Justice in Our Image: Robinson Says Caribbean Court Embodies Regional Self-Governance
A leading Caribbean constitutional law expert has called for deeper regional ownership of legal and political institutions, describing the Caribbean Court of Justice (CCJ) as a central pillar of self-governance and identity.
Delivering the Norman Manley Distinguished Lecture in Kingston, Jamaica, Professor Tracy Robinson said the CCJ represents not only a legal forum but also a reflection of the Caribbean’s post-independence aspirations.
“Despite the diversity of our experiences, the CCJ is ours,” she said, noting the court’s 20th anniversary. “It is no longer an idea under construction—it is a functioning institution that mirrors the Caribbean’s legal maturity and plural identity.”
Professor Robinson, who teaches at the University of the West Indies, Mona, Faculty of Law, argued that reliance on the UK’s Judicial Committee of the Privy Council as the region’s final court of appeal is no longer appropriate.
She said continued loyalty to external institutions reflects what Barbadian writer George Lamming once described as “the terror of the mind”—a lingering doubt in the Caribbean’s own capacities.
Only five CARICOM countries—Barbados, Guyana, Belize, Dominica and St Lucia—have adopted the CCJ in its appellate jurisdiction. Other states continue to send their final legal appeals to London.
Professor Robinson framed the court as part of a broader effort to decolonise Caribbean legal education and jurisprudence.
She highlighted decisions from the CCJ that have addressed constitutional reform, electoral integrity, and outdated colonial laws—particularly those shielded by “savings clauses,” which prevent judicial review of laws passed before independence.
In her view, the court’s approach to interpreting these laws shows a commitment to regional self-determination. “The CCJ treats with suspicion the overwhelming impact on the dignity of Caribbean people of laws which were not made by the same people to whom they apply,” she said.
Robinson also argued that the court has contributed to the development of a Caribbean democratic culture, where public dialogue, accountability and constitutional values take precedence over imported legal traditions.
She questioned the continued emphasis on the UK’s Westminster model, stating that Caribbean constitutions must be understood on their own terms.
“The unpoetic truth is that saying we have durable Westminster constitutions that generate regular elections leaves us wholly unresourced to address the cacophony of democratic dysfunctions we experience,” she said.
The lecture included references to CCJ judgments concerning the right to vote, electoral disputes in Guyana, and media freedom. Robinson said these rulings illustrate the court’s role in safeguarding democratic principles in politically fragile contexts.
Robinson’s lecture coincided with a year of planned academic activities celebrating the court’s 20th anniversary, including research publications, case studies and student-led forums at the Norman Manley Law School.
Her address concluded with a call for renewed regional commitment to the CCJ and a broader cultural shift toward recognising Caribbean legal institutions as both competent and legitimate.
“This is not only about law,” she said. “It is about who we believe ourselves to be.”
Advertise with the mоѕt vіѕіtеd nеwѕ ѕіtе іn Antigua!
We offer fully customizable and flexible digital marketing packages.
Contact us at [email protected]
 as a symbol of regional self-governance and identity.){kind=link}
If the court is for us by us, then it need to prove it can be fair and strong.
Me still feel like some countries only sign on when it benefit them.
The concept sweet, but execution is what will make people believe in it.
Self-governance sound good, but people still wary of leaving the Privy Council.
Professor Robinson says (CCJ) is a central pillar of self-governance and Identity. Conceptually the idea is correct.
But the reality is far from the truth.
We do not identify with Government and I institutional corruption. That is not our identity
The professor entire thesis is framed on the idea that we are now a mature region and should free ourselves from the vestige of former Colonial masters
This is about laws, constitution and jurisprudence, not so much about culture and history as ger thesis unfers.
The professor like many others in in the legal profession and government fail in her understanding of why do many in the Caribbean chooses to remain with the Privy Council. She attributes it to some sort of love and attachment to our colonial past.
She and her colleagues refused to acknowledge it’s about the political corruption the public encounter in their daily lives.
It is about their perception of the judicial system as being prejudiced against those who are poor and not powerful.
Professor Robinson references to CCJ judgments concerning the right to vote, electoral disputes in Guyana, and media freedom, flies in the face of the Antigua and Barbuda experience.
To assert that we do not understand, is an insult to our sense of integrity and fairness.
There was no media freedom in Antigua and Barbuda until the Derrick family went to the Privy Council at a time when the Bird ruling family had a radio monopoly.
The establishment of Observer radio led the Bird family loosing the next election.
CCJ did not enable that political situation to come about. The Privy Council did.
Professor Robinson is misinformed and present a bias thesis in favour if the CCJ which is offensive to our knowledge about the history of Eastern Caribbean jurisprudence.
We are no anglophiles. We are proud of being a people of African descent. We are a Caribbean people who are determine to see justice is deserved to all people. Not just the rich and the powerful
We are simply asking for those like The Constitutional Scholar Professor Robinson to address the issues of widespread institution CURRUPTION withing the Caribbean; rather than casting dispersions as to the reasons why we reject the CCJ.
Law is law…
Justice is justice….
Does it really matter who serves the justice once it comes from a competemt court?
Should race, religion, politics, finances or social stature matter in the deliverance of justice?
Can anyone of those calling for Caribbean jurist to take charge of our jurisprudence say that we have received racial justice from the JCPC?
I don’t think so.
In fact the Privy Council has been so impressed with our legal luminaries that our most recently retired chief justice of the ECSC now sits on JCPC.
Are the ones calling for the shift just disturbed that they cannot meet and influence the justice handed down by the Privy Council?
We see how the justice system in America is in shambles.
Justice is handed down according to political beliefs.
That which was right under the democrats is not wrong under the Republicans.
Is that where the call is wanting to go?
What happens in America happens because the judges aren’t insulated from political contamination. I dread the day when this will become so blatant here.
Can we ever forget a man called Brian Alleyne of Dominica?
He remained the Acting Chief Justice of the ECSC for years.
The then prime minister of Grenada vowed that he would not be confirmed to th position because of a decision which he handed down that the ssid prime minister didn’t agree with.
That’s the justice system that we need.
One which is truly blind.
We cannot bend, twist and turn according to politicial dictates.
A few years ago when president of the CCJ should have been in court to deliver a judgement he chose instead to go and have coffee with politicians.
That could never hapoen in the JCPC.
Justice is justice and when it is influenced by the desires of any party with interest it is not justice.
The Privy Council has been a faithful servant.
It has served us exceptionally well.
If it is not broken there is no need to fix nor replace it.