Between Community Law and Common Law: The Rise of the Caribbean Court of Justice at the Intersection of Regional Integration and Post-Colonial Legacies

Q2 Social Sciences Law and Contemporary Problems Pub Date : 2016-03-08 DOI:10.2139/SSRN.2528978
Salvatore Caserta, M. Madsen
{"title":"Between Community Law and Common Law: The Rise of the Caribbean Court of Justice at the Intersection of Regional Integration and Post-Colonial Legacies","authors":"Salvatore Caserta, M. Madsen","doi":"10.2139/SSRN.2528978","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This article provides a pioneering empirical analysis of the emergence and transformation of the Caribbean Court of Justice (CCJ). The article analyses both the protracted process of negotiating a common court for the Caribbean and its subsequent institutionalization as the CCJ. The court eventually created in 2005 was uniquely vested with a double jurisdiction: original jurisdiction over Caribbean community law, notably the Revised Treaty of Chaguaramas (RTC) (2001), and appellate jurisdiction over other civil and criminal matters. We argue that this double competence is symptomatic of the complex socio-political context and transformation of which it is part. While the CCJ’s original jurisdiction over the RTC has been the background to a new more legalized process of Caribbean integration under the CARICOM, in its appellate function the Court is now gradually repatriating to the Caribbean the development and control over the common law from the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council (Privy Council/JCPC) in London which until recently remained the last court of appeals for civil and criminal cases from the Caribbean. Using unique data collected on the ground, in both our legal and sociological analysis of the development of the CCJ since 2005, we show how this combination of globalization and latter-day decolonization continued to have a fundamental impact on the Court and its authority in the region. We moreover demonstrate how the Court has changed from initially deploying a sort of Legal Diplomacy (Madsen 2011) to now increasingly seeking to legitimize its practices in providing justice to the Caribbean people. The latter has helped the CCJ expand its group of interlocutors significantly beyond the initially rather narrow set of insiders involved in litigation before the Court as well as expanded its authority.","PeriodicalId":39484,"journal":{"name":"Law and Contemporary Problems","volume":"51 1","pages":"89-115"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2016-03-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"17","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Law and Contemporary Problems","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2139/SSRN.2528978","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"Social Sciences","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 17

Abstract

This article provides a pioneering empirical analysis of the emergence and transformation of the Caribbean Court of Justice (CCJ). The article analyses both the protracted process of negotiating a common court for the Caribbean and its subsequent institutionalization as the CCJ. The court eventually created in 2005 was uniquely vested with a double jurisdiction: original jurisdiction over Caribbean community law, notably the Revised Treaty of Chaguaramas (RTC) (2001), and appellate jurisdiction over other civil and criminal matters. We argue that this double competence is symptomatic of the complex socio-political context and transformation of which it is part. While the CCJ’s original jurisdiction over the RTC has been the background to a new more legalized process of Caribbean integration under the CARICOM, in its appellate function the Court is now gradually repatriating to the Caribbean the development and control over the common law from the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council (Privy Council/JCPC) in London which until recently remained the last court of appeals for civil and criminal cases from the Caribbean. Using unique data collected on the ground, in both our legal and sociological analysis of the development of the CCJ since 2005, we show how this combination of globalization and latter-day decolonization continued to have a fundamental impact on the Court and its authority in the region. We moreover demonstrate how the Court has changed from initially deploying a sort of Legal Diplomacy (Madsen 2011) to now increasingly seeking to legitimize its practices in providing justice to the Caribbean people. The latter has helped the CCJ expand its group of interlocutors significantly beyond the initially rather narrow set of insiders involved in litigation before the Court as well as expanded its authority.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
在共同体法和普通法之间:加勒比法院在区域一体化和后殖民遗产交汇处的兴起
本文对加勒比法院(CCJ)的出现和转变进行了开创性的实证分析。本文分析了加勒比共同法院谈判的漫长过程及其随后作为中央法院的制度化。最终于2005年成立的法院拥有独特的双重管辖权:对加勒比共同体法律的原始管辖权,特别是2001年修订的查瓜拉马斯条约(RTC),以及对其他民事和刑事案件的上诉管辖权。我们认为,这种双重能力是复杂的社会政治背景和转型的症状,它是其中的一部分。虽然中央法院对加勒比共同体的最初管辖权是加勒比共同体下加勒比一体化的一个更加合法化的新进程的背景,但在其上诉职能方面,法院现在正逐步将设在伦敦的枢密院司法委员会(枢密院/司法委员会)对普通法的发展和控制移交给加勒比,该委员会直到最近仍然是加勒比民事和刑事案件的最后上诉法院。我们利用实地收集的独特数据,对2005年以来中央法院的发展进行了法律和社会学分析,展示了全球化和后期非殖民化的结合如何继续对法院及其在该地区的权威产生根本性影响。此外,我们还展示了法院如何从最初部署一种法律外交(Madsen 2011)转变为现在越来越多地寻求使其为加勒比人民提供正义的做法合法化。后者帮助CCJ扩大了其对话者群体,大大超出了最初参与法院诉讼的相当狭窄的内部人士群体,并扩大了其权威。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Law and Contemporary Problems
Law and Contemporary Problems Social Sciences-Law
CiteScore
2.00
自引率
0.00%
发文量
1
期刊介绍: Law and Contemporary Problems was founded in 1933 and is the oldest journal published at Duke Law School. It is a quarterly, interdisciplinary, faculty-edited publication of Duke Law School. L&CP recognizes that many fields in the sciences, social sciences, and humanities can enhance the development and understanding of law. It is our purpose to seek out these areas of overlap and to publish balanced symposia that enlighten not just legal readers, but readers from these other disciplines as well. L&CP uses a symposium format, generally publishing one symposium per issue on a topic of contemporary concern. Authors and articles are selected to ensure that each issue collectively creates a unified presentation of the contemporary problem under consideration. L&CP hosts an annual conference at Duke Law School featuring the authors of one of the year’s four symposia.
期刊最新文献
The Influence of Re-Selection on Independent Decision Making in State Supreme Courts Voting Rights and the “Statutory Constitution” Challenging Gender in Single-Sex Spaces: Lessons from a Feminist Softball League Treaties and Human Rights: The Role of Long-Term Trends Correcting Federalism Mistakes in Statutory Interpretation: The Supreme Court and the Federal Arbitration Act
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1