The Caribbean Court of Justice – Excelling in Distinguishing?

Since its establishment in 2005, the Caribbean Court of Justice (CCJ) has seen consistently low adoption of its appellate jurisdiction, with few states choosing it as their final court of appeal. However, despite the limited uptake of this optional jurisdiction, the CCJ has had a remarkably significant impact—particularly in relation to the mandatory death penalty and the criminal offences of buggery and serious indecency. This paper examines the decisions and influence of the CCJ in human rights, focusing on key rulings such as Nervais and Severin v The Queen [2018] CCJ 19 (AJ); McEwan v Guyana [2018] CCJ 30 (AJ) and HolderMcClean-Ramirez et al v Attorney General of Barbados (2022) 44/220. It compares these to judgments of the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council (JCPC), including Chandler v The State (No 2) (Trinidad and Tobago) [2022] UKPC 19; Surratt v Trinidad and Tobago [2007] UKPC 55; and Chantelle Day et al v The Governor of the Cayman Islands et al [2022] UKPC 6. Through this analysis, the paper explores how CCJ jurisprudence is shaping the human rights landscape in the Commonwealth Caribbean, and assesses the potential implications for the future appeal of the court’s appellate jurisdiction. Keywords: Human Rights; Buggery; Serious indecency; Commonwealth Caribbean; Death penalty