In an explosive report in today’s Sunday Express newspapers in Trinidad and Tobago based on a series of internal correspondences, the President of the Caribbean Court of Justice (CCJ), Justice Winston Anderson has been accused of “dictatorial’ leadership, allegations of panel fixing and allegations of attempting to influence Court decisions with the recent Guyanese case of Mohamed vs the Ministry of Home Affairs, Attorney General and Magistrate being among cases cited.
The Sunday Express said based on internal correspondence it exclusively obtained, five of the CCJ’s six sitting judges challenged Justice Anderson’s leadership, with one warning of “creeping patterns of anti-democratic approaches” and another calling for an urgent meeting to address “a level of disenchantment that may well be a approaching a crisis point if left unaddressed.
According to the Sunday Express report, the issues initially stemmed from a correspondence sent to the panel of judges by the CCJ President on June 22, 2026 titled “Judicial dress code” and later grew into a much deeper and larger issue of alleged panel fixing and reported attempts to influence the decisions of the Court.
In one of the correspondences, Justice Peter Jamadar of Trinidad and Tobago, not only addressed the CCJ President’s reported attempt at imposing a “Judicial dress code,” but raised broader concerns about the handling of cases, with the case of the Mohameds vs the MOHA, AG, and Magistrate being cited.
“I have, recently, been experiencing a deep-felt sense of disregard in relation to the discharge of my core judicial functions…Though this is not the entire truth, nor is it my entire experience of working with you, it is a partial and significant one for me – and one that is deeply troubling (as I expressed directly to you in our last panel discussions in Mohamed vs MOHA, AG and Magistrate). This is an environment that certainly for me, is increasingly becoming toxic and affecting how we as judges work together in the discharge of our core functions. It has not been conducive to judicial well-being,” Justice Jamadar wrote in the exchange obtained by the Sunday Express.
But Justice Jamadar did not stop there, he also cited in the correspondence highlighted by the Sunday Express, what he considered other acts of alleged judicial interference.
“Two relate to the core function of judicial decision-making and impact the rule of law and the due administration of justice – seen through the lenses of judicial independence, impartiality and integrity,” he said.
Justice Jamadar said he witnessed firsthand an attempt to influence the case involving the Mohamed. “…the Mohamed vs MOHA, AG and Magistrate extradition matter and what I experienced as an attempt to influence the opinions of colleagues that differed from yours in an authoritative manner,” Justice Jamadar said in an email to the CCJ President.
He added: “what I experienced was far beyond anything that I have ever experienced in all my years as a judicial officer sitting on the appellate courts. Which experience, I may add, was also expressed by other colleagues who were present at this meeting.”
Justice Jamadar said he was concerned that there were “emerging or creeping patterns of anti-democratic approaches,” and warned against the implications of such.
The furor started over the CCJ President informing colleagues of a planned dress code for the Court being sent to the Regional Judicial Legal Services Commission for its final approval, when none of the other judges were informed of the dress code or had any input. The disagreement captured in the email quickly exploded from the dress code issue to the claims of alleged panel fixing and other issues seen as a threat to the Court.
You must be logged in to post a comment Login