 One of the challenges facing our country is the confidence in the rule of law. The rule of law, how a country governs, sets the tone and tenure for the entire society. A corrupt government will be get a corrupt society. We must ensure that justice prevails for all citizens and that there are consequences for wrongdoing. We must not be tolerated from anyone, including politicians and public officials. Constitutional reform will also be placed on the front burner. We are working to bring about St. Lucia's ascension to the appellate jurisdiction of the Caribbean Court of Justice. We must not be afraid of our own potential to do great things and trust our institutions. In both his party's manifesto and in his maiden New Year's address, the Prime Minister announced the government's intention to replace our final appellate court, the United Kingdom-based Privy Council, with the Caribbean Court of Justice. Today we have the opportunity to hear from the highest authorities of that court. I am particularly pleased that President Saunders and Associate Justice Barrow have taken time off to return to the jurisdiction where they both literally made themselves household names. Indeed, they are considered locals. Who can forget the Saunders' vote, which forever changed capital punishment sentences in the OECS? The vote which said that hanging was not automatic following a guilty verdict in a capital case. Two gentlemen whom I got to know extremely well during their time here indeed have continued to follow the decisions at the CCJ most keenly, decisions which are found to be not only enlightening but comparable in jurisprudential quality to any of that rendered by the Privy Council. Their decision in the Dominica elections petition case, which itself upheld our own justice of appeal Mario Michel's decision, is one such judgment. One does not say he agrees with every decision, but even then it is not because of the quality of the reasoning. On occasion I would chat with President Saunders about something I may not have fully understood or appreciated. The Guyana election petition case was one such. I was honored to have been at the U.E. Cavill campus some three years ago on Saturday 20th October 2018 to be exact when he was awarded an honorary doctor of law's degree. The gem of an acceptance speech he delivered is a recommended listening. It is therefore of great pleasure and much honor that I invite to address us President Honorable Justice Saunders and Associate Justice Barrow. Thank you very much. On behalf of the entire judicial complement and staff of the Caribbean Court of Justice, I wish to express deepest appreciation for the invitation extended to address such an esteemed gathering. I am particularly pleased as an intention to do so. I'm old enough to remember when in the 1960s dozens of St. Lucian's would at Easter descend on St. Vincent for a weekend of great times and at year's end Vincentians would return the favor. In each case many of these excursionists left their shores not knowing with whom they would be staying but firm in the knowledge that they would be accommodated as in each island they were in a private home by a generous and hospitable host or hostess they were knowing for the first time. My wife and I spent four wonderful years residing in this simply beautiful country and on the last occasion we visited August 18th 2018 it was for our first son's marriage to Suwala Rakai a beautiful young lady from St. Lucian. So the citizen exceedingly pleased to be able to make these remarks on this occasion in this place is an honor statement. We at the CCJ have followed with tremendous interest and pleasure the recent statements made by Prime Minister Philip J. Blair regarding the government's intention to have St. Lucia exceed to the appendage restriction of the CCJ. Since that momentous step naturally impacts the CCJ I believe the court has a responsibility if not a duty to share with you information about these operations that is pertinent to your decision making. I'm confident that imparting that information whether in these hollow precincts or elsewhere does not in the least compromise our judicial independence. I recognize at the outset that there will be some persons who might say but this is an odd time to be addressing this issue or that instead of exceeding to the CCJ as a valid jurisdiction it would be better that attention should be focused on closing gaps in and optimizing the efficiency of the domestic justice system. These are all political issues for determination by the people of St. Lucia but I have to confess that for the region I have heard such opinions expressed again and again the intent always appeared to be the same to excuse a failure to put an end to one of the remaining linkages with our colonial past. For some people it is never a good time to take any such step. Today I wish to say a little about the structure, composition and work of the CCJ. The court has two distinct jurisdictions. The first is what is referred to as the original jurisdiction where the court interprets and applies the carry-on treaty. St. Lucia, like every other carry-on state, is automatically a part of the original jurisdiction. Today's discussion relates to the appellate jurisdiction where the court has appealed from the courts of appeal of those states that no longer send their appeals to England to be resolved by British judges. But first a little about the court itself. The court is funded from the proceeds of a trust fund established by the states of carry-on. The fund was capitalized at US $100 million which was obtained by the Caribbean Development Bank. The various states of carry-on repay that money in proportion to the relative size of their economies. St. Lucia's repayment was US $2.1 million. The $100 million was placed in the hands of a board of trustees whose remittance is to invest that money so that the yield on that investment will finance the court's operating budget. This mechanism is the envy of all international courts because it strengthens the court's financial independence and insulates the court from the possibility of political pressure being exerted upon it. The judges and staff of the court are selected by a regional Judicial and Legal Services Commission that is entirely independent of any form of political control or influence. The president of the court is the chairman of the commission. To date, the following St. Lucia's have served terms of office on the commission, namely the right honourable Sir Vincent Closer, Mr. Frank Meyers, Mr. Egbert Lionel, Mr. Everestus John Murray, and Mr. Tyrone Charles. The president of the court is selected by the commission and appointed by the boards of at least three-quarters of the heads of carry-on states. The heads may only accept or decline to accept the commission's nomination. They cannot hand in their own charts. The president serves a non-renewable seven-year term. The agreement establishing the court makes provision for nine judges and the president, but since its inauguration, to save expense and in light of the limited number of states that have acceded to the appellate jurisdiction, the court has been able to get by with six judges and the president. I am the third president. The Caribbean has been exceptionally fortunate to have had two outstanding regional jurists to serve as president prior to my appointment. The first was the right honourable Mr. Justice Michael de Labelstein of Trinidad and Tobago, and my immediate predecessor was the right honourable Sir Dennis Byron, himself resident in St. Lucia currently. The current judges are the honourable Mr. Justice Jacob Witt, originally from the Netherlands, but who has long made curious out of his home. The honourable Mr. Justice Winston Anderson of Jamaica. The honourable Madame Justice Maureen Rajnath Lee of Trinidad and Tobago. The honourable Mr. Justice Dennis Barrow de Lis, who is here with us. The honourable Mr. Justice Andrew Burgess of Barbados. And the honourable Mr. Justice Peter Jamadah of Trinidad and Tobago. This judicial compliment comprises a well-rounded and very highly regarded mix of academic, legal and judicial experience. St. Lucia ratified the agreement establishing the CCJ without any reservations. That ratification had two consequences. Firstly, St. Lucia, like every other carry-on state, automatically became part of the court's original jurisdiction. Secondly, on the article 25 of the agreement, St. Lucia solemnly agreed to have its final appeals heard by the CCJ. Now, the oldest and most fundamental principle in international law is captured in the Latin expression, pacta soot savanda. It means that treaties must be obeyed in good faith. By finally acceding to the applied jurisdiction, St. Lucia will fall into compliance with this bedrock principle of the law of treaties that undergirds mutual trust and confidence among southern states. Accession represents a logical forward progression in the constitutional maturation of a Commonwealth Caribbean state. The parliaments of Barbados and Guyana, Belize and Commonwealth of Dominica have all taken this significant step. And in each of these four states, a recurrent pattern is evident. Before I speak to that pattern, I digress briefly to state that in any country, relatively few appeals are heard by that country's final appellate court. The Supreme Court of the United States, for example, agrees to hear, on average, between 64 and 80 appeals each year. Although thousands of litigants apply for their appeals to be heard. I make that digression in order to contextualize some figures I wish now to point out. I ask that we focus not so much on the discrete numbers, but on the comparison. The pattern I earlier referenced is that in each of the countries that sends their appeals to the CCJ, there has been a marked expansion in second level appeals. Let us take Barbados, for example. In the five years prior to joining the CCJ, only six appeals from Barbados were decided in London. In the five years after joining the CCJ, that number had climbed to 20. In 2019 alone, the CCJ decided as many cases from Barbados as Barbados had sent to London. In the last five years, their cases were being heard by the Judicial Committee of the Public Council. Belies of Dominica have experienced the same trend. Dominica joined the CCJ in 2015. In the five years between 2010 and 2015, that country sent a single appeal to be heard in London. But between 2016 and last year, the CCJ had already heard seven appeals from Dominica, one of St. Lucia. In the 16 years since the CCJ has been operating, St. Lucia has had only 17 cases heard in England. In other words, on an average, about a single case per year. This extremely low number of cases decided in London is easy to explain. It is simply far more convenient for a Caribbean person to approach the CCJ. Indeed, the court, the CCJ, goes out of its way to facilitate access to it. Permit me to reference one notable instance. This case actually involved the National of St. Lucia, who is a lecturer at Cable Campus of the University of West Indies. He resided in Barbados. Under the laws of that state, he was entitled to be registered as an elector of that country's elections. But over the years, he was frustrated in his efforts to be so registered. He brought an option claiming the right to be registered. In the meantime, elections were called in Barbados. The lecturer is anxious to exercise his right to vote. His action proceeded through the local courts, but he was dissatisfied with the effect of the decision of the Code of Appeal. On Friday afternoon on 11th May 2018, he filed an application to the CCJ for permission to appeal using our modern e-filing platform. This matter was extremely urgent because elections in that country were scheduled for the 24th of May. And the cutoff date for the final electoral list to be prepared and published was a few days away. The color long story short, between 4 p.m. on Friday 11th of May and 2 p.m. on Sunday 13th May, the CCJ enabled and facilitated the following processes. The appeal was filed and served. Five judges of the CCJ were assembled and given the file to study. A hearing was held by video conference commencing Sunday 13th May at 11 a.m. in which counsel for all the parties were present and as well a chief elections officer. And at approximately 2 p.m. that Sunday, after completion of the hearing, the Code gave an oral decision on the case. The appeal succeeded. The chief electoral officer was ordered to cause the electoral to be registered as an elector before 12 noon the following day. The name of the case is Bentos against the chief electoral officer. It can be found on our website. In addition to the convenience of having an accommodating final court in a neighboring island, it is considerably less expensive to access the CCJ than it is to take an appeal across the Atlantic to England. Partly because the filing fees of the CCJ are far less. Moreover, long before the pandemic, the CCJ was hearing cases by video conference so that litigants and their lawyers are not necessarily required to travel to Port of Spain if they cannot afford it. Quite apart from questions of convenience and expense, Caribbean lawyers who have appeared before the CCJ have expressed to us their view that their sense of being in a place where they belong eliminates a certain measure of this competence stress. The cultural and idiomatic connectivity makes for easier and better communication. Litigants too have expressed a similar experience of feeling comfortable to repose trust and confidence in judges who have a more intimate appreciation of the milieu in which their disputes arise. What about equality and integrity of the court's jurisprudence? It is for others to make that assessment. All I would say is that the CCJ's judgments are delivered in a timely fashion and are regarded by other courts regionally and internationally with the utmost respect. The processes involved in the intake, management, hearing and delivery of judgment in the cases the CCJ handles together with the quality of the jurisprudence constitute the core unit of the court. That is what all final courts do. For my part, it just as impressive feature of the CCJ's operation is that it has rapidly become the nerve center of a regional justice ecosystem that supports and promotes judicial administration and reform, judicial and legal training, public awareness of justice-related issues and promotion of the rule of law generally. Permit me to single out just a few isolated examples. The court's educational arm, the CCJ's Academy for Law engages in public awareness and training programs with a variety of justice sector stakeholders. The academy is actually right now in the midst of a project honoring 34 pioneering Caribbean women jurists many of them forgotten heroines. One of them is the late Madam Justice Marie Elizabeth Bourne-Hollens. Who among us have heard of her? She died in 2014. Justice Bourne-Hollens was born to Barbadian parents in Monfortune, there in St. Lucia. She was the first woman judge of the Commonwealth Caribbean. The academy has published a book with the biographical summary of her and of all the other 33 honorees. It is the CCJ's Academy for Law that is immortalizing and making the public aware of the career and impact of people like Justice Bourne-Hollens. The academy is chaired by CCJ judge Mr. Justice Winston Anderson. The Caribbean Association of Judicial Officers or CAJUM was established in 2009 through the efforts of the CCJ. The current chair is CCJ judge Mr. Justice Peter Jamada. The vice chairman, St. Lucia's Honorable Justice Vivian Georges Taylor Alexander. There is hardly a judge, magistrate or registrar in the entire region who has not been touched in one way or another by CAJUM, whether through its informative, user-friendly electronic newsletter. It's several training initiatives for judicial officers or its grand biennial conference held on each occasion in a different character on state. When the Government of Canada made 20 million Canadian dollars available for judiciaries in the region for justice improvement, it was agreed by all that the CCJ would be the executing agency for this project. It is called the Jurist Project. Over the last eight years or so, the CCJ has been managing that project on behalf of the heads of judiciary of carry-on states. That project has done much to improve the administration of justice across the region, including in particular in the OECS states. I can go on and on. The point is that the CCJ fills a deep void in promoting regional justice, in promoting the regional justice ethos that translates to an enhancement in the rule of law. We do so with tremendous pride and humility. Our 2019-2024 strategic plan, our second strategic plan, guides our efforts to live our vision to be a model of judicial excellence. That strategic plan is no mere coffee table document. It inmates our mission of providing accessible, fair and efficient justice for the people and states of the Caribbean community. The proper interpretation and application of law and resolution of disputes are intimately linked to an awareness and understanding of the morals and culture of the people who inhabit the spaces from where the disputes originate. Every state deserves a final call whose judges have a full appreciation of and so can readily identify with the realities, the dreams and aspirations, the values and the challenges of the people. So, when is the right time for St. Lucia to join the appellate jurisdiction of the CCJ? That is a question for this honest body to answer. You may perhaps be assisted in answering that question by considering other questions. What is the logic of investing two million US dollars in an asset only to make very limited use of that asset? Especially when the asset is functioning well. When there is, to put it at its lowest, no demonstrable difference in quality between the use and value you can derive from that asset and that which is to be had from the alternative. Where is the logic when it costs your citizens considerably more to use the alternative? St. Lucia is the most popular state in the OECS. It hosts both the Secretariat of the OECS as well as the headquarters of the Eastern Caribbean Supreme Court. Accession by this country to the appellate restriction of the CCJ will set a powerful example to the remainder of Karinon and in particular the other OECS states. Distinguished ladies and gentlemen, the Caribbean Association of Judicial Officers of which I spoke earlier is coincidentally scheduled to convene in St. Lucia this year for its biennial conference. A conference which should have actually been held last year. We hope and expect the pandemic permitted to assemble as usual a large representation of Caribbean judges, magistrates, registrars and court administrators on this side. Nothing would please us more in the CCJ. If when we do towards the end of this year we can combine that occasion with an in-person sitting of the Caribbean Court of Justice here in Castries to mark St. Lucia's accession to the appellate restriction. I thank you very much.