-every judge would now be required to sit on each panel
Mired in controversy, Caribbean Court of Justice (CCJ) President Justice Winston Anderson yesterday rejected allegations of “panel fixing” and attempts to influence the outcome of cases but admitted that he removed Nigerian-born Justice Chile Eboe-Osuji from a judicial panel because of a disagreement over courtroom attire.
In a nine-page statement responding to allegations contained in leaked internal emails that appeared in Trinidad’s Sunday Express on August 9, Justice Anderson said he removed Justice Eboe-Osuji from the panel hearing a preliminary application in D’Almada v Trinidad and Tobago, scheduled for July 2, after the judge declined to conform to what Justice Anderson described as the court’s established practice on judicial attire.
Justice Anderson said the dispute arose after Justice Eboe-Osuji appeared in what he understood to be the judge’s traditional national dress during two proceedings. The matter was discussed privately on June 10, but Justice Eboe-Osuji subsequently advised that, except when robes were required, he would appear in either national dress or a suit and tie.
“I considered this to be totally unacceptable,” Justice Anderson said yesterday.
“Not having been able to secure a commitment to abide by the accepted practice of judicial wear for this Court, I took the decision as President to remove the colleague from the panel hearing a procedural preliminary application,” he added.
Justice Anderson said his concern did not arise from advice received from judicial counsel or another member of the court’s legal staff. He said it was heightened by communications from chief justices and other serving and retired senior judicial officers across the region who expressed concern about the attire worn during the court’s proceedings.
The CCJ President maintained that the judge’s removal was based solely on attire and had “nothing whatsoever” to do with his opinions, participation in judicial conferences or expression of judicial views.
He said Justice Eboe-Osuji was subsequently informed that he would sit on the panel hearing the substantive matter, at which judicial robes would be worn.
Justice Anderson acknowledged that he might have handled the dress-code controversy too forcefully.
“I understand and appreciate the view that I may have approached the matter of the handling of the issue of dress code too strongly,” he said.
Institutional issue
He nevertheless maintained that it was an institutional issue involving the appearance, consistency and tone of the court rather than one directed at an individual judge.
According to Anderson, a draft judicial dress code was prepared for consideration by the Regional Judicial and Legal Services Commission (RJLSC). He said he offered his judicial colleagues several opportunities to discuss it before the commission’s June 26 meeting, but those opportunities were not taken up.
The commission subsequently agreed that the draft should be returned to the judges for review and comments. Justice Anderson said a wider consultation with national courts was now being proposed to determine whether national dress should be permitted on the bench and how it should be defined in the diverse Caribbean context.
“The idea of individual judges adopting their own interpretation of national or traditional dress would seem to be at odds with the very concept of a Caribbean Court,” he said.
“In the meantime, however, I consider it my duty as President to maintain the status quo and prevent unilateral decisions by individual Judges to alter established conventions.”
The disclosures by Justice Anderson came amid an unprecedented internal controversy at the regional court following the publication of leaked emails showing that five of its six other sitting judges had raised concerns about Justice Anderson’s leadership and the administration of the institution.
The reported allegations included authoritarian leadership, insufficient consultation, manipulation of judicial panels and attempts to influence judicial decisions. The RJLSC has announced that the matters will be addressed through a transparent and independent review.
Justice Anderson condemned the unauthorised disclosure of the correspondence, saying it had caused concern, anxiety and “profound sadness” within the institution and across the region.
“Such disclosures and their publication are wholly unacceptable and strike at one of the fundamental principles upon which every independent judiciary depends,” he said.
“It erodes trust in the sanctity of judicial deliberations and judicial collegiality. It erodes public trust and confidence in the third branch.”
Consultation
Addressing complaints about a lack of consultation, Justice Anderson said he had regularly convened meetings of the judges and established an Executive Strategic Planning and Advisory Committee comprising the two most senior judges and the court’s three most senior administrative officers.
He also pointed to meetings of the court’s Monitoring and Evaluation Committee and said he routinely made himself available to judges, managers and staff.
“I do not refuse requests from my Judges to discuss any matter affecting the Court,” he said.
On the allegation of panel fixing, Justice Anderson said it was “wholly untrue”.
“The constitution of panels has always formed part of the administrative responsibilities of the President of the Caribbean Court of Justice,” he said, adding that the authority had never been used to influence the outcome of proceedings.
Justice Anderson maintained that the panel in the D’Almada case was altered solely because of the disagreement over attire. He noted that the application was interlocutory and that the five judges who heard it unanimously granted permission for the substantive matter to proceed.
“The inferential leap required to elevate the issue of Bench attire to an allegation of panel fixing is irresponsible, intellectually dishonest, injudicious and quite simply, malevolent!”, he declared.
Justice Anderson also said a judge should not be presumed incapable of deciding a matter impartially because of nationality, place of origin or another personal characteristic.
Such an assumption, he said, would undermine not only the individual judge but public confidence in Caribbean justice.
Justice Anderson announced that, going forward, every CCJ judge would be required to sit on every panel unless the judge opted out for a legitimate reason and was excused. Justice Anderson, who assumed office on July 6, 2025, said the court had continued to discharge its responsibilities in its Original and Appellate jurisdictions.
He pointed to judgments delivered during the past year, the court’s work in advancing regional integration, and initiatives relating to governance, staff development, administration and public outreach.
He credited those accomplishments to the judges, managers and staff.
“These accomplishments have not been achieved by the President acting alone,” Justice Anderson said.
He added that the CCJ was more than a judicial institution and represented decades of work by Caribbean people who believed the region could establish and sustain its own final court.
“Where I have been at fault, I will own up to my shortcomings,” he said.
Justice Anderson undertook that the court would continue hearing and determining cases and discharging its responsibilities under the Agreement Establishing the Caribbean Court of Justice and the Revised Treaty of Chaguaramas.
The court, he said, would continue serving the region “with independence, fairness and integrity deserving of the trust and confidence of the Caribbean people.”
Discussion