As a student in business school I once complained to a professor that he was giving us more assignments than we could possibly complete properly. He laughed and said this was true and by design. Business school after all was designed to prepare students for the real world where there was never enough time to do all the things that needed to be done. He was teaching us how to prioritize.

And certainly one of the key traits of successful managers is the ability to separate the necessary and important from the needless and trivial. After all there are just 24 hours in a day and we have only a limited sum of energy at our disposal. Those who waste time and effort on unimportant issues will certainly not have enough to spend on truly crucial matters.

But sometimes it seems Jamaica’s leaders have forgotten this basic tenet of management. Look at the immense amount of time and money the government is spending on the Caribbean Court of Appeals issue for instance.

It is not as if the Jamaican public is crying out for the Privy Council Right of Appeal to be abolished. A recent poll showed a significant majority in favour of keeping it. And indeed in another poll a few years back most respondents felt that Jamaica’s justice system had gotten worse since independence. Our politicians’ grand talk about ’sovereignty’ is certainly not shared by the man in the street. And frankly on a common sense level it is difficult not to agree with the Jamaican public.

It was the British after all who invented the common law system. The Privy Council is one of the oldest and most experienced legal bodies in the world and has been dispensing justice for centuries. But not only is there probably no more impartial judicial authority on earth, it is willing to act as our final appellate court for free. Why would anyone give up such a deal unless they are forced to? And the reality is that British colonial guilt - and probably residual imperial pride - would never allow them to do so unless Jamaica made a specific request. Access to the Privy Council is really a free lunch that Jamaica in its present condition would be foolish to refuse.

One day the majority of Jamaicans may demand that the Privy Council Right of Appeal be abolished and replaced with a Caribbean or even strictly Jamaican alternative. But until then the logical course would be to let sleeping dogs lie and deal with more pressing issues. The luxury of grappling with grandiose issues like ‘symbolic independence’ and ‘metaphorical sovereignty’ should be reserved for countries that have solved their basic economic and social problems. They are certainly matters which should come well down on the list of priorities of a nation that ranks 109^th in the world on per capita GDP, that has seen practically no economic growth over the past five years, and where the murder rate has doubled in a decade.

Replacing the Privy Council final appeal with a Caribbean Court of Appeal would certainly not have any positive impact on our crumbling economy. Indeed such a move would probably lessen foreign investors’ confidence in our legal system, especially if it was established without the direct approval of the Jamaican electorate. Governments that change the rules simply because they can do not inspire certainty either in their own people or outsiders. Who could have confidence in a final court of appeal that is not entrenched and could be dismissed whenever the government did not approve of a ruling it made?

The hanging argument is of course a big red herring. Those who believe that executing people is some magic panacea for crime are dreaming. No study has ever shown capital punishment to be an effective deterrent against crime. America is the only developed country to execute murderers, yet it has a far higher murder rate than any other western country. In any event the Privy Council has never ruled against hanging, only that humane procedures should be followed before it is carried out. Surely all civilized people agree with this sentiment.

The Privy Council Appeal is a matter that affects less than 100 Jamaicans a year and its only cost to the country is travel and lodging expenses for those involved in the case. A Caribbean Court of Appeal would obviously cost many millions more. (And no one seems to have any idea exactly how it would be paid for.) If the government really is serious about improving Jamaicans’ access to justice, would it not make more sense to spend the money on fixing some of the obvious ills plaguing our judicial system? After all these affect thousands of our citizens every day.

It is no secret that the physical infrastructure of our courts throughout the island is in a terrible condition. Not only are many of the buildings run down and dilapidated, but material support is inadequate. There is a shortage of even basic facilities - law books, short hand writers, and photocopying facilities. How can we even talk about having a fair justice system when such conditions prevail?

Another glaring fault of the Jamaican judicial system is the raft of outdated laws and penalties on the books. Everyday we hear of persons being convicted and then fined ridiculously low amounts because that is what the law prescribes. A few months ago the following news item caught my attention. “[David] Thwaites, charged with operating an unlicensed fishing vessel, pleaded guilty to the charge and was fined $200 or 10 days in jail.”

Now perhaps $200, or its old pound equivalent, represented a substantial amount of money back in the days of independence. But does anyone really imagine that a fine that now amounts to the price of one fish can act as a deterrent to any would be illegal fisherman? And lawyers assure me that there are hundreds of instances of such nonsensicalities enshrined in our law books.

If the Prime Minister and Attorney General really want to strengthen Jamaica’s confidence in its judiciary they should start by implementing a systematic approach for the adjustment of laws and fines to changing commercial and societal realities. For such illogicalities undermine everyone’s respect for the judicial system. As the old axiom says, ridiculous laws make the law ridiculous. changkob@hotmail.com