The Caribbean Community’s (CARICOM’s) decision to seek an advisory opinion from the Caribbean Court of Justice (CCJ) on Carla Barnett’s contentious reappointment as its secretary general is a pragmatic move that frees the community to get on with doing the things critical to transforming itself into a genuine single market and economy.Further, by invoking Article 212 of the Revised Treaty of Chaguaramas, seeking an advisory opinion, rather than engaging in an adversarial, contentious proceeding before the court, the community has prevented the possibility of a clawing, knock-down fight – or the appearance thereof – which could pose existential threats to the community.Indeed, it is to Trinidad and Tobago’s credit – the main protagonist in this matter – that it recognised those dangers and had proposed that the community as a whole seek the opinion, rather than Port of Spain mounting a contentious challenge. This way, CARICOM receives institutional insulation.Significantly, Trinidad and Tobago’s prime minister, Kamala Persad-Bissessar, has said that her government will abide by the opinion of CCJ, which, in its original jurisdiction, is the interpreter of the CARICOM treaty and arbiter on community law.The Barnett controversy arose out of a decision by CARICOM’s heads of government, a retreat during their summit in St Kitts and Nevis in February, to appoint the 68-year-old Belizean economist to a second five-year term as secretary general. Her current term expires in mid-August.The problem is that Trinidad and Tobago was not in the room and Port of Spain has argued that the entire process used to extend Dr Barnett’s tenure was irregular, therefore null and void.At the St Kitts summit, Prime Minister Persad-Bissessar, who was into a period of CARICOM-bashing, returned home early, leaving her foreign minister, Sean Sobers, as acting head of delegation.Mr Sobers had indicated that he might miss the retreat because he feared becoming seasick during the crossing by boat, from St Kitts to Nevis, the venue for the gathering. Trinidad and Tobago, however, insisted that he was later effectively disinvited from the retreat by being informed by secretariat officials that it was for heads of government only. NOT THE ENTIRETYThis, however, was not the entirety of Port of Spain’s grievance. It complained, too, that there was no formal recommendation from CARICOM’s council of ministers to the heads of government, for Dr Barnett’s reappointment. Neither was the issue clearly placed on the agenda as a matter for discussion, nor was the decision appropriately minuted in the notes from the meeting. In any event, Port of Spain has argued, a heads retreat was not an appropriate forum, under the treaty, for appointing a secretary general. In addition, it claimed, the rules were broken with respect to when and how leaders can make decisions with a qualified majority in breach of the normal requirement for unanimity.While Trinidad and Tobago has insisted that its position was one of principle, rather than attacking an individual, it hasn’t escaped some observers that Ms Persad-Bissessar has inveighed against Dr Barnett’s leadership for the disrespect she believed she received from the secretariat when, while in opposition, she sought the CARICOM’s intervention in a domestic matter. Prior to the decision by the heads to seek the advisory opinion, Port of Spain had said it wouldn’t recognise Dr Barnett as secretary general (SG), once her current contract expires on August 15. In calling for the issue to be taken before the CCJ, it softened slightly on how the SG would operate: she would be engaged on a month-to-month basis and wouldn’t be able to take any decision that wasn’t irreversible.  Neither would the secretary general be involved in the process taking the dispute to the CCJ.However, at their summit this week in St Lucia, with Prime Minister Persad-Bissessar present, the heads of government agreed “that the status quo with respect to the re-appointment of the Secretary General shall remain unless and until the Community considers the said Advisory Opinion from the CCJ”. “The Heads of Government further underscored that this process does not impugn the integrity of any member state or individual; rather it reflects the community’s collective commitment to continuous institutional improvement with the highest standards of good governance,” a statement on the issue said.Happily, the leaders dealt with, and were able to resolve, this issue relatively early in their St Lucia summit. That would have allowed them more time to exchange ideas and, where possible, arrive at consensus positions for confronting major global schisms that have undermined the interests of the global south countries, including the members of CARICOM.In a tumultuous global environment, the logic of integration, including CARICOM’s mission of a seamless regional economy, is unimpeachable. But a seamless CARICOM economy requires the removal of market and other regulatory frictions, of which many remain in the community. The efforts to eliminate them demand acceleration.