COMMENTARY: A vote for the CCJ is a vote to fulfill Antigua and Barbuda’s national destiny

WHEN  THE  CITIZENS of Antigua and Barbuda go to the polls on 6th November 2018 to vote in a referendum to determine whether they will permit their nation to remain under the judicial jurisdiction of the British Privy Council or whether they will opt for the Caribbean Court of Justice (CCJ) and thereby embrace a judicial jurisdiction that is exclusively Antiguan/Barbudan and Caribbean, I hope that they make a choice that takes both Antigua and Barbuda and the Caribbean Community in the direction of fulfilling their historical journeys towards the goals of full national sovereignty and civilizational independence.

This is my fervent hope – and it is a hope based on an understanding of just how long and deeply rooted those journeys to national sovereignty and civilizational independence are, and how much blood, sweat, tears, struggle and hope have been invested in those journeys!

You see, if we are to fully appreciate the rootedness and sacredness of the Antiguan and Barbudan struggle for national sovereignty, we have to go way back to the middle of the 17th Century and to the heroic efforts of our enslaved African ancestors to escape the jurisdiction of the British slave plantations of Antigua and to establish free maroon-type communities in the primeval woods of the Shekerley range with its imposing Boggy Peak.

We would also need to recall that so determined were the British slave masters to reassert their plantocratic jurisdiction that most of those early Antiguan freedom fighters were brutally hunted down and executed!  But, tellingly, this did not deter those heroic Antiguan ancestors from joining a growing tide of regional slave rebellions and developing even more advanced aspirations for the achievement of a free independent and sovereign black nation.

In fact, the year of destiny for Antigua was 1736!  By that time, fellow enslaved Africans in such neighbouring British colonies as Barbados, St. Kitts and Jamaica had already demonstrated through slave plots, rebellions and maroon resistance that they intended to achieve black freedom and sovereignty.  Furthermore, in the Danish colony of St. John – a mere 200 miles from Antigua – fellow enslaved Africans had risen up in 1733 and taken control of the entire island.

It was against this background that, in October of 1736, the British plantocracy of Antigua discovered – to their great consternation – that the leaders of the enslaved African people of Antigua had developed a master-plan to destroy the system of slavery; to take control of the island; and to establish an independent sovereign Asante-type kingdom.  This, of course, was the famous King Court rebellion of 1736.

Tragically, the revolutionary plan was discovered by the British plantocratic authorities; the rebellion was crushed; and such heroes of Antigua and Barbuda as King Court (Tacky), TomboyScipioHerculesNedFortune and Secundi were brutally executed and made into national martyrs.

However, it is one thing to kill revolutionary leaders, but it is another thing altogether to kill revolutionary ideas of freedom, nationhood and sovereignty.

Needless to say, those aspirations towards freedom and nationhood remained very much alive among the black people of Antigua, Barbuda, Barbados, Jamaica, St. Kitts and all the other European colonies of the Caribbean, and, some two hundred years later – in the year 1945 – coalesced in the demands of Vere Bird and the other leaders of the Caribbean Labour Congress (CLC) for the transformation of the socially and racially oppressive West Indian colonies of the day into democratic, socially and economically just self-governing nations within the over-arching structure of a West Indian Federation.

Without a doubt, the most potent formulation of these historic demands took place at the founding conference of the CLC in Barbados between the 17th and 27th of September 1945.  Antigua was represented not only by Vere Bird, but also by Harold T. Wilson and J. Oliver Davis.  Also in attendance were such political giants as Richard Hart (Jamaica), George McIntosh (St. Vincent), Grantley AdamsHugh Springer and Frank  Walcott (Barbados), T. A. Marryshow (Grenada), Hurbert Crichlow and A. A. Thorne (Guyana),Albert Gomes (Trinidad and Tobago) and W. J. Lesperan (Suriname).

And when these historic demands were ultimately betrayed and subverted– largely through the combined duplicity of the British Colonial Office and the folly of Alexander Bustamante — culminating in the 1962 collapse of the West Indian Federation, it was the veteran leader, Vere Bird, who joined forces with the younger Errol Barrow of Barbados and Forbes Burnham of Guyana to retrieve the vision and re-engineer our people’s historic journey to full nationhood and sovereignty with the signing of the Caribbean Free Trade Association Agreement (CARIFTA) at Dickenson Bay, Antigua, on 15th December 1965.

CARIFTA was formally launched on 1st May 1968 – making this year of 2018 the 50th anniversary year of CARIFTA – and by 1973 had evolved into the more comprehensive and substantial Caribbean Community (CARICOM). 

And it is CARICOM which – through functional co-operation – has supported and maintained such critical edifices of our national sovereignty and civilizational independence as the University of the West Indies and the Caribbean Development Bank, and that has established the Caribbean Court of Justice (CCJ).

Of the three visionary architect nations of CARIFTA, two have removed themselves from the judicial jurisdiction of the British Privy Council and have established the CCJ as their highest and final appellate court – Barbados and Guyana.  But what of Antigua? How will Antigua decide?

Perhaps this 50th anniversary year of the effective launching of CARIFTA is symbolically and spititually the right time for the people of Antigua and Barbuda to – in this most tangible and meaningful of ways – reiterate their commitment to the completion of our people’s historic journey towards full national sovereignty and Caribbean civilizational independence.

I humbly ask the people of Antigua and Barbuda to reflect deeply on the sacrifices made by the King Courts and Tomboys of sacred memory, and on the outstanding lessons of self-respect and self-determination taught to us all by such outstanding Antiguan and Barbudan sons and daughters of our Caribbean Civilization as George WestonVere BirdTim HectorSir Vivian RichardsJamaica KincaidSir Andy RobertsKing ShortshirtPaget Henry and so many others before casting their vote on the 6th of November.

Disclaimer: The comments on this page do not necessarily reflect the views of Inc. All comments are approved by before they are posted. We never censor based on political or ideological points of view, but we do try to maintain a sensible balance between free speech and responsible moderating.

We will delete comments that:

  • violate or infringe the rights of any person, are defamatory or harassing or include personal attacks
  • are abusive, profane or offensive
  • contain material which violates or encourages others to violate any applicable law
  • promote hatred of any kind
  • refer to people arrested or charged with a crime as though they had been found guilty
  • contain links to "chain letters", pornographic or obscene movies or graphic images
  • are excessively long and off-message

See our full comment/user policy/agreement.


  1. Alvin Bernard
    August 28, 2018

    I am sure there have been numerous cases that were decided after the fact. I can’t recall the complainants moving for an injunction. However the question was over the proper/improper award of contract. If the case of the complainants was accepted by the court, a ruling; costs, penalties etc. in their favour could be handed down notwithstanding the completion of the bridge

  2. Man CCJ
    August 27, 2018

    It appears to me before we emancipate ourselves from the Privy Council we first must emancipate ourselves from mental slavery and if that should take scores of years if not centuries the OECS courts and CCJ should simply fire the officers (judges) who will fail to adhere to the just way of administering justice.

  3. Man CCJ
    August 27, 2018

    David this piece of writing is commendable and really brilliant but I’ve got some concern with regards to the CCJ. If we so believe that the Privy Council is a vestige of colonialism why does the court system you so promote through a person in prison when a judge is addressed by the name she/he is known by. I wonder why an individual say My Lord and My worship I wonder where these so called court protocols come from? Why do I have to dress with tie, long pant and long sleeve in your court sir. My Lord some of us can speak creole which is our own indigenous language why can’t I speak it in the court and have to speak in a language I cannot speak well. Mr David why has the court system allowed politicians and political operatives influence it. Sir just follow a series of discussion/ writings penned by Cabral Douglas on Caribbean News Now about a years or two ago. I am no legal luminary and I do not want to be bombarded by legal jargons and the likes.

  4. Jonathan Y St Jean
    August 27, 2018

    If the people of Antigua and Barbuda are wise they will ask questions of both sides, the prosecution, and the defense, in the islands which have so far decided to have the CCJ as their final court of appeal. So far as I can determine in the case of Dominican litigants the CCJ is a waste of time, bearing in mind that justice delayed is justice denied. For example, the matter of the new bridge in Roseau was brought to the CCJ before the commencement of construction but by the court, the ruling came after the bridge was already built. So that opinion was moot. The court should have issued an injunction to stop work in progress whilst it made heard the case and decided its opinion. The track record of this court is one where judges are scared of their masters and don’t appear to be independent.

    • Alvin Bernard
      August 28, 2018

      I am sure there have been numerous cases that were decided after the fact. I can’t recall the complainants moving for an injunction. However the question was over the proper/improper award of contract. If the case of the complainants was accepted by the court, a ruling; costs, penalties etc. in their favour could be handed down notwithstanding the completion of the bridge

    • Alvin Bernard
      August 28, 2018

      Many cases have been ruled on in the past after the fact. The case of the complainants rested on the proper or improper award of the contract. If a decision was handed down in their favour it would just be a matter of appropriate costs and penalties notwithstanding the completion of the bridge.

  5. August 27, 2018

    CCJ is in the pocket of the different government that in power, so until that change, I say stay with the privy council, if you really want justice

Post a Reply to Alvin Bernard Cancel Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

:) :-D :wink: :( 8-O :lol: :-| :cry: 8) :-? :-P :-x :?: :oops: :twisted: :mrgreen: more »

 characters available