A month ago, we told you how Justice Sonya Young had reserved her decision in a claim for judicial review which UDP Senator and Chairman, Michael Peyrefitte, brought against the Government of Belize. He and his attorney, Former Prime Minister Dean Barrow, attempted to convince the court to strike down a contract that the Briceno Administration granted to the telecoms company, Smart/Speednet Communications.
As we told you, Peyrefitte and former PM Barrow think that it is improper that the Finance Ministry, which Prime Minister John Briceno heads, awarded a 3.3-million-dollar contract to Smart, a company which is partially owned by his family. The contract is for the provision of Microsoft 365 software to the Government of Belize.
During the extended hearings on this matter, the claimant pointed out that 2 members of the Prime Minister's family, are part-owners of SMART. They also insisted particularly that the PM's Brother, Jaime Briceno, is the chairman of the Telecoms company. They reasoned, therefore, that this decision was tainted with bias and irrationality.
Also, both the claimant and the National Trade Union Congress of Belize focused on what they characterized as the late addition of Smart as one of the bidders for the contract in a selective tendering process by the Ministry of Finance.
And then, the claimant strenuously insisted that the Ministry violated the Finance Audit Reform Act when it failed to send the contract to the Contractor-General for review before entering into it. That departure from the proper procedure was conceded by the Government's attorney, Douglas Mendez, who submitted that the court should give an appropriately-worded declaration to address that matter.
In defense of this lawsuit, Mendez also argued that the ultimate decision-maker for the contract's award was Financial Secretary Joe Waight, and not the Prime Minister himself. Mendez submitted that a proper process was conducted and that not just because the PM is disqualified from making the decision, does it immediately taint the independent selection process. He insisted that the decision was grounded in reasoning based on the selection of the lowest bid.
After consideration of the arguments raised by all the litigants, Justice Young returned with a decision yesterday denying Peyrefitte's request that the Smart contract be quashed.
So, since the biggest relief was refused, we asked both Peyrefitte and his attorney, Dean Barrow, if that is a win for the government. This morning, they insisted in interviews via zoom and telephone that it's actually a split decision with some victories for them as well. Here's how they justified that position:
Daniel Ortiz
"You all were pushing for a full cancellation of the Smart Speednet contract."
Rt. Hon. Dean Barrow - Attorney For the Claimant
"Well, we didn't get that. The judge, as she was entitled to do we conceded this from the start. While we asked that she cancel the contract as a way of signaling that the breach, in this case, was absolutely serious, we accepted that the law is quite clear. The judge has the discretion to decide on the basis that cancellation would in fact do more harm than good. She has the jurisdiction to decide not to cancel, and that's how she exercised her jurisdiction. She said that cancellation would result principally in additional expenses to the taxpayer because Government will not be able to get the money it had already paid Smart, and it would have to go and spend additional money to get a new contractor to in fact procure the Microsoft licenses. I would have wished if she would have done otherwise, but I cannot, in conscience fault her decision. It would one that she was entitled to make, and so her having made that decision."
Hon. Michael Peyrefitte - Claimant
"She did make it clear that the Government broke the law, and as a result, she declared that she broke the law."
Daniel Ortiz
"If the PUP-friendly citizens of Belize take the view that you failed on your attempts to try to embarrass the Government, and that really, your case landed nowhere, what would be your response?"
Hon. Michael Peyrefitte
"It did land somewhere. The judge declared that their actions were illegal, and contrary to the law. I don't know they can claim any victory to that. They also have to pay the full cost to the two attorneys representing me in the matter, because of their failure to follow the law. So, I can't see how they can claim that as some sort of victory."
Rt. Hon Dean Barrow
"Mr. Mendez for the Government had asked that we not get full costs, that perhaps the costs be halved, or reduced to an extent even greater than 50%. The judge rejected that. The judge said, giving us full costs, certified fit for a senior counsel and a junior counsel was a way of signaling the court's displeasure with the conduct of the Government."
Hon. Michael Peyrefitte
"I'm doing my job, Daniel. I'm a senator for the Opposition, and the health of a democracy depends on a strong Opposition. I will keep on being vigilant, looking at Government's actions, and if I have to bring 1 lawsuit a week, that's what I'll do. But, the government will be, at the very least, kept on its toes, and I pledge that."
Peyrefitte tells us that both he and his attorney are waiting for the written decision from Justice Young and that they will consider their options, including a possibility of an appeal since they have a 21-day deadline.
