LMWR
Impact on ordinary folk:
The number of appeals indicates beyond doubt that there has been an increase in appeals to the final court. This indicates that ordinary folk now have additional scope and opportunity to be heard and to obtain justice. An interesting trend is the fact that the number of civil cases filed, exceeds the combined total of criminal and constitutional cases. In other words, there are more cases filed in which the State is not a party than cases in which the State is. This is an important fact and change from the pattern in the countries which do not have access to the CCJ. The fact is also clear that the civil litigants at the level of the CCJ are not limited to corporate or wealthy people because a number of civil appeals have been heard in forma pauperis showing that the ordinary citizen has been benefitting from the existence of the CCJ. Take for example the case of Elizabeth Ross v Coreen Sinclair [2008] CCJ 4 (AJ). Two very poor ladies (one quite aged) from Guyana had a dispute between them about the right to occupy a condominium. It was a matter very important to them. They could never previously have had that matter litigated by a second tier appellate court. The CCJ heard it in forma pauperis (even in civil matters, the CCJ will hear matters in forma pauperis). Two members of the Guyanese Bar agreed to represent both ladies pro bono. The ladies were able to have most hearings done by teleconferencing. With videoconferencing which the CCJ has now installed in the courts of Member States which did not already have the facility, even more can be done. As a result of the CCJ’s intervention, on occasion, Bar Associations have had attorneys provide pro bono services so that important matters could be ventilated for persons who could not afford to have their own legal representation. Attorneys have expressed pride in appearing before their own final appellate court and in providing charitable services for indigent clients with deserving
The number of appeals indicates beyond doubt that there has been an increase in appeals to the final court. This indicates that ordinary folk now have additional scope and opportunity to be heard and to obtain justice. An interesting trend is the fact that the number of civil cases filed, exceeds the combined total of criminal and constitutional cases. In other words, there are more cases filed in which the State is not a party than cases in which the State is. This is an important fact and change from the pattern in the countries which do not have access to the CCJ. The fact is also clear that the civil litigants at the level of the CCJ are not limited to corporate or wealthy people because a number of civil appeals have been heard in forma pauperis showing that the ordinary citizen has been benefitting from the existence of the CCJ. Take for example the case of Elizabeth Ross v Coreen Sinclair [2008] CCJ 4 (AJ). Two very poor ladies (one quite aged) from Guyana had a dispute between them about the right to occupy a condominium. It was a matter very important to them. They could never previously have had that matter litigated by a second tier appellate court. The CCJ heard it in forma pauperis (even in civil matters, the CCJ will hear matters in forma pauperis). Two members of the Guyanese Bar agreed to represent both ladies pro bono. The ladies were able to have most hearings done by teleconferencing. With videoconferencing which the CCJ has now installed in the courts of Member States which did not already have the facility, even more can be done. As a result of the CCJ’s intervention, on occasion, Bar Associations have had attorneys provide pro bono services so that important matters could be ventilated for persons who could not afford to have their own legal representation. Attorneys have expressed pride in appearing before their own final appellate court and in providing charitable services for indigent clients with deserving