A constitutional lawyer says attorneys adopting the King’s Counsel title following the installation of a new British monarch sends the wrong message when Barbados has declared itself a republic, even as Chief Justice (CJ) Sir Patterson Cheltenham declared the matter was not a straightforward one.
The question of whether attorneys should hold on to the postnominal title of Queen’s Counsel (QC) bestowed on them prior to the death of Queen Elizabeth II or adopt the KC postnominal with her son King Charles now on the throne, came up for discussion on Wednesday as several veteran lawyers made appearances before the Chief Justice in the Court of Appeal.
While some attorneys who hold the QC title have adopted the KC title, by virtue of the Demise of the Crown Act 1901, constitutional attorney Garth Patterson, who is also a QC, said he had difficulty adopting those letters.
“Having a new monarch who does not represent the head of state of Barbados . . . for us to adopt the postnominal of King’s Counsel I think puts us in an embarrassing position,” he said.
“I think it sends the wrong message – that despite our proclamation that we have cut our ties with the monarchy, we are still clinging to the vestiges of that monarchy. I personally have a serious difficulty in adopting that postnominal.”
The CJ said the issue is one he has “agonised on”, noting that the grant of letters is largely an executive decision.
“I am not sure having received republican status we automatically go back. There is that school of thought with a persuasive argument . . . . Now that we have gone there [to republican status], isn’t there some point at which we need to pause and say hold on, do we anomalously remain QCs – which we will be the laughing stock of the world if we were – or do we become KCs – we also are the laughingstock because you fellas just proclaimed yourself a republic. So where are you?
“This is not a straightforward point as I first thought it was…. When I open the legal year I will have something to say about it,” he added.
Attorney Patterson disclosed that he had written to the Attorney General on the issue and suggested that the matter be the “subject of legislation”.
In his correspondence, he suggested the postnominal of Senior Counsel (SC) – which is consistent with the practice in republics across the region – be substituted for those holding the offices of QCs prior to going republic as an equivalent honour and privilege granted by the independent state of Barbados.
Sir Patterson, meanwhile, said he was “trying to work out” how much authority the judiciary, and a Chief Justice in particular, has on the matter.
“Because if you look at the instrument . . . you are given when you become a Queen’s Counsel, you will see that it is particular to you and you become one of Her Majesty’s Counsel.
“The other point that I throw out is whether this gift is something that can be taken and who takes it. It is not a straightforward a matter as people thought where you can just say ‘so, what is the government’s position on it, what is the court’s position?’.
“I was warned to reflect on it carefully and now that we are even just tossing it out you recognise it doesn’t lend itself to a straight and ready answer,” he added.
The Chief Justice said his approach may well be to have short and intense consultations “with some of the very persons who are here sitting, on a one-to-one basis”.
“Having taken off the monarchical garbs and assumed the republican ones, the question remains live as we have just raised it . . . but I know it is not an easy matter to resolve . . .
“I also think a considered note from the CJ of the day summarising the arguments and saying these are the options may well be a tasteful way of dealing with it, that offers some guidance,” he added.
