Caribbean Trade Law and Development

Tag: Politics

  • Caribbean-African Trade: The Unfinished Bridge

    Caribbean-African Trade: The Unfinished Bridge

    Ashley Williams, Guest Contributor

    The Premise

    History left a fracture where a bridge should have been. The Caribbean and Africa—two regions tethered by blood, yet disconnected by trade.
    For centuries, we have exchanged culture, music, and resilience, but not commerce at scale. That was by design.

    Today, we are positioned to correct that. Not as an afterthought, not as a side conversation, but as a deliberate economic force.
    The Caribbean and Africa are two sides of the same coin—one rich in resources, the other rich in financial infrastructure and global access.

    The question is not if this bridge will be built. The question is who will control its foundation.

    The Case for Reconnection

    For decades, Caribbean nations have been locked into trade cycles dictated by former colonial powers.  Our largest exports still head to North America and Europe.
    Our tourism models remain dependent on Western economies. Even our food supply is largely imported from outside the region.

    Africa, too, has been locked into extractive economic relationships—its vast resources flowing outward, while financial control remains offshore.
    China, the EU, and the U.S. have embedded themselves as dominant players in African trade. Yet, the Caribbean is absent. Why?

    Because we have not yet moved as a collective force. But when we do, the system changes.


    Strategic Synergies: What We Bring, What They Bring

    Caribbean economies are small but agile. We are financial architects. We design offshore structures, manage global wealth, and maneuver regulatory frameworks like second nature.
    Africa, on the other hand, is  a sleeping giant—a landmass of opportunity, with raw materials, energy potential, and scale.

    The synergy is undeniable. The Caribbean is the financial brain, Africa is the industrial body.


    1. Financial Infrastructure & Alternative Investment 


    The Bahamas is a financial powerhouse—one of the world’s most recognized offshore banking hubs. Africa is experiencing a fintech revolution, leapfrogging traditional banking systems.

    – Caribbean Strength: We control regulatory frameworks, offshore finance, and structured investment models. 
    – African Strength: Digital banking, mobile finance, and large-scale investment needs. 
    – Opportunity: A Caribbean-African sovereign wealth fund that structures investments in real estate, energy, and infrastructure across both regions. 

    2. Renewable Energy & Power Independence
    Both regions suffer from high energy costs and dependency on fossil fuels. Africa has solar farms the size of cities, untapped hydroelectric power, and access to rare minerals needed for battery storage. 

    – Caribbean Strength: Expertise in solar-powered desalination, grid management, and sustainable energy policies. 
    – African Strength: Raw materials, large-scale renewable energy projects, and battery storage potential. 
    – Opportunity: Co-owned energy companies** that provide off-grid power solutions for both regions—drastically reducing reliance on external energy suppliers. 

    3. Food Security & Agricultural Trade 
    The Caribbean imports **80% of its food.  That is a liability. Africa has the land and the output to close this gap. 

    – Caribbean Strength: Trade logistics, duty-free zones, and financial structuring. 
    – African Strength: Large-scale agricultural production, natural farming conditions. 
    – Opportunity: A direct agricultural pipeline, moving fresh, organic African produce into the Caribbean food supply chain. 

    4. Real Estate & Infrastructure Development 
    Both regions have a real estate boom, but capital access remains a challenge. The Bahamas understands luxury development and foreign direct investment. Africa needs urban expansion and commercial real estate projects. 

    – Caribbean Strength: Investment-friendly real estate laws, residency incentives, and luxury market expertise. 
    – African Strength: High demand for commercial and residential expansion. 
    – Opportunity: A Caribbean-African Real Estate Fund that funnels investment capital from both regions into large-scale developments.


    Breaking the Barriers: The Playbook 

    This is not a matter of potential, but of execution. The barriers are not structural; they are psychological and logistical.

    1. Trade Agreements & Economic Alignment 
    The African Continental Free Trade Area (AfCFTA) exists. CARICOM exists. The link between the two is missing. 
    Bilateral agreements must eliminate tariffs, streamline import/export regulations, and incentivize direct Caribbean-African trade flows.

    2. Direct Shipping & Air Cargo Routes 
    Right now, Caribbean-Africa trade requires detours through Europe or the U.S. That is not sustainable. We need dedicated trade hubs in The Bahamas, Barbados, and Jamaica to serve as logistical entry points for African goods. 

    3. Digital Trade & Blockchain Integration 
    Africa leads in mobile banking. The Bahamas leads in blockchain-friendly regulation. Smart contracts, blockchain-based supply chain verification, and digital trade platforms can bypass traditional barriers and create frictionless commerce. 

    The Bahamas as the Financial Bridge 

    The Bahamas is uniquely positioned to be the Caribbean-African trade epicenter. It is one of the world’s most respected financial jurisdictions, a tax-neutral hub, and a global player in wealth management and fintech.

    What must happen next? A formalized Caribbean-African Investment Forum. A platform that: 

    – Connects investors with African-Caribbean projects.
    – Structures investment vehicles for real estate, energy, and agriculture. 
    – Expands digital banking solutions to enable smooth financial transactions. 

    The Bahamas can lead this movement. Not by asking permission, but by building the infrastructure.

    Conclusion: The Shift is Inevitable 

    This is not just about trade. This is about rewiring the economic power flow. 
    For too long, both regions have been extraction zones—raw materials, cheap labor, offshore finance—flowing outward, never cycling back. 

    The cycle ends here.

    This is about control. Control of capital, control of supply chains, control of our economic future. 

    Africa is rising. The Caribbean is evolving. And when these two forces align, the game resets. 

    The only question that remains is: Who moves first?

    Ashley Williams is an attorney, strategic visionary, and key figure in the rise of The Bahamas and the founder of WilliamsAdvise.

  • Grenada leads the way by abolishing criminal libel – We all should follow suit

    Alicia Nicholls 

    The big legal news rippling across the Caribbean Sea this week is the revelation that the Tillman Thomas government in Grenada has made history by being the first Commonwealth Caribbean territory to abolish criminal defamation and thus bring its libel laws, at least on this front, in conformity with the exigencies of a twenty-first century democracy.

    According to the International Press Institute (IPI), Grenada’s Criminal Code (Amendment) Act of 2012 abolished sections 252 and 253 of the Grenada Criminal Code which imposed criminal sanctions for libel. The repeal was a big victory for the International Press Institute which has been ardently campaigning for the abolition of criminal defamation in all Commonwealth Caribbean States, advocating instead the reliance on civil actions exclusively. Seditious libel however still remains on the books as a criminal offence under s 357 of the Criminal Code. For a full background on the work of the IPI on this front, see here.

    Freedom of the press is held to be one of the central tenets of a functioning liberal democracy. The rationale behind press freedom is that a robust and independent press keeps public officials in check by informing the populace of their actions, calling them out on their shortcomings, while also providing information which would allow the public to make informed decisions in their own interest. However, the existence of antiquated defamation laws on the statute books of Commonwealth Caribbean countries has led many to criticize these vestiges of the colonial era as fetters on the efficacy of the fourth estate in scrutinizing our public officials, and thereby serving as a barrier to true democratic governance.

    The zeal with which Commonwealth Caribbean territories have tended to cling to our pre-independence laws has been heavily criticized, but in the case of our libel laws, the situation becomes even more perplexing. While it is accepted that a delicate balance must be maintained between the much deserved need to protect a person’s reputation and the equally deserved right of the public to access information, the harshness of Commonwealth Caribbean countries’ libel laws can be contrasted with the iniquitously broad freedom of expression privileges granted to parliamentarians on the floor of parliament under the convention of parliamentary privilege.  Is the freedom of speech of parliamentarians therefore more valuable than that of those whose role is to serve as the watch dogs of our post-independence democracies?

    Defamation legislation throughout the Commonwealth Caribbean ranges in vintage from semi-modern to archaic acts dating back to the mid-nineteenth century.  With sluggish statutory change, if any, it has been up to the common law to adapt the laws of defamation to the needs of modern twenty-first century democracies. The defence of qualified privilege is one which has not generally found much success in case law before the landmark House of Lords decision in Reynolds v Times Newspapers Limited [2001] which recognized the duty of the press to communicate to the world at large and also recognised a public interest defence which commentators have called the “Reynolds defence”. In Jameel v Wall Street Journal Europe, Lord Nicholls of Birkenhead further clarified the Reynolds defence by giving some guidance on the factors to be taken into consideration when deciding whether the defence of qualified privilege applies.

    Criminal libel prosecutions remain alive and well in the Caribbean, although their frequency varies according to territory. In the recent Grenadian case of George Worme and Grenada Today v Commissioner of Police of Grenada (2004) which had been referred to the Privy Council, Lord Rodger importantly rejected submissions by counsel that then section 258 was too narrowly drafted to allow for the raising of the Reynolds defence. However, the court also regrettably held that criminal libel  was “a justifiable part of the law of the democratic society in Grenada”. Rulings such as this reinforce the cloud of fear hanging over regional journalists in execution of their ‘watch dog’ function.

    Penalties for criminal libel vary across the region. Before its abolition, section 252 of the Grenada Civil Code provided that the penalty of conviction for negligent libel was imprisonment for six months, while two year imprisonment existed in the case of intentional libel. The Barbados Defamation Act (Cap 199) of 1997, one of the more ‘modern’ acts,  is a bit more lenient at Article 34(3) as it gives the Court the discretion to impose a fine of up to $2,000, imprisonment for a term not exceeding 12 months or both.Despite the talks and promises of libel reform decades after many of us have achieved independence, our journalists still have the risk of criminal prosecution as an ‘occupational hazard’ of their profession. It is little wonder therefore that self censorship by media houses is endemic in several Commonwealth Caribbean states, including Barbados. It is a practice which, though done to shield these entities from prosecution, is contrary to the public interest.

    Moreover, stringent libel laws have tended to make the constitutional guarantee of right to access to information virtually nugatory, particularly where freedom of information acts do not exist. In Barbados, the proposed Freedom of Information Act which was supposed to buttress the constitutional guarantee of right to access to information under section 20 of the Constitution of Barbados by, inter alia, providing greater public access to information held by government bodies, has not yet been passed and neither have the proposed defamation reforms. On the contrary, the UK, from whom our defamation laws were inherited, abolished criminal libel and sedition per section 73 of the Coroners and Justice Act 2009 and is currently in the process of passing a new Defamation Act (currently HL Bill 41) which is aimed at modernizing that country’s defamation laws.

    In countries which pride ourselves as democratic states, it is high time that we purge our statute books of these archaic and anti-democratic laws. As seen in Grenada, this is not a move most politicians would make without strong lobbying by local, regional and international civil society.  Despite this, Grenada’s big step towards the complete removal of criminal defamation should be applauded and one can only hope that other post-independence Commonwealth territories, including Barbados, would follow suit in the interest of greater democracy.

    Alicia Nicholls is a trade policy specialist and law student at the University of the West Indies – Cave Hill. You can contact her here or follow her on Twitter at@LicyLaw.

  • Small dots but big footprints: Caribbean Countries and International Organisations

    Alicia Nicholls

    Another daughter of the soil has been called to serve on one of the world’s most eminent and most important intergovernmental organisations. This time it is Barbados’ Chief Medical Officer, Dr. Joy St. John who has been appointed Chairwoman of the Executive Board of the World Health Organisation (WHO).

    Dr. Joy St. John, a medical doctor, joins a growing list of Barbadian and CARICOM nationals who have been called to serve in the highest echelons of some of the world’s most prestigious international bodies. Casting our minds a bit back in time, one would recall another Barbadian woman who made a notable contribution to public health issues at the international level. Barbados’ former Governor-General, Dame Ruth Nita Barrow, served as a nursing advisor to the WHO and the Pan-American Health Organisation for more than a decade. Though a midwife and nurse, Dame Nita had also served as President of the International Council on Adult Education in 1975 and 1986.

    Outside of the health arena and more contemporarily, Mrs. Elizabeth Thompson, former Barbados Labour Party (BLP) cabinet minister and well-esteemed environmental lawyer and negotiator, was appointed as a United Nations Assistant Secretary General. In 2010 she was appointed by UN Secretary General Ban Ki-Moon as Executive Coordinator of the UNCSD Rio +20 Conference. In the field of trade in intellectual property, Mr. Trevor Clarke is the World Intellectual Property Organisation (WIPO)’s Assistant Director General for the Culture and Creative Industries Sector. Further in the area of culture, Alissandra Cummins, the Director of the Barbados Museum and Historical Society, is currently the Chairperson of the Executive Board of UNESCO  (2011-2013) and had also made history as being the first Caribbean and female president of the International Council of Museums between 2004-2010.

    We in the Caribbean often regard ourselves as small states. Indeed, by our geographic, demographic and economic size, we are. However, our contribution in international organisations, particularly on issues of greatest concern to us as small states,  should serve to us as a reminder that while we may appear as no more than little dots on a map, our footprint in these organisations often belies our size.  One would recall that it was Trinidad & Tobago under the leadership of then Prime Minister A.N.R. Robinson which was instrumental in pushing for the establishment of the International Criminal Court (ICC). Again in the field of law, eminent Jamaican law professor and former principal of the Norman Manley Law School, Dr. Stephen Vasciannie, served on the prestigious UN Law Commission whose mandate is the codification and progressive development of international law.

    There are many others that can be listed but I have made my point. The ability of Caribbean people to assume and function effectively in these key positions and the faith that other nations have put in the representation of our nationals stand as testament and vindication of the solid investment that our governments have tended to put in developing our greatest resource, that is, our people.

    I wish Dr. St. John all the best in her new position as she continues to fly our Barbadian and CARICOM flags high.

    Alicia Nicholls is a trade policy specialist and law student at the University of the West Indies – Cave Hill. You can contact her here or follow her on Twitter at @LicyLaw.

  • Is the World Bank finally committed to an open and merit-based selection process? Only time will tell…

    Alicia Nicholls

    The current president of the Washington DC-based World Bank, Robert Zoellick, a former executive with Goldman Sachs, will be stepping down from the post in June of this year.  Per a tacit agreement between the US and European countries, all eleven presidents of the World Bank since the Bank’s founding in 1944 have been American. Concomitantly, a European has always headed its sister institution the International Monetary Fund (IMF).  This present World Bank selection cycle has seen an unprecedented challenge to US monopoly of the World Bank’s leadership to date. The US’ nominee, Dr. Jim Yong Kim, faces stiff competition from two nominees from the global South, Dr. Ngozi Okonjo-Iweala from Nigeria and the Brazil-nominated Mr. Jose Antonio Ocampo from Colombia.  Coming on the heels of the IMF’s managing director selection process last year when Europe retained its perennial grip on that institution’s leadership position, the question on everyone’s mind is whether this World Bank selection cycle will see a continuation of the status quo or whether either candidate from the global South will stand a decent chance of assuming the reins of this important international financial institution (IFI).

    The contemporary geopolitical and economic configuration of the world is much different from that which existed in the immediate post-World War II era in which the Bretton Woods institutions were born. The US, while still the world’s largest economy by GDP, now shares the world stage with several increasingly important poles of growth, notably emerging economies which have been the main engines of economic recovery. Yet the World Bank’s governance structure does not reflect this multipolar reality. Tired of the iniquitous status quo, the BRICS have been pushing for reform of the Bretton Woods institutions to reflect present-day economic realities and to allow developing countries a greater say in the international financial and economic system. While the BRICS have been successful in increasing their voting power in the World Bank, securing the top post has been a different story. Will this time be different?

    Brazil has nominated former Colombian Minister of Finance, Jose Antonio Ocampo, a US-trained economist who is currently a Professor at the Ivy-League Columbia University in New York City. In its communiqué of March 26th, the African Union  endorsed the candidacy of renowned Nigerian economist, diplomat and former government minister, Dr. Ngozi Okonjo-Iweala. Perhaps in an attempt to diffuse the calls for change, the Obama administration shied away from the usual choices of bank executives and bureaucrats and instead nominated the Korean-born US national Dr. Jim Yong Kim.  A medical doctor, Dr. Kim is the President of the prestigious Dartmouth College and is well-known for his work in fighting tuberculosis and HIV-AIDS throughout the developing world.

    It should be noted that all three candidates being considered are highly educated and tremendously qualified in their respective fields. All three were born in developing countries and educated at Ivy League universities in the US. That being said, Dr. Okonjo-Iweala’s impeccable qualifications and her vast experience should make her rise to the top of the pack.  Dr. Okonjo-Iweala is an internationally respected economist with a wealth of expertise in development issues at both the national and global levels.  She has spent more than twenty years at the World Bank until ascending to the post of Managing Director in 2007. She has also served twice as Minister of Finance and Minister of Foreign Affairs in her home country of Nigeria. It is therefore no surprise that Dr. Okonjo-Iweala was named as one of the 100 most powerful women by Forbes Magazine.

    Dr. Okonjo-Iweala as the World Bank’s new president would be a powerful symbol for gender rights. It would be the first time a woman, far less a woman from the global South, would be at the helm of this powerful but traditionally male-dominated global financial institution. A wife and mother of four, Dr. Okonjo-Iweala has been outspoken on gender equality and on the macroeconomic and social benefits of providing finance to women and of encouraging women entrepreneurship. In this regard, it is hoped that she would push for more gender-sensitive bank lending programmes.

    Perhaps, even more critically, it would be the first time a person from a developing country and an African nation, will be at the head of this institution. The World Bank is an important lender to developing countries and has the twin goals of reducing poverty and promoting development. Despite some of its good work, the World Bank, like its twin sister the IMF, has not always had the best reputation in the developing world, including right here in the Caribbean. During the 1990s, its structural adjustment programmes under the so-called Washington Consensus foisted austere market reforms and other neo-liberal policies on cash-strapped countries as conditionalities for loans. These policies included deregulation, privatization, cuts in Government expenditure (especially in social welfare) and liberalization of capital markets, which if introduced too quickly and/or without the supporting institutional framework could lead and have led to devastating consequences in the countries concerned and have had a disproportionate impact on the livelihoods of women and the poor. For a case in point, just watch the documentary Life and Debt for a vivid look at Jamaica’s experience with IMF-World Bank sponsored structural adjustment. Under a Okonjo-Iweala presidency, it would be hoped that there will be the genesis of a new era in the Bank’s dealings with the South, marked by less focus on free market ideology and a greater sensitivity towards the impact of policies on vulnerable groups in society such as women and the poor.

    However, Dr. Okonjo-Iweala’s candidacy faces two big hurdles. Chief among them is the Bank’s ‘democratic deficit’. It is the Bank’s 25-member Board of Executive directors which will ultimately decide the successful candidate.  As the largest economy among the 187 countries in the World Bank, the US has the majority of votes. By choosing a nominee, the US has shown that it will not go against its own strategic interests by supporting a non-American for such a key post.  Moreover, European countries, which hold the second largest block of votes, are unlikely to support a non-US candidate, especially given the US’ support for their IMF nominee last year. Additionally, Japan has already signalled its intention to support the US nominee.

    The only alternative would be for Dr. Okonjo-Iweala to garner unanimous developing country support. Therein lies the second problem.  The BRICS have been reticent about throwing their support behind a single nominee from the South and have so far not endorsed any of the three candidates. Last year the BRICS missed their opportunity to block the ascension of yet another European to the post of IMF managing director by their inability to unanimously agree on an alternative candidate, even though there were well-qualified non-European candidates.

    This crop of candidates will make unanimous developing country support behind a single candidate even more elusive. The Brazil-nominated Mr. Ocampo will probably enjoy significant support from Latin American countries. But as the US nominee, Dr. Kim is the clear front-runner for the job. Moreover, by choosing an Asian-American, a non-banker and a public health professional,  the US has picked a candidate who will undoubtedly garner support from many developing countries, including some Asian countries which have criticised the US’ monopoly of the World Bank leadership position. Despite being the best candidate, Dr. Okonjo-Iweala will have a tough, and some say, futile battle for the World Bank presidency.

    As the countries which rely the most on IFIs and arguably stand the most to lose from any turmoil in the international financial system, developing countries need to have a greater say in these global financial institutions. Is the World Bank truly committed to an open and merit-based process irrespective of nationality? Only time will tell.

    Alicia Nicholls is a trade policy specialist and law student at the University of the West Indies – Cave Hill. You can contact her here or follow her on Twitter at @LicyLaw.