The Judiciary
The Report of the Constitution Reform Commission contains a number of valuable recommendations on the judicial system which were supported by l7 of the l8 commissioners present. Noting that the judiciary is the citizens' chief protector against oppression or mistreatment by the State and must therefore be seen to be as free as possible from executive pressure they propose that the judicial system should be administratively autonomous and should be funded by a block vote out of the consolidated fund and that the Registrar, Assistant Registrar and professional officers of the high court be appointed by the Judicial Service Commission and not the Public Service Commission. As regards the appointment of judges, the commissioners propose that the appointment of judges shall be in accordance with the advice of the Judicial Service Commission (JSC), as is at present the position, but that Article l28 of the constitution be strengthened to ensure that the President appoints the persons recommended. There have been cases where persons have been recommended by the JSC but never appointed. As regards the Chancellor and the Chief Justice, now appointed by the President after consultation with the Leader of the Opposition (the Commission has recommended that this should replace the cynical (l980) term "Minority Leader"), it is proposed that they be appointed through a "consensual mechanism". This is not spelt out but it is the sort of appointment that could have been handled by a non-executive president if there was one. The commissioners seem to envisage some form of agreement between the government and the opposition on these two top judicial appointments. It is also proposed that any extension of the tenure of a judge should be done in accordance with the advice of the JSC and should not be at the whim of the President, as is now the case. Provision should be made for part-time judges, an interesting proposal which would allow leading members of the bar to do some public service by serving as judges for part of the year or say one week a month. It is also proposed that the retiring age for a puisne judge should be 65 (it is now 62) and for an appeal court judge 68 (it is now 65) but that there be no provision for extension of service. This will only apply to appointments after the constitution is amended. The commissioners also say that it is undesirable that retired judges should practise at the bar, and thus suggest that consideration be given to raising the level of their emoluments and pensions. The Commissioners recommend that provision be made for Guyana to accede to the Caribbean Court of Appeal. This will be widely welcomed. Mr Seaga willing, the court could become a reality next year. At last, the Commonwealth Caribbean will have a regional court which can give a new sense of pride and confidence to us all and start building a regional jurisprudence. Taken together, these recommendations will go some way towards strengthening the structure of judicial independence. As the commissioners note, ultimately each judge must follow his own conscience and the law when performing the judicial function. But it helps a lot if they are as insulated from outside influence as possible.
|