Dear Editor,
I have carefully considered recent public statements by Caribbean leaders, including Prime Minister Kamla Persad-Bissessar and President Irfaan Ali, concerning the apparent divergence within the Caribbean Community regarding the reappointment of the Secretary-General of CARICOM, Dr. Carla Barnett.
This development raises substantive questions of procedure, governance, and institutional integrity. Appointments of this magnitude, akin to senior leadership selections within comparable international organisations, ought properly to be advanced as a formal agenda item at Meetings of Heads of Government and clearly communicated well in advance. On the basis of information presently in the public domain, this does not appear to have been the case.
If accurate, such a departure from established practice in 2026 merits a clear and reasoned explanation from the Chairman of the CARICOM, the Prime Minister of St Kitts, Dr. Terrence Drew.
The appointment of a Secretary-General has traditionally followed a structured and deliberative process, incorporating formal discussion and, where necessary, a vote subsequent to caucus engagement. Within that framework, any objections raised by member states, should be afforded due consideration prior to the finalisation of a decision. The Republic of Trinidad and Tobago, as the largest contributor to CARICOM must be given such an opportunity to raise their concerns about the continuation of the tenure of Dr. Barnett (see table below).
The question of financial contribution further underscores the need for inclusivity and procedural fairness. A limited number of member states—namely Trinidad and Tobago, Jamaica, The Bahamas, and Guyana—collectively covers over 67% of the CARICOM expenses. As the largest single contributor, Trinidad and Tobago’s concerns regarding transparency and process warrant careful and respectful engagement; not this attempt to engage in deception from certain heads of states.
Equally, public discourse on this matter should be guided by prudence and a commitment to de-escalation. The present circumstances call for measured diplomacy, mutual respect, and, where appropriate, impartial facilitation to safeguard regional cohesion and if the compromise means a new Secretary General, so what; the Caribbean unity is more important.
Ultimately, the legitimacy and effectiveness of CARICOM are grounded in adherence to transparent procedures and the sustained confidence of its member states. It is therefore imperative that any outstanding concerns be addressed in a timely, constructive, and institutionally consistent manner to avert broader financial, operational, and political repercussions for the Community. If this is mishandled, then we can have a depleted CARICOM without the active participation of Trinidad and Tobago and their 23% contribution.
The consequences are dire.