And from tourism to politics, last month we gave you an update on the Belize Peace Movement's lawsuit against the Elections and Boundaries Commission concerning the matter of redistricting. This citizen group has long insisted that neither of the two mass parties has the political will to meaningfully address the disparity in the sizes of the electoral divisions.
The E&B Commission then filed an application to have the matter struck out, but the Chief Justice ruled in favour of the Peace Movement because of the critical nature of the issue raised.
And today in a press conference, one of the BPM's attorneys, Arthur Saldivar, explained more about what happened in court.
Arthur Saldivar, Attorney
"What occurred in this matter and what the Chief Justice is saying is that the strike out application, not in her words but mine now, could have be successfully brought because 1, there was no perfected order of the court in relation to the issues that the applicants were seeking to bring. What had happened in this particular matter was that both the claimants and the respondents in the matter came together and formulated our own timeline to get certain things down. For example putting in place witness statements and other things in preparation for trial. This was not pursuant to an actual order of the court so since that was the case and given the fact that we had a situation where the court registry was going through certain changes due to covid, the timeline we had set for ourselves could not be strictly complied with. Now all along there was this move on the part of government, Elections and Boundaries, to settle this matter and they were engaging with us to settle the matter so we were not really in any sense of urgency given that they had given us indication that they wanted to settle. Lo and behold, when the time came and they realise well we don't want to settle anymore they sought to do this and made the application to strike out but as the Chief Justice has put in her judgement, the provisions that would allow for a strike out to take place had to first hinge on there being in existence, a perfected order. None existed, strike out could not move forward."
And Saldivar explained that the crux of the matter was whether the E&B Commission, and therefore the government, is in compliance with the constitution - or at least has the will to comply. From the BPM's perspective, until there is a proposal, there is no compliance.
Arthur Saldivar, Attorney
"To be fair, the Chief Justice could have stopped at the point where she noted that there was no perfected order, but she went further to say what she saw in the substantive aspect of what has been brought before her as it relates to the constitution itself and its compliance or non-compliance on the part of the Elections and Boundaries Commission. So it doesn't take much to glean that in the view of the court at this time, there is sufficient grounds to suggest that the constitution is not being followed by the present administration in its capacity and the Elections and Boundaries Commission."
"The constitution is clear and this is what the judgement is saying, has there been compliance. When the Chief Justice asks has there been compliance with section 90, section 90 is saying expressly that a proposal must be laid before parliament, there must be a proposal for the equal distribution so the government can say whatever they want to say, they can scream from the highest mountain and go the lowest valley but until a proposal is made before parliament, they have not complied with the constitution, and that is what the judgement is saying."
"So that basically relate to that portion with Chief Justice saying let's not deal with item 4 and 6 of the claim because that election has already gone. Once we deal with the [meat] of the issue which is whether or not section 90 is being complied with, if that is complied with then by extension, automatically, what has been brought up in items 4 and 6 of the claim would be fixed. So that should be fixed before the next election because this case now is up for completion in a short period of time."
Saldivar noted that there was still no definitive date set for the trial and that they would need to approach the registrar to make arrangements. He added, though, that before that, there would need to be a period where all parties are given a chance to field questions to the court expert.
