Last night, we brought you preliminary coverage of the latest compliance hearing that the Caribbean Court of Justice hosted to hear from both the Maya of Southern Belize and the Government of Belize. They were seeking periodic updates on how far the Government and the Mayan Claimants have gotten in the full implementation of Maya Communal Land Rights in Belize.
It turns out that even after seven years of this process, a consent order, and extended interventions from the judges of the CCJ, the two sides STILL have plenty to fight over.
This afternoon, we got reactions from Cristina Coc, the spokesperson for the Toledo Alcaldes Association, which we'll share with you a little later. But we start our coverage on the communal land rights issue with harsh criticism that the President of the Caribbean Court of Justice had for the Government of Belize.
It concerns the Full Prior and Informed Consent Protocol, or FPIC. Viewers will remember that the Mayan Claimants complained bitterly that the Government submitted a draft of this document to the court without the full support of the Maya - specifically with the Toledo Alcaldes Association. Well, it turns out the Government began its implementation process without sending them a finalized copy for their perusal.
Here's that moment when the CCJ President, Justice Adrian Saunders, told the Government's lead attorney that he was "very disappointed" to hear that:
Justice Adrian Saunders - President, CCJ
"Were the Appellants sent an English language version - the final copy?"
E. Andrew Marshalleck, SC - Attorney for GOB
"With the new title? I don't think so."
Justice Adrian Saunders
"Mr. Marshalleck, I don't know. I don't quite understand how this process evolving. Because all of this, you know, that is being done arises not out of the Government's own deliberate desire to do what it thinks best for Belize and its people. It arises out of litigation. And it arises out of litigation where the parties consented to an order. Now, this is a very novel, awkward kind of order because it is one where one side of the litigation has the responsibility of implementing that order. But, they have to implement it in good faith and in a spirit that respects the fact that the implementation emerges out of a consent order, where there are litigants on the other side. I am disappointed to hear that the FPIC Protocol, which is an important aspect of implementing that consent order, could be finalized by one party and be implemented, and the other party has not seen the final version. That is very disappointing."
