Jamaican Leg of Shanique Myrie Case Ends – Points to Note

Flag of the Caribbean Common Market and Community (CARICOM) (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

 

The Caribbean Court of Justice sat in Jamaica for three days from March 4 – 6, 2013 to take the evidence of Jamaican witnesses in the Shanique Myrie case. Myrie claims to have been discriminated against by the government of Barbados when she tried to visit the country in March 2011.

The claimant, Myrie, called six witnesses, while the government of Jamaica, an intervening party, called four witnesses. It is great that the public is so interested in this case, but here are a few points to note. 

1. The part of the evidence to which the public has been exposed is that which has emerged under cross examination. This is because the witnesses state their account of what happened in written statements which are then tendered into evidence to stand as their evidence in chief. In other words, you don’t see, as you would in a criminal trial, the witness verbally giving his or her account. This means that the public generally does not know the entirety of the witness’s account, its length, how many details were provided, or the depth of the account. All we have heard are the parts which the opposing attorney chose to highlight.

In other words, when we hear an attorney in cross-examination – and the same thing will happen when the court travels to Barbados – hammering away at one or two or several details – at this stage it is very difficult to say whether a witness has been “discredited” or not. What are the key issues in the case? In this case, a key aspect of the evidence is the cavity search, which the government of Barbados is denying ever took place. Was Myrie shaken on that critical aspect of the testimony? This was not an aspect dealt on in any detail in cross examination so the public cannot really make any informed view of that issue. That, of course, will be for the judges to decide.

Myrie’s witness statement was 18 pages long. The public was therefore not exposed to the vast majority of her evidence and as a result cannot at this point make any realistic or informed assessment of her evidence as a whole.

2. It is a truism in law that memories fade. It would always be unlikely for any witness to remember every detail of a matter that took place some time ago. That would be taken into consideration in assessing credibility of a witness.

3. This is not a domestic court. It is an international court with no jury, but with seven experienced judges hearing the case. The difference is helpfully explained in a rebuttal filed by Jamaica’s Deputy Solicitor General Dr. Kathy Ann Brown in response to an application by the attorneys representing Barbados to strike out the statements of three of the Jamaican witnesses. She stated that:

“International courts generally allow parties the freedom to submit any evidence they wish in order to prove the facts necessary to establish their respective cases. It is submitted further that an international court determines the relevance , materiality and weight of the evidence offered by any party and in appropriate circumstances may generally only exclude evidence if it is duplicative, defamatory or obviously irrelevant.

In contrast to the treatment of evidence at the national level …in international cases rules of procedure that govern the submission of evidence and its evaluation are less restrictive.”

 In other words, a lot of evidence will be admitted that may not have been admitted under the rules of evidence in domestic courts, and it is for the judges to sift through the evidence and make their assessments.

As  a result, one of the attorneys explained to me that the frequent objections which would normally be made in domestic court were not made, as they were allowing the court to hear all the evidence being presented. This would be why one concerned observer commented that the Barbadian attorneys were walking all over our witnesses.

4. I have also been disturbed by some of the disrespectful comments about one of the witnesses who told the court that he could not read or write. The suggestions I have heard (from Jamaicans) are that he should not have been called to give evidence. The witness has given his account of how he was treated. Why should he be denied the opportunity to do so because of his inability to read?

The courtroom can be an intimidating place for many people. Consider the lawyers flitting around in black robes – the imposing bench of, in this case, seven judges sitting on high, the way in which lawyers talk  (when in court) which almost inevitably does not sound anything like the way normal people talk, and in this case, the thick, to the ears of many of us,  Bajan accent in which the lead attorney was questioning the witnesses. And last but far from least, there was the frustrating refusal of almost everybody in this case to actually speak into the microphone – judges and attorneys alike. Add to that the fact that a witness’s natural language may have been Jamaican patois, not English. Any of these factors could have contributed to an inability to properly understand the questions being asked. Let’s be a little more sensitive in our assessment of our fellow Jamaicans.

 The upshot? Don’t jump to conclusions and pronounce the case won or lost just yet. This could be a landmark case in the region. I have no doubt that will be reflected in the ruling.

 

 

 

 

Related articles

• Caribbean Court of Justice Sitting in Jamaica – Significant (newsandviewsbydjmillerja.wordpress.com)
• Eyeing the case before the Caribbean Court of Justice (kaieteurnewsonline.com)

Day One of the Shanique Myrie Case

Caricom-Flag (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

Opening Submissions

The Caribbean Court of Justice on March 4, 2013 began hearing the case of Shanique Myrie, a Jamaican woman who alleges that she was unlawfully denied entry to Barbados on March 14, 2011, because of her nationality and that she was subjected to degrading treatment including an illegal cavity search. The case is grounded in the revised Treaty of Chaguaramas, which governs the operation of CARICOM.

Day one of the proceedings saw Myrie’s lawyers making opening statements, while Myrie’s witness statement was admitted to evidence, following which attorneys for the state of Barbados began to cross examine her.

Opening statements were made by Myrie’s lawyers, Michelle Brown and Nancy Anderson.

Anderson told the Court that the case was about two of the most important rights at the level of the Caribbean Community (CARICOM) as set out in the revised Treaty of Chaguaramas which governs the operation of CARICOM, freedom of movement, and freedom from discrimination on the basis of nationality.

The case, she said, is also about one young woman traveling for the first time to another Caribbean country, who arrived there on March 14, 2011, and experienced a pleasant first few minutes in that country. She was then escorted to a waiting area, interrogated by two police officers from the drug squad seeking to ascertain if she was a drug courier, and subjected to an embarrassing, painful and offensive cavity search, Anderson said.

The treatment was in breach of the government of Barbados’ international obligations, and its obligations under the Treaty. She said there was only one reason for the suspicion of Myrie, that of her nationality,

Brown, dealing with the legal issues relating to the case, said that the court will be asked to interpret three aspects of the Treaty, in relation to freedom of movement, a guarantee that the Treaty rights of CARICOM nationals must be observed, and that fundamental human rights of CARICOM nationals must be observed.

She said it must be the standard that all CARICOM nationals be treated with respect and that they should expect to be treated with respect.

She stressed that under the Treaty, there should be no discrimination against CARICOM nationals based on nationality, and that Jamaican nationals ought to be treated in the same way as Barbadian nationals.

She said that when Jamaicans arrive in Barbados “there should be no sniffer dogs if the same treatment is not meted out to other nationals.”

The Court will be asked to find that fundamental human rights in international law should also be recognized in Community law.

Myrie is seeking declarations that Barbados has breached its obligations under the Treaty, that her rights were violated and that she is entitled to damages in compensation. She is also seeking an apology from the government of Barbados.

Caribbean Court of Justice Sitting in Jamaica – Significant

 

Caribbean Court of Justice logo (Photo credit: Mark Morgan Trinidad B)

The Caribbean Court of Justice (CCJ) is sitting from March 4-8, 2013 for the first time at the Jamaica Conference Centre  in Kingston, Jamaica, as it hears a case brought by a Jamaican, Shanique Myrie, against the state of Barbados.

Miss Myrie is alleging that she was subjected to discriminatory treatment by government officials when she sought to enter Barbados and that the discrimination was based on her nationality. This, she is arguing, is contrary to the Barbadian government’s obligations under the revised Treaty of Chaguaramas which governs the operations of the Caribbean Community (CARICOM).

It is a significant development for the region for a number of reasons. The discussion about whether CARICOM countries should accede to the appellate jurisdiction of the CCJ has been going on for years, somewhat obscuring the fact that the CCJ is up, running and adjudicating, and that Jamaica does in fact have access to the Court in its original jurisdiction, in relation to matters arising under the Treaty.

That simply means that if a matter relates to the Treaty of Chaguaramas, for example, trade, or as in allegations in the current case, free movement or discrimination based on nationality, the only court legally empowered to adjudicate on such matters is the CCJ.

The Shanique Myrie case brings the court to life for Jamaicans. It is sitting in real time, in Jamaican space, dealing with an issue that many Jamaicans have complained about – their treatment at the hands of immigration officials of other Caribbean countries.

Although based in Trinidad and Tobago, it had long been proposed that the CCJ would be itinerant, travelling throughout the region to hear cases. This is the first such occasion. It demonstrates to Caribbean nationals the proximity of the Court, and removes at least one layer of cost involved in traveling to the UK to access the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council. I am not going to pretend that this will make access to the Court cheap, or even affordable for many. Legal fees can be prohibitive, and as the Shanique Myrie case has shown, depending on the facts of the case, traveling costs can still apply.

Nevertheless, this exposure can only be good for the Court.

Related articles

• Free movement in CCJ spotlight (trinidadexpress.com)
• Eyeing the case before the Caribbean Court of Justice (caribbean360.com)

PNP’s Posturing on the CCJ Unhelpful

Caribbean Court of Justice logo (Photo credit: Mark Morgan Trinidad B)

Today I’m blogging over at http://www.rjrnewsonline.com. I did a follow-up to my first piece on Jamaica and the Caribbean Court of Justice, where I had said that Jamaica is in limbo on the issue.

Today I’m saying that the PNP’s posturing on the CCJ matter  has been unnecessarily antagonistic and is unlikely to be at all helpful in fulfilling what they say is their goal, replacing the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council with the Caribbean Court of Justice as Jamaica’s final court of appeal. Check out my post here.

Related articles

• Sitting in Limbo – Jamaica and the CCJ – Part 1 (newsandviewsbydjmillerja.wordpress.com)

Sitting in Limbo – Jamaica and the CCJ – Part 1

Note: I am now also writing for the website www.rjrnewsonline.com.

Caribbean Court of Justice logo (Photo credit: Mark Morgan Trinidad B)

Please check out my first post on Jamaica and the Caribbean Court of Justice in which I say that twenty years after the seminal report from the West Indian Commission, Time for Action, we are still spinning our wheels. You can read it here.  CARICOM leaders have a track record of delay, however, and I recently commented here on the most recent Heads of Government meeting and the progress, or lack thereof.

Related articles

• Jamaica’s appeal court dilemma (bbc.co.uk)

Book Review: Black Meteors – the Caribbean in International Track and Field

Verdict: Excellent read

If the performances of gold medalists Usain Bolt and Shelly-Ann Fraser of Jamaica, Kirani James of

English: Shelly-Ann Fraser and Kerron Stewart at the World Championship Athletics 2009 in Berlin (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

Grenada and Keshorn Walcott of Trinidad and Tobago in the London Olympics excited your interest in Caribbean athletics, or if you have been a long-time fan, you really should check out Black Meteors – The Caribbean in International Track and Field.

Black Meteors is published by Ian Randle Publishers, and written by Basil Ince, a former athlete and administrator, diplomat and academic, who marries his interests in this thoroughly attractive and engaging book about Caribbean sportsmen and women.

The layout and format of the book are excellent, with easy-to-read text, and a large number of photographs of athletes ranging from the pioneers like Lennox Miller and Arthur Wint of Jamaica, to more recent athletes such as Ato Boldon of Trinidad and Tobago and Javier Sotomayor of Cuba, and current stars like Yohan Blake and superstar sprinter Usain Bolt of Jamaica, among many, many more.

English: Kirani James during 2011 World championships Athletics in Daegu (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

And therein lies one of the biggest and most welcome differences between this book and many others. The author states that:

“throughout the book the word Caribbean refers to all Caribbean peoples, English speaking and non-English speaking.”

Ince approaches that issue of what is a “Caribbean” athlete in an entirely natural way, that makes not just geographical sense, given the breadth of talent displayed throughout the region, but also allows the author to introduce readers to some athletes who may not as well known to them as others.

The other important aspect of Ince’s approach to the book was the effortless story-telling which brings to life, not just the athletes and their successes, but the socio-political backdrop to their sporting careers.

One example is his discussion of the evolution of women’s participation in the Olympics, from the days when women were not allowed to participate at all, to the performances of the great Merlene Ottey of Jamaica (who is still competing at over 50 years old) and Deon Hemmings, the first Caribbean woman to win Olympic gold in 1996.

Another example is the exploration of the impact of the Cuban revolution on the performance of Cuban athletes, which laid the groundwork for athletes like Alberto Juantorena, winner of the 800 m and 400m  gold medals in Montreal, and the struggles of the track and field programme given the US economic embargo of the

World Athletics Championships 2007 in Osaka – Alberto Juantorena (right), gold medal winner over 400 and 800 metres at the 1976 Olympics, while assisting at a victory ceremony at the 2007 world championships (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

island.

But Ince also spends time discussing current issues and athletes, including Jamaica’s success in Beijing.

If you have any interest at all in track and field, this will be an excellent addition to your library.

Highly Recommended

CARICOM Heads of Government Summit – Spinning Their Wheels

Flag of the Caribbean Common Market and Community (CARICOM) (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

 

I just read the communique coming out of the CARICOM annual Heads of Government summit.

The document dutifully details, in all of 9 paragraphs, comments at the opening ceremony.

 

http://www.caricom.org/jsp/pressreleases/press_releases_2012/pres185_12.jsp

There’s a paragraph each on the award of the Order of CARICOM (to Mr Kamaluddin Mohammed, Trinidad and Tobago, known as Mr. CARIFTA, and who “played a leading role in laying the foundation for the Community’s social, trade and economic cooperation structures, including the Single Market”) and the 8th Annual CARICOM 10K race (I never even knew they had one, but for the record, it was won by Cleveland Forde of Guyana and Tanya Nero of Trinidad and Tobago).

Bear with me here, I’m going somewhere with this.

An Amendment to the Agreement Establishing the Caribbean Knowledge and Learning Network Agency (the what? ) was signed by Antigua and Barbuda, Grenada and Suriname, and the Secretary General of the UN sent greetings.

They discussed the global economic situation, but don’t seem to have made any decision on what to do. They did however, agree “on the need to develop a Caribbean Investment Programme to support the efforts at stabilization and growth as well as competitive production.”

What the hell does that mean? Did they decide to establish the programme or not? It sure doesn’t sound like it. They agreed that we need a programme. Maybe after another couple of summits they’ll get around to agreeing to actually establish one! And then one day, actually establish it. (If they did so agree, the writers of the communique should be more specific, I don’t take anything for granted especially when interpreting comments from politicians)).

Map of the CARICOM countries that have a single market (CSM) CARICOM members part of CSM CARICOM members not part of CSM CARICOM associate members (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

They looked at the CARICOM Single Market and Economy (CSME) and endorsed the agreements reached at the Meeting of the Prime Ministerial Sub-Committee on CSME on 3 July 2012.

Now, I have no idea what the Prime Ministerial Sub-Committee decided, since the reports of statements made at the press conference after the meeting were full of vague nothings like this:

“”What came out of this meeting though, is a firm commitment to the CSME project, [and] it is conceded that we have some challenges to meet. We have not moved as quickly as we would have wished… There are some knotty problems which continue to bedevil us, but we must continue to wrestle them to the ground by doing some sensible prioritising.” That from Barbados Prime Minister Freundel Stuart,  who chaired the meeting.

http://www.caribbeannewsnow.com/headline-CSME-moving-ahead,-says-Barbados-PM-11614.html

The Communique helpfully adds that “With regard to the Single Economy, Heads agreed on specific elements of the Work Programme and Timetable for implementation in the short to medium term.”

The Heads also, according to the Communique, spoke about economic joint ventures, BAICO/CLICO,  children and youth, HIV/AIDS, UWI, CARIFESTA, Haiti, external trade, border issues…..

They noted…they recognised…they were updated…they welcomed…YAWN!!!!!

I’m being impolite I know, but I am bored with the CARICOM Heads of Government Summit. (I covered it once or twice, and never, ever want to do so again. Lurking outside meeting rooms and sprinting after Prime Ministers with delusions of grandeur to beg a comment or two, and then attending press conferences where little or nothing is said is not my idea of a productive use of my time.)

CARICOM Prime Ministers get together twice a year and spin their wheels. Let me be clear, I am not one of those who believes that there is no value in CARICOM. There is a lot of valuable work being done and regional co-operation taking place in areas like health, education and security.

The Heads of Government summit, however, is a grand waste of time. While the technocrats work all through the year, when the Heads get together the point is to make those political decisions which are needed to move matters forward. I don’t see that happening.

I’m not alone. James Moss-Solomon, that consummate regionalist, has been also sounding increasingly weary and impatient at the inactivity of the Heads of Government.

http://www.jamaicaobserver.com/columns/Caricom–Rain–no-play_10938301

Two of the  big issues in the region right now, are the cost of energy in Trinidad and Tobago and its impact on regional trade, and the Caribbean Court of Justice. Were either  of those discussed at the Summit? I don’t know, what I can tell you is that there was no mention of either in the communique.

The oil refinery at Pointe-à-Pierre (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

Instead, an organization that gets little enough done in English is now requesting “the conduct of a study to examine the possibilities and implications, including costs, of introducing French and Dutch.”

The Heads apparently did not endorse Trinidad and Tobago’s proposal to accede to the CCJ on criminal matters only. I say apparently, because there is no mention of that important issue in the communique. The Barbados Nation’s editorial comments on its surprising absence from the communique.

http://caricomnewsnetwork.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=7542&Itemid=457

Is it really surprising though?

And are we surprised at the growing apathy towards CARICOM and ignorance of its work?

I don’t think CARICOM is either irrelevant or outdated. But our leaders certainly go out of their way to make it appear so.