The leaked emails from inside the Caribbean Court of Justice (CCJ) do not make for comfortable reading. Judges describing their president’s leadership as authoritarian, complaining of unilateral panel changes, attempts to shape opinions on live cases, and a “toxic” working environment, undermine public trust. For an institution still fighting to become the final appellate court for several Caribbean nations, the timing is particularly awkward.

On August 14, the President of the Court, Justice Winston Anderson, issued a detailed public statement condemning “in the strongest possible terms, the unauthorised disclosure and publication of confidential material”. He provided context for the contested decisions, denied that any panel had been altered to influence outcomes, and acknowledged that he “may have approached the matter of the handling of the issue of the dress code too strongly”. He also stated that, where he has been at fault, he will own up to his shortcomings. Importantly, going forward, “every Judge of the Court will be required to sit on every panel, unless the Judge opts out for a legitimate reason and is excused”.

Yet the president’s statement, while necessary and welcome, cannot by itself close the matter. The most serious allegations came from multiple judges, and public confidence will be best served by the Regional Judicial and Legal Services Commission exercising its independent functions. Under the agreement establishing the court, the commission holds disciplinary authority over the judges. Detailed Judicial Discipline Regulations set out how complaints of inability or misbehaviour are investigated, referred to an independent tribunal, and resolved. For the president, the process is elevated: removal requires a tribunal recommendation followed by a three-quarters vote of the Heads of Government. A Judicial Code of Conduct supplies the ethical standard. These safeguards exist for precisely this situation. An independent process by the commission remains essential.