Investigating, removing CCJ president not so easy – attorney Nigel Hughes

Prominent Guyanese attorney Nigel Hughes on Wednesday cautioned that investigating and removing the president of the Caribbean Court of Justice (CCJ) is a complex process that cannot be done merely by a review, but by the triggering of a probe by at least three Caribbean Community (CARICOM) leaders.

Mr Hughes said that, for the sake of the independence and integrity of the Trinidad-headquartered CCJ, he believes that three or more regional leaders should invoke provisions of the agreement establishing the regional court to address the “grave” allegations.

“If true, they go to the heart of the Court’s integrity,” he said in a Facebook post.

The establishment agreement provides for at least three CARICOM leaders to represent, jointly, to other regional leaders that the question of removing the CCJ president from office ought to be investigated, then the Heads of Government shall establish a tribunal.

“The Caribbean public is entitled to an independent tribunal inquiry conducted by senior judges, not to political posturing or institutional paralysis. The CCJ belongs to the people of the Caribbean. Its credibility depends on the rule of law being applied to its leaders with the same rigour it is applied to everyone else.,” Mr Hughes said.

Unlike the other judges, who could be removed by the Regional Judicial and Legal Services Commission (RJLSC), the president is appointed or removed by the qualified majority vote of three-quarters of the contracting parties on the recommendation of the Commission.

Referring to the RJLSC’s decision to conduct a “transparent and independent review” to address the serious concerns in a manner that protects public trust and confidence in the Court and the broader administration of justice throughout the Caribbean, Mr Hughes said that position was consistent with its response to a complaint dating back to 2025.

The CCJ establishment agreement says the president can be removed from office by CARICOM leaders on the RJLSC’s recommendation if a tribunal advises the commission that he ought to be removed from office for inability or misbehaviour.

Except for The Bahamas, which is not a member of the Caribbean Community (CARICOM) single market, the CCJ is responsible for settling single market disputes in the other 14 full CARICOM member states and is the final court of criminal and civil appeals in Barbados, Belize, Dominica, Guyana and St Lucia.

Mr Hughes explicitly states that the RJLSC does not have the legal power to investigate the president but can only exercise such authority over the other judges.

However, the agreement allows for the suspension of the president until the outcome of a tribunal investigation advising CARICOM leaders that the president should remain or be removed.

Mr Hughes flagged a conflict-of-interest concern as the president chairs the RJLSC which must transmit the tribunal’s recommendation to CARICOM leaders.

He notes that the treaty does not say what happens when the president is both the subject of a removal recommendation and the chairman of the body making that recommendation.

“Basic principles of fairness — the right not to be a judge in one’s own cause — clearly require the President to step aside from those deliberations. The treaty’s provision for a Deputy Chairman to preside supports this reading, but the gap in the text is real and could be disputed,” he says.

He says the process is difficult by design to protect judicial independence by ensuring that no single government, no political faction, and no disgruntled litigant can remove the president of the Caribbean’s highest court.

At the same time, it provides a legitimate pathway for accountability when the threshold of misbehaviour or inability is genuinely met, he says.