember Mr Panday who championed the CCJ when he was PM and opposed it when he was in opposition? It is my very strong view that the politics of the DLP and that of Mr Panday should join Mr Thompson wherever he resides now.

    Like

  • But he spent the entire evening telling us how good a lawyer he was and naming names of popular England and Wales lawyers. I was so disappointed. I think it showed his lack of self-confidence

    Hal, And he is the epitome of regional jurisprudence? What were you expecting to hear from this shallow man? And why did you believe that he was as good a lawyer an advocate as anyone found in the courts of England and Wales?.

    Second, the CCJ is NOT a court of first instance at all, the original jurisdiction judgments are not appeasable to any other court.

    Finally, we have a choice re the JCPC. We had none, seemingly, with regard to slavery and colonialism! They are not at all identical…

    Liked by 1 person

  • Why is it not punching above its weight?
    A body that is well structured, financed and articulated.

    Although it has entered the populist discourse as A Very Good Thing, punching ABOVE one’s weight may be gravely injurious to one’s health. Would you fight Ali tor Foreman or Tyson as a flyweight?

    Liked by 1 person

  • @ Jeff,

    I never said he was a shallow man at all. But comparing himself against UK lawyers was totally irrelevant. To me it showed self-confidence. He was and remains, an outstanding advocate.
    By jurists I am talking about legal theorists, philosophers of law – even sociologists of law. The idea of choice is philosophically confusing; constitutional independence removes, or at least neutralises, that which one is independent of. You can only gain independence from something that inhibits our freedom -be that slavery, colonialism, or some form of internal self-government. Freedom of choice is a future decision, even if it means returning to the old system, in which the basis for that decision is self-determined..

    Like

  • lack of self-confidence.

    Like

  • Mr Cumberbatch, please update your references. It is Joshua, Wilder or Fury that a flyweight is advised to avoid.

    Self governance implies hard work, confidence, creativity, courage and joie de vivre. When did the present generation lose these attributes?

    Like

  • The irony escapes some people,

    Like

  • Barbados STILL does not have a constitution drafted by Bajans.

    Like

  • Until then (and I still do) I had assumed this man was as good a lawyer an advocate as anyone found in the courts of England and Wales. *But he spent the entire evening telling us how good a lawyer he was and naming names of popular England and Wales lawyers. I was so disappointed. I think it showed his lack of self-confidence.*.

    I never said he was a shallow man at all. But comparing himself against UK lawyers was totally irrelevant. To me it showed self-confidence. He was and remains, an outstanding advocate.*

    Which one is it, Hal?

    Liked by 1 person

  • The Truth Shall Set You Free

    “That is a good argument if you are looking back and is fundamental to anti-colonial rule. But moving forward with self-determination the underlying assumption must be that we have quality judges.

    As I have previously said, these things are best explained with an example. Some time ago myself and a Trinidadian-born friend spent an evening with a senior Barbadian lawyer and his wife.

    Until then (and I still do) I had assumed this man was as good a lawyer an advocate as anyone found in the courts of England and Wales. But he spent the entire evening telling us how good a lawyer he was and naming names of popular England and Wales lawyers. I was so disappointed. I think it showed his lack of self-confidence.

    Where is our jurisprudence? Where are our world-class jurists? By the way, I still think the CCJ is flawed, as I have said before, being a court of first instance and a final Appellate court. The argument against the Privy Council is silly. It is like arguing why slavery or colonialism were wrong. That much must be assumed.” {Quote}

    Please explain this drivel?

    What has spending an evening with a senior Barbadian lawyer, which ended in disappointment for you because he bragged about how good a lawyer he was, has to do with the CCJ?

    Based on your interaction with ONE means ALL Barbadian lawyers lack self confidence?

    Like

  • Would you fight Ali tor Foreman or Tyson as a flyweight?

    David (not of BU) defeated Goliath in his encounter, Likewise many an incumbent in the last election, so too David ( not former PM nor of BU) took on Hyatt… should I continue? Its really not about health, but faith and guts.

    Like

  • Second, the CCJ is NOT a court of first instance at all, the original jurisdiction judgments are not appeasable to any other court.

    APELLABLE for “appeasable”, whatever that is!

    Like

  • David (not of BU) defeated Goliath in his encounter, Likewise many an incumbent in the last election, so too David ( not former PM nor of BU) took on Hyatt… should I continue? Its really not about health, but faith and guts.

    9of9, The first is allegory, the second is owed mainly to the fecklessness of the last administration, and the third was decided on a point of law…but you go ahead and punch above your weight if you care to….Good luck!

    Like

  • Mr Cumberbatch, please update your references. It is Joshua, Wilder or Fury that a flyweight is advised to avoid.

    Duly noted, Sir!

    Like

  • Ok Jeff,
    Allow me some punches.
    What has gone wrong with the Legal construct worldwide?
    The Institutions of Justice SEEM to have taken on a new philosophy.

    In all respect to the Advocates of Prudence, Justice seem to have been watered down, where mockery and injustice prevails. The cloaks of greed has given rise to manipulation of systems, procedures and processes, where judgements are imbalanced, unjustifiable, malicious. Where known violations of law / infringements especially Corporate go unaddressed, favorable results celebrated, rights removed and the list can go on….

    It may all be drivel to some, even blasphemy, but what is transpiring today in publish reporting is to the observers “mock-sport” of the system.. where the law is know by practitioners, defense is lauded or loopholes strategized.

    Is their two sets of law?

    Cases can be identified worldwide to make the point.
    This one still lingers.. How can one accused of a criminal act be afforded leave of country without escort?.

    Care to comment Luminary Counsellor

    Like

  •         Posted to a T&T chat to this article:
    

    If you are selling something the worse way to convince people to buy it is to tell them “all yuh too stupid to understand the benefits of this product”…..

    The best way is to convince them is to show them your product is good, damn good, will benefit them, will be a great thing for them etc etc

    Within the upper echelons, populating the higher rungs of Maslow’s hierarchy, they speak of true independence etc but in the real world of the 99% what they really matters about the CCJ is this: when I have an important court matter that will affect my life, that of my family or friends, or the nation, do I trust the CCJ or the Privy Council? Many of the same people who are for the CCJ will run to the PC if faced with a super critical legal matter….. we have to get real, admit this, then deal with it.

    Here is a “secret” — the people do not trust the local judiciaries that are laughably incompetent, inefficient, and in the case of T&T, an absolute joke of leadership and management. Where do the CCJ personnel come from? The local judiciaries. You got to improve & build trust and confidence in the local judiciaries and take it to up the CCJ or else

    Like

  • Within the upper echelons, populating the higher rungs of Maslow’s hierarchy, they speak of true independence etc but in the real world of the 99% what they really matters about the CCJ is this: when I have an important court matter that will affect my life, that of my family or friends, or the nation, do I trust the CCJ or the Privy Council? Many of the same people who are for the CCJ will run to the PC if faced with a super critical legal matter….. we have to get real, admit this, then deal with it.

    @David, that choice no longer exists for some…us, for example…

    Liked by 1 person

  • @Jeff

    Found the comment interesting, good insight.

    Like

  • Is their two sets of law?

    Cases can be identified worldwide to make the point.
    This one still lingers.. How can one accused of a criminal act be afforded leave of country without escort?

    nineofnine, There are not two sets…one only.

    The matter to which you refer- the presumption of innocence demands that unless you are perceived as a flight risk, you should be entitled to your freedom.The fact that the individual has already travelled AND returned to the island on a previous occasion would likely lead the judicial officer to believe reasonably that the individual has no intention of absconding and thus grant the permission sought.. The operative word here is accused. Guilty is different…

    Like

  • Jeff there is a huge ignorance about the mechanics of bail by the general public. It goes back to civic awareness and why politicians and their surrogates so easily manipulate public opinion.

    Liked by 1 person

  • @ Jeff,

    It showed lack of self-confidence. I sent a correction immediately after, but it was not published.

    Liked by 1 person

  • In every instance when confronted by change we display an inherent self doubt. This goes for whether we believed that a newspaper of local origin-the nation , could have ever “outdo” the Advocate then owned by Lord Thompson , to the CCJ.
    There is much work to be done!

    Like

  • Jeff..
    ..”The fact that the individual has already travelled AND returned to the island on a previous occasion would likely lead the judicial officer to believe reasonably that the individual has no intention of absconding and thus grant the permission sought.. ”

    The fact that one, who holds a passport, most likely would have multiple stamps within showing destinations travelled.
    The fact that one, who is before the Courts for whatever charge, is ordered to SURRENDER THEIR PASSPORT and usually be required to report to a DESIGNATED police station at allotted times.
    The fact the they are present IN THE COURT to answer the charge, is evidence that have travelled and returned to the jurisdiction.. even multiple times.

    That reasoning you posit has no weight.. based on law, rather, as you claim is based on presumption.
    Rightfully, presumption then carries dual determination at the whims and fancy of a judicial officer AND DOES NOT RENDER JUSTICE to the rights of the accused who by law is innocent until proven guilty.

    IS THAT THE LAW OR JUSTICE more so it appears to be partial, discriminatory and somewhat prejudiced.

    What am I missing here?

    Like

  • I love how Jeff (the UWI graduate) destroys the nuffernarians. Imagine individuals who decry the quality of education at UWI are now advocating that those same graduates not defer to the knowledge/expertise of the British legal luminaries….unless this senior Barbadian lawyer was educated in the mudda country.

    David – Sorry but joining the CCJ is a clear choice. The politicians always opt to politicise it when in Opposition.

    Like

  • As one of the nuffernarians here de ole man is not as smart as the others here so I will keep my questions very straignt and to the point

    @ the Luminary Jeff Cumberbatch

    1.What is your cogent opinion as it relates to the unilateral proposal to wipe all cases older than 10 years off the law books of Barbados?

    2.Do you not think that, with these in an ongoing sequence of ongoing travesties of justice, where your legal matter never gest a day in court, or that your resources to hire a lawyer are non existent, does it not seem logical that a people so disenfranchised by such local governance, or to use you analogy Boxed into disbelief by the George Foreman nature of these types of fly by night decisions, that a people, punch drunk and BELIEVING THAT WHICH IS “LOCALLY DISTILLED” will be intrinsically dishonest, would default to an equally faceless Privy Council?

    3.Dont you find it a most strange thing that you would receive this seeming compliment from the 1st of the BLP dogs, that they would come to commend your competence but that you would be avoided as one of the Legal Beagles in their Advisory Pool?

    Why do they avoid you and Eddie Ventose and rely on David Barry?

    Dont answer IF SUCH WILL ammmmmmm expose the nefarious nature of your current admirers

    heheheheheheheh

    Liked by 1 person

  • The evil things you do, really does follow you.

    ..this is Caroline Herbert’s, deceased and supposedly Thorne’s handiwork…Herbert for sure had no qualms about stealing from the living, dead, dying, disabled, abled..she stole from whomever, with the help of her fellow SKUNKS from bar association…and the skunk who was Chief Justice.

    Like

  • Within the social sciences we talk about a time lag

    It is difficult for us to understand the determination by some that we should have a Caribbean Court of Appeal or even CARICOM.

    Not that we have not supported these in the past and probable still will in the future.

    However, nobody has explained to us the relative merits of integrationism at a time when other blocs are in peril.

    These would obviously include the EU. Then we’ve had the TPP. At a time of trade wars and rumours of trade wars.

    Like

  • The EU is a power grabbing entity of crafty elitists, IT IS NOT AN ELECTED BODY.

    The group of Caribbean Nations States are the peaks of mountains of once an Atlantic continent, where the majority of inhabitants have the roots in Africa. As Africans away from home, we all should/must unite under one umbrella for the causes that develop us an African Nation expatriated even for repatriation to build the homeland.

    CARICOM must unilaterally build greater ties with the Homeland and forget China with their expansionary agendas.

    Like

  • @Nineofnine,

    Are you serious? Look at the democratic structure of the EU and that of CARICOM and tell me which is more democratic? Pick any institution. I agree with you about China.
    By the way, we still have not been told what is the national debt to China and if the Mottley-led BLP government defaulted on our China debt too.

    Like

  • Hal,
    The structures of the EU (28 European countries) and CARICOM (29) are the same, they both are built on a second tier collective representative principle.

    WHAT IS DEMOCRATIC hic DEMOCRACY but a demonic practice on people and prosperity.
    Democracy, if you are aware was “created” by the banking elite centuries ago. They designed the governance system venture to pilfer the populations through “Government” debt, interest rates and deficits of Governments to further enrich themselves continuously… hence, the Government collect their (banking elites) money via taxes.

    Per the EU, as at the end of 2018 are in a colossal debt crisis due to borrowing and reckless spending by some of it member states. Six of its member countries has been brought to the point of bankruptcy.

    The ECB in its monetary policies retroactive to fiscal policies of governments is tantamount in its present predicament. Pushing Trade but interest rates eroding progress exponentially.

    CARICOM pool their resources. The level of borrowing is not known and seem not to be in any crisis mode.

    The CSME thrust for one currency must learn from the EUs’ demise and formulate a collective agreement for balanced MONETARY and FISCAL policies to avoid erodible practices.
    Avoid credit, debt.

    CARICOM IS NOT on par with the EU current economic position.
    Further construct must take the narrow road in the name of true DEMOCRACY if ever there is such..

    Like

  • The best thing notable about the EU is that the member states came together for TRADE to which the cause for war was diminished and to some degree, the ecomonic reliance on the umbrella body by weaker member states.

    Like

  • @ NIneof nine,

    Today is January 8.

    Like

  • Hal
    …and, your point is…

    Like

  • @ Nine of nine,

    I am not going back to an old discussion. We cannot continue to round and round in circles.

    Like

Join in the discussion, you never know how expressing your view may make a difference.

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s