There has been talk of behind-the- scenes moves aimed at breaking the deadlock over the three CCJ Bills.
A proposed Agreement was to operate on two levels: the Government and the Opposition one one level and the PNP and JLP on the other.
The Government wishes the Opposition to support the CCJ Bills by voting in favour of the CCJ Bills, both in the House of Representatives and in the Senate.
The Opposition wishes the issue of whether the Caribbean Court of Justice should replace the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council as Jamaica's final Court of Appeal to be put to the Jamaican electorate by way of a vote.
More than 50% of Opposition Members in the House of Representatives and more than 50% of the Opposition Senators in the Senate will vote in support of the CCJ Bills in the House of Representatives and in the Senate, respectively.
The question to be put to the electorate: "Are you in favour of the Caribbean Court of Justice replacing the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council as Jamaica's final Court of Appeal"
The electorate may vote Yes or No to that question.
All parties to the Agreement would agree "not to say or do anything, or allow any of its officers or appointed candidates to say or do anything, whether in media advertising, media interviews, public debates, media talk shows, published articles, platform speeches or other public activities..... that might reasonably be perceived to be inconsistent with a support of a Yes vote.
The Government would " not bring the CCJ Bills into operation by way of publication in the Gazette of a notice in accordance with clause 1 of each of the CCJ Bills unless and until--
In the event of any material breach occurring after the CCJ Bills have been passed by Parliament with the support of at least two-thirds of members of each House, the Government shall be released from any further obligations and the Government may thereafter cause the CCJ Bills to be brought into operation.Controversy:
The above was brought to the attention of the Senate by the Leader of Opposition Business, Senator Tavares-Finson. However, Government Senators have countered that it was a personal initiative of the Leader of Government Business in the House of Representative, Phillip Paulwell.
JFLAG Tries to Clarify its Agenda 2014
J-Flag Says It Wants More Done For LGBT People
Health Minister Says Boldness Needed to Change Buggery Laws for HIV Prevention Work to be Effective
Foreign Affairs Minister says Govt should be cautious on gay rights issues in Jamaica
Holiness, hypocrisy and homosexuality …Pastors and the buggery law debate
CVM TV @ Sunrise on the Buggery review & JFLAG's 100 days hope for meeting with PM
Health Minister Ferguson on WAD '13 & FBOs fear of a Buggery repeal with future parachuted gay marriage
Promised Conscience Vote on Buggery in Jamaica was a fluke
PNP’s Bobby Pickersgill differs on Conscience Vote route to decide on Buggery Law 2013
Church defends Buggery Law ... 2013
Buggery Law challenges & overlooked judicial solutions 2013
PNP's Damion Crawford says it's highly unlikely buggery review will happen .....
PNP Wins ................Hope for LGBT People ??? 2011
"Outdated" Bail Laws to be changed but Buggery Laws remain ... how convenient Mr.Golding? 2010
an earlier podcast on the history of the law from 1533: