THE Caribbean Court of Justice (CCJ) remains one of the region’s most visionary achievements, a tangible expression of the Caribbean Community’s (CARICOM) aspirations for unity, independence, and self-determination.

Yet, more than two decades after its establishment, it continues to face a puzzling deficit of regional support.

This ongoing reluctance, as Attorney-General and Minister of Legal Affairs Anil Nandlall, SC, rightly described this week, is an “enigma.”

Speaking on his programme Issues in the News, Nandlall renewed his call for CARICOM states to adopt the CCJ in its appellate jurisdiction, urging governments to demonstrate real commitment to regional integration, not merely in rhetoric, but through action.

His remarks followed the recent swearing-in of Justice Dr Christopher Arif Bulkan, the newest Guyanese appointed to the CCJ’s bench.

The ceremony, held at the Office of the President and attended by President, Dr Mohamed Irfaan Ali and CCJ President Justice Winston Anderson, was a proud moment for Guyana.

It also served as a timely reminder of how far the regional court has come, and how far it still has to go.

Since its inauguration in 2005, the CCJ has been tasked with two vital roles: exercising original jurisdiction over disputes arising from the Revised Treaty of Chaguaramas and serving as the final appellate court for those nations willing to replace the British Privy Council.

However, to date, only Guyana, Barbados, Belize, Dominica, and Saint Lucia have taken that decisive step toward judicial independence.

Ironically, Trinidad and Tobago, the seat of the CCJ’s headquarters, remains outside the appellate framework, a symbolic contradiction that reflects the broader hesitation across the region.

Nandlall’s observation that this situation is both a “travesty” and an “oddity,” is difficult to dispute.

CARICOM has repeatedly championed ideals of unity, sovereignty, and economic integration — through initiatives such as the Caribbean Single Market and Economy (CSME), yet it continues to rely on a foreign court in London for final judicial review.

How can the Caribbean credibly speak of decolonisation while retaining the Privy Council as the ultimate arbiter of its justice? The persistence of this colonial vestige not only undermines the region’s sovereignty, but also conveys a lack of confidence in its own institutions.

The CCJ, by contrast, has consistently proven its competence, fairness, and integrity. In Guyana, the court’s judgments have strengthened the rule of law and bolstered confidence in judicial independence.

The court has demonstrated its ability to interpret complex constitutional issues, maintain impartiality, and deliver reasoned rulings that align with democratic principles.

Opponents often argue that the CCJ is too young or politically vulnerable to replace the centuries-old Privy Council.

Yet, these concerns overlook the fundamental truth that every enduring institution was once new. The strength of the CCJ will only grow with use, through the trust and participation of the very nations that created it.

Regional leaders must therefore move beyond hesitation and symbolism. The Caribbean cannot fully claim to be self-governing while outsourcing its highest judicial authority.

Supporting the CCJ in its appellate jurisdiction is not simply a matter of legal reform; it is an act of regional affirmation.

As Justice Bulkan takes his place on the bench, his appointment should serve as both a celebration of Guyanese excellence and a call to collective responsibility.

If the Caribbean is serious about charting its own destiny, then it must embrace its own court, and, with it, its own justice.