HGP Nightly News – The Bar Council of the Bar Association of Guyana has condemned the unauthorised disclosure of internal correspondence among Caribbean Court of Justice judges but stopped short of addressing the serious allegations reportedly contained in those communications.
Its intervention comes amid reports of deep internal discord at the CCJ, including allegations that a majority of the judges accused Court President Justice Winston Anderson of managing the regional institution in an “authoritarian” and “dictatorial” manner.
Those allegations have not been independently established. The Bar Council, however, expressly declined to endorse, reject or otherwise assess their substance, focusing instead on how the purported correspondence entered the public domain.
“Internal correspondence and deliberations among judges are, and must remain, confidential,” the Council declared.
It warned that disclosure of such material, regardless of its contents, could undermine confidence in the judiciary and bring the administration of justice into disrepute.
According to the Council, any unauthorised disclosure to the media would constitute a “gross breach of confidence and a serious dereliction of duty” by whoever was responsible.
The Council also defended the need for the CCJ president to be given sufficient latitude to articulate and implement a vision for the Court and determine the principles governing its administration. It stressed, however, that this authority must be exercised within the limits of the Court’s Code of Judicial Conduct.
Significantly, the statement offered no view on whether the reported complaints against Justice Anderson were justified, whether the correspondence was authentic or whether the allegations warranted an independent institutional review.
The Bar Council’s position therefore addresses the confidentiality breach but leaves unanswered the larger issue now confronting the Court: whether the reported correspondence points to genuine governance problems within the Caribbean’s highest judicial institution.
The controversy has particular significance for Guyana, where the CCJ serves as the country’s final appellate court. The Court also exercises original jurisdiction in disputes involving the interpretation and application of the Revised Treaty of Chaguaramas.
The reports have also revived earlier concerns raised by PNCR Leader Aubrey Norton about Justice Anderson’s alleged involvement in discussions surrounding Guyana’s senior judicial appointments.
Norton disclosed last year that Justice Anderson personally engaged him about the substantive appointment of then acting Chancellor Justice Yonette Cummings-Edwards. Norton said he ended the engagement after becoming uncomfortable with its direction and subsequently questioned the impartiality of the regional court.
No evidence was publicly produced establishing that Justice Anderson was acting on political instructions, and the latest reported internal complaints do not prove Norton’s allegations. Together, however, the developments have intensified scrutiny of the CCJ president’s leadership and the institution’s internal governance.
The Bar Council said the Court must remain a bastion of justice and that its institutional integrity must be respected, protected and preserved.
While preserving judicial confidentiality is essential, the controversy has now moved beyond the identity or motives of whoever disclosed the correspondence. Public attention is increasingly focused on whether the reported concerns of the judges themselves have merit and what steps, if any, will be taken to address them.
The Bar Council’s statement makes its position on the leak unmistakable. Its silence on the substance of the reported complaints, however, means the central questions surrounding leadership, accountability and confidence in the CCJ remain unresolved.
