Legal Opinion Challenges Dr. Carla Barnett’s Reappointment as CARICOM Chair

A 48-page legal opinion prepared by Trinidadian legal scholar Rajendra Ramlogan of The University of the West Indies, concludes that Barnett’s reappointment may not have complied with the requirements set out in the Revised Treaty of Chaguaramas, the founding legal framework of CARICOM.  According to Ramlogan, the decision was finalized during a closed-door retreat of regional leaders in Nevis following the CARICOM Heads of Government summit in February. He argues that the process excluded some officials who were legally entitled to participate and failed to secure the level of support required under the treaty.  The issue first emerged after Trinidad and Tobago objected to both the process and the outcome. Prime Minister Kamla Persad-Bissessar has maintained that her country did not support Barnett’s reappointment and was not properly represented when the matter was discussed. Persad-Bissessar had left the summit before the retreat, and her government contends that Foreign Affairs Minister Sean Sobers, who was acting as head of delegation, was effectively left out of the discussions.  CARICOM officials have disputed that claim, saying Sobers was invited but declined to attend because of concerns about the boat trip to the retreat venue.  In his opinion, Ramlogan argues that the retreat was operating under procedures different from those of a formal meeting of the Conference of Heads of Government, the body that holds authority under the treaty to appoint or reappoint a Secretary-General. Because of that distinction, he says the retreat may not have had the legal authority to make such a decision.  He also points to treaty provisions that allow a Head of Government to designate a minister or other representative to attend meetings in their place. Ramlogan contends that representatives from Trinidad and Tobago, The Bahamas, and Antigua and Barbuda were unable to participate, creating what he describes as a significant procedural defect.  Another concern raised in the opinion involves the role of the Community Council of Ministers. Ramlogan argues that the treaty requires the Council to formally recommend a candidate before the Conference can make an appointment. He says there is no evidence that such a recommendation was made in Barnett’s case.  The legal scholar stresses that his findings are not a reflection on Dr. Barnett’s qualifications, performance, or integrity. Instead, he says the opinion focuses solely on whether the proper constitutional and procedural steps were followed.  The matter has already attracted attention from other regional leaders. Earlier this year, Jamaican Prime Minister Andrew Holness suggested that another meeting of CARICOM Heads of Government may be the best way to resolve the dispute and bring clarity to the issue.  For its part, CARICOM has not indicated that it intends to revisit the appointment. However, Ramlogan concludes that the concerns surrounding the process are serious enough to warrant further examination, arguing that if treaty requirements were not followed, the decision could ultimately be considered constitutionally defective and potentially void.