Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-g8jcs Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-25T13:29:51.411Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Legal and institutional aspects of the Organisation of Eastern Caribbean States

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 October 1985

William C. Gilmore
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

In spite of an ever increasing interest in Caribbean affairs the signing, by representatives of seven Commonwealth governments, of the treaty establishing the Organisation of Eastern Caribbean States (OECS) in June 1981 aroused little academic or media comment outside the region. Indeed, in the years which followed, this experiment in collective self reliance continued to be largely ignored by the academic community notwithstanding the incorporation of a number of relatively bold innovations in the structure and scope of the institution which had been created.

Type
Notes
Information
Review of International Studies , Volume 11 , Issue 4 , October 1985 , pp. 311 - 328
Copyright
Copyright © British International Studies Association 1985

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1. See, Treaty Establishing the Organisation of Eastern Caribbean States of 18 June, 1981 (OECS Secretariat, Castries, St. Lucia: 1981) (hereafter OECS Treaty). See also, Organisation of Eastern Caribbean States Act, Act No. 6, 1983 (St. Lucia), and, Organisation of Eastern Caribbean States Law 1981, People's Law No. 41, 1981 (Grenada).

2. For an interesting analysis originating within the Caribbean see, Demas, ‘The Viability of the Organisation of East Caribbean States’, Bulletin of Eastern Caribbean Affairs, 8 (1982), pp. 5–23.Google Scholar

3. See generally, Payne, A., Sutton, P. and Thorndike, T., Grenada: Revolution and Invasion (London, 1984).Google Scholar See also, O'Shaughnessy, H., Grenada: Revolution, Invasion and Aftermath (London, 1984)Google Scholar, and Ambursley, F. and Dunkerley, J., Grenada: Whose Freedoml (London, 1984).CrossRefGoogle Scholar

4. See, OECS Treaty, art. 6(11).

5. Id., art. 6(4).

6. For the text of the OECS press release detailing these sanctions see, Gilmore, W., The Grenada Intervention: Analysis and Documentation (London, 1984), p. 92.Google Scholar

7. The words of Prime Minister Adams of Barbados on 26 October

8. See, id., pp. 33, 102–5 See, e.g., Joyner, ‘The United States Action in Grenada: Reflections on the Lawfulness of Invasion’, American Journal of International Law, 78 (1984), pp. 131–44, and Boyle et al, ‘International Lawlessness in Grenada’ id., pp. 172–5 But see, Moore, ‘Grenada and the International Double Standard’, id., pp. 145–68, and Fraser, ‘Grenada—The Sovereignty of a People’, West Indian Law Journal, 1 (1983), pp. 205–91 For the views of the author see generally, supra, note 6.

9. See, Dale, W., The Modern Commonwealth (London, 1983), p. 313.Google Scholar

10. Foreign Affairs Committee, Grenada (H.C. Paper 226: 1983–84), p. 41. As a consequence consideration is now being given to independence. See The Guardian, 2 June 1984.

11. See supra, note 6, pp. 88–92 for extensive extracts of this agreement. St. Kitts/Nevis subsequently obtained membership of this grouping. See, Bulletin of Eastern Caribbean Affairs, 9 (1984), p. 42.

12. See, supra, note 6, p. 33. It now appears likely that, following proposals from various eastern Caribbean governments, this scheme will be upgraded. See, Bulletin of Eastern Caribbean Affairs, 9 (1983), pp. 39, 41, 47, and Bulletin of Eastern Caribbean Affairs, 9 (1984), pp. 32–3.

13. Payne, Derived from A., The International Crisis in the Caribbean (London, 1984), pp. 167–70.Google Scholar

14. Lestrade, S., CARICOM's Less Developed Countries (Institute of Social and Economic Research, University of the West Indies, Barbados, 1981), p. 8.Google Scholar

15. Foreign Affairs Committee, Caribbean and Central America (H.C. Paper 47: 1981–2), para. 142.

16. See, e.g., Lewis, , ‘The Agony of the Eight’, in Lowenthal, D. and Comitas, L. (eds), The Aftermath of Sovereignty (New York, 1973), pp. 215–35.Google Scholar

17. See, e.g., , Thorndike, ‘The Politics of Inadequacy’, Social and Economic Studies, 28 (1979), pp. 597–617.Google Scholar

18. See generally, Broderick, ‘Associated Statehood—A New Form of Decolonisation’, International and Comparative Law Quarterly, 17 (1968), pp. 368–403CrossRefGoogle Scholar, and Gilmore, , ‘Legal Perspectives on Associated Statehood in the Eastern Caribbean’, Virginia Journal of International Law, 19 (1979), pp. 489–555.Google Scholar

19. See, Gilmore, , ‘Requiem for associated statehood?’, Review of International Studies, 8 (1982), pp. 9–25.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

20. See, e.g., Lewis, , ‘The Architecture of Political Regionalism in the Commonwealth Caribbean’ in Ince, B. A.et al. (eds), Issues in Caribbean International Relations (Institute of International Relations, University of the West Indies, Trinidad, 1983), p. 113.Google Scholar

21. Geiser, , ‘Regional Integration in the Commonwealth Caribbean’, Journal of World Trade Law, 10 (1976), p. 551.Google Scholar

22. Axline, W. A., Caribbean Integration: The Politics of Regionalism (London, 1979), p. 83.Google Scholar For the text of the agreement see Preiswerk, R. (ed.), Documents on International Relations in the Caribbean (Institute of Caribbean Studies, Universidad de Puerto Rico, Puerto Rico, 1970)Google Scholar, p.412 etseq.

23. See, Goodwin and Lake, ‘The LDC’s in Integration Schemes: The CARICOM Experience’ in B. A. Ince, et al. (eds), supra, note 20, p. 136.

24. Axline, supra, note 22, p. 100. For the text of the agreement see, Preiswerk, supra, note 22, p. 463 et seq.

25. 25. See A. Payne, The Politics of the Caribbean Community, 1961–79 (Manchester, 1980), p. 106. Interestingly, at that time none of the participants were independent states in international law. See, Carnegie, ‘Commonwealth Caribbean Regionalism: Legal Aspects’, Year Book of World Affairs (1979), p. 183.

26. All of the CARIFTA LDCs subsequently became parties to the agreement establishing the Caribbean Development Bank located in Barbados.

27. See, e.g., Demas, W., West Indian Nationhood and Caribbean Integration (Barbados, 1974), p. 31.Google Scholar

28. Reproduced in International Legal Materials, 12 (1973), pp. 1033–79.

29. See, e.g., supra, note 14, pp. 2–6; and, supra, note 23, pp. 129–57. See also, Wiltshire, ‘Mini-States, Dependency and Regional Integration in the Caribbean’ in Lewis, V. A. (ed.), Size, Self-Determination and International Relations: The Caribbean (Institute of Social and Economic Research, University of the West Indies, Jamaica, 1976), pp. 98–121;Google Scholar and, Wiltshire, , ‘Integration in Developing Regions as Competing Systems’ in Millet, R. and Will, W. M. (eds),The Restless Caribbean: Changing Patterns of International Relations (London, 1979), pp. 258–9.Google Scholar

30. See, supra, note 27, pp. 33–4. See also, G'Connell, , ‘The Caribbean Community: Economic Integration in the Commonwealth Caribbean’, Journal of International Law and Economics, 11 (1976), pp. 35–66;Google Scholar and, Simmonds, , ‘The Caribbean Economic Community: A New Venture in Regional Integration’, International and Comparative Law Quarterly, 23 (1974), pp. 453–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

31. See, Axline, supra, note 22, p. 126.

32. See, e.g., supra, note 19, p. 13. For the entrustment to Montserrat see, Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs to Governor of Montserrat, 21 March 1974 (unpublished letter made available by FCO).

33. See, Geiser, H. J., Alleyne, P. and Garjraj, C., Legal Problems of Caribbean Integration: A Study on the Legal Aspects of CARICOM (Leyden, 1976), pp. 55–6.Google Scholar

34. See, e.g., Currency (No. 2) Ordinance, Ordinance No. 5, 1965 (St. Lucia). The original members of the East Caribbean Currency Authority were Antigua, Barbados, Montserrat, St. Kitts-Nevis-Anguilla, St. Lucia and St. Vincent. Grenada joined in 1968 whilst Barbados subsequently withdrew and established its own Central Bank. See, Central Bank of Barbados Act, Act No. 6, 1972 (Barbados). The operation of this scheme has not been free from criticism. See, e.g., McClean, A. W., Money and Banking in the East Caribbean Currency Area (Institute of Social and Economic Research, University of the West Indies, Jamaica, 1975)Google Scholar. This arrangement has recently been upgraded so as to form a sub-regional Central Bank. See, Eastern Caribbean Central Bank Agreement Act, Act No. 23, 1983 (St. Lucia).

35. 1967 c. 4 (UK).

36. See, Gilmore, ‘The Associated States of the Commonwealth Caribbean: The Constitutions and the Individual’, Lawyer of the Americas, 11 (1979), pp. 15–16. Grenada has since withdrawn from the scheme. See, Grenada People's Law No. 4, 1979. This institution is now known as the Eastern Caribbean Supreme Court. See, The Saint Lucia Constitution Order 1978, S.I 1978, No. 1901 (UK), Sched. 2, s. 8. See also, OECS Communique of 16 June 1982 following the 1st meeting of the Authority (unpublished).

37. See Preiswerk, supra, note 22, pp. 399–400.

38. Axline, supra, note 22, p. 100.

39. See, Payne, supra, note 25, pp. 259–66. See also, Caribbean Quarterly, 18 (1972), pp. 36–54, and Bulletin of Eastern Caribbean Affairs, 1 (1975).

40. Explanatory Handbook on the Establishment of the Organisation of Eastern Caribbean States (WISA Secretariat, Castries, St. Lucia, 1981), p. 3.

41. WISA Communique of 21 October 1978 (unpublished). See, Th e Virgin Islands Daily News', 28 October 1978.

42. Confidential Report of the WISA Council Joint Representation Committee, of March 1979 (unpublished), p. i.

43. Id., p. 2.

44. Supra, note 40, p. 4.

45. WISA Communique of 31 October 1980 (unpublished).

46. See OECS Treaty, art. 21.

47. Supra, note 40, p. 5.

48. See OECS Treaty, art. 3(1). 49. See id., art. 3(2).

49. See id., art. 2(2).

50. See also, art. 22(1).

51. See id., art. 2(3).

52. Id.

53. See Dundas, The Law of the Caribbean Community, West Indian Law Journal (1980), p. 15. See also, Carnegie, supra, note 25, pp. 184–6.

54. See, e.g., OECS Treaty, art. 6(3), art. 7(2), art. 8(2), and art. 9(2).

55. See, id., art. 23.

56. See supra, note 10, p. 42. No other OECS member has taken advantage of the art. 23 procedure.

57. OECS Treaty, art. 2(4).

58. Dundas, supra, note 53, p. 14.

59. See, Bulletin of Eastern Caribbean Affairs, 9 (1983), p. 54, and OECS Communique of 27 May 1983 (unpublished). See also, Foreign Affairs Committee, The Economic and Political Security of Small States (H.C. Paper 541 : 1983–844), para. 26.

60. See Carnegie, supra, note 25, p. 181. See also, Gilmore, supra, note 18, pp. 521–30, and; Gilmore, ‘The Anguilla Act, 1980: A Question of Constitutional Propriety’, West Indian Law Journal (1981), pp. 10–12.

61. OECS Treaty, art. 2(4). See also, art. 22. Another possible candidate for some form of association with the OECS is Barbados which has shown signs since the Grenada intervention of strengthening its links with members of the sub-regional grouping in a number of areas. See, Bulletin of Eastern Caribbean Affairs, 9 (1984), p. 32.

62. Carnegie, supra, note 25, p. 191.

63. OECS Treaty, art. 24(1).

64. Id., art. 24(2). For difficulties encountered in the context of CARIFTA see, Dundas, supra, note 53, pp. 13, 26–7.

65. See, supra, note 6, p. 92.

66. OECS Treaty, art. 16(2).

67. OECS Communique of 12 November 1982 (unpublished).

68. OECS Treaty, art. 5(2).

69. Id., art. 6(4).

70. Id., art. 6(7).

71. See, id., art. 6(1) and (2).

72. Id., art. 6(4).

73. See, id., art. 6(10).

74. See, id. art. 6(9). See also, art. 12, and art. 13.

75. Id., art. 6(8). See also, art. 16(1). Such provisions, among others, may well form the basis of a claim by OECS for the possession of an international juridical personality, an issue which lies beyond the bounds of the present study. See also, art. 17(1) which states that the OECS ‘shall enjoy legal personality’.

76. OECS Treaty, art. 6(6).

77. See, id., art. 6(5).

78. Supra, note 40, p. 6.

79. See Carnegie, supra, note 25, pp. 193–4; Dundas, supra, note 53, pp. 18–19; and, Axline, supra, note 22, p. 77.

80. OECS Treaty, art. 4.

81. As in the protracted proceedings of UNCLOS III.

82. Supra, note 21, p. 565.

83. See, supra, note 6, p. 44.

84. See, OECS Treaty, art. 7(1), (2), and (5).

85. Id., art. 7(6).

86. Id., art. 7(3).

87. Id., art. 8(3).

88. See, id., art. 8(4).

89. See, supra, note 6, pp. 41–3.

90. See, id., art p. 43.

91. See, Bulletin of Eastern Caribbean Affairs, 9 (1983), p. 40.

92. OECS Treaty, art. 9(3).

93. See, id., art. 9(4).

94. See, id., art. 10(1) and (2).

95. See, id., art. 10(1) and (3).

96. Commentary on the Draft Treaty, annexed to supra, note 42, p. 6.

97. OECS Treaty, art. 10(3). Such appointment is for an initial period of four years and the Director-General may be re-appointed.

98. Id., art. 10(4).

99. Supra, note 40, p. 8.

100. See, e.g., OECS Treaty, art. 17(4) granting diplomatic privileges and immunities to senior officials.

101. Id., art. 10(8).

102. Id., art. 10(9).

103. See, The Caribbean Community in the 1980's: Report by a Group of Caribbean Experts (Caribbean Community Secretariat, Guyana, 1981), pp. 84–5.Google Scholar

104. See, id., p. 107.

105. See, id.

106. See, e.g., Ince, The Administration of Foreign Affairs in a Very Small Developing Country: The Case of Trinidad and Tobago, in V. A. Lewis (ed.), supra, note 29, pp. 307–39.

107. See, e.g., Searwar, Administration of Foreign Relations (unpublished paper delivered at the Conference on Independence for Very Small States with Special Reference to the Caribbean, University of the West Indies, Barbados, 25–28 March 1974), pp. 1, 20–3.

108. Supra, note 40, p. 13.

109. See, e.g., Payne, supra, note 25, p. 220.

110. 110. Id.

111. Supra, note 40, p. 12.

112. Supra, note 42, p. i.

113. See, e.g., id., pp. 10–11.

114. Id., p. 2.

115. See The Commonwealth: its special responsibilities to Small States (Commonwealth Secretariat, London, 1979).Google Scholar

116. See Foreign Affairs Committee, supra, note 59, para. 12. See also, Commonwealth Heads of Government: The Lusaka Communique, August 1979 (Commonwealth Secretariat, London, 1979)Google Scholar, para. 54.

117. Foreign Affairs Committee, supra, note 59, p. xiii.

118. Reproduced in Brownlie, I. (ed.), Basic Documents in International Law (Oxford, 3rd edn, 1983), p. 215.Google Scholar

119. On the importance of the UN for the conduct of the external relations of small states see, UNITAR, Small States and Territories: Status and Problems (New York, 1971), pp. 113–14.Google Scholar

120. See, e.g., United Nations Juridical Yearbook, (1965), p. 223; and United Nations Juridical Yearbook, (1967), pp. 317–20.

121. Supra, note 115, p. 20.

122. See, in particular, art. 8(3) and art. 42(2). See also, supra, note 115, p. 21; supra, note 42, p. 17; and, Foreign Affairs Committee, supra, note 59, p. xiii.

123. See, supra, note 42, Annex C.

124. Id., p. i.

125. OECS Treaty, art. 11(2).

126. See, id., art. 11(4).

127. See, id., art. 11(5).

128. Id., art. 11(3).

129. See, Foreign and Commonwealth Office, The London Diplomatic List: December 1983 (London, 1983), p. 20.Google Scholar The High Commissioner is also accredited for St. Lucia to France, West Germany and Sweden. In addition, he represents these states in their relations in London with IMO and the Commonwealth Secretariat, and represents the interests of St. Lucia, St. Vincent and St. Kitts/Nevis at UNESCO.

130. The possibility of establishing a joint arrangement in relation to the EEC is still under active consideration.

131. See, e.g., Pollard, Institutional and Legal Aspects of the Caribbean Community, Caribbean Studies, 14 (1974), pp. 58–72; supra, note 33, pp. 158–73; and, Dundas, supra, note 53, pp. 22–3. See also, Carnegie, supra, note 25, pp. 194–5.

132. See OEC S Treaty, art. 14(1) and (2).

133. Id., Annex A, s. 1. It has since been decided that nominees should be barristers of not less than 10 years experience. See OECS Communique of 16 June 1982 (unpublished).

134. OECS Treaty, Annex A, s. 2(c).

135. Id., s. 2(d).

136. See, id., s. 3.

137. See, id., s. 6.

138. E.g., 1969 Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties, Annex, s. 6. See, supra, note 118, p. 386.

139. OECS Treaty, art. 14(3). See also, Annex A, s. 6.

140. See, supra, note 96, pp. 10–11.

141. Reproduced in supra, note 118, p. 387, at p. 397. See also, S. Rosenne, The Law and Practice of the International Court (Leyden, 1965), vol. I, pp. 323–6.

142. Schwarzenberger, G. and Brown, E., A Manual of International Law (Abingdon, 6th edn, 1976), p. 197.Google Scholar

143. See, Fox, , ‘Conciliation’ in Report of a Study Group on the Peaceful Settlement of International Disputes (David Davies Memorial Institute of International Studies, London, 1966), p. 83.Google Scholar

144. Supra, note 96, p. 12.

145. Supra, note 2, p. 19.