Earlier in the news, you heard Foreign Minister Wilfred Elrington discussing his views on the Guatemalan's effective occupation of the Sarstoon River, saying that it is incorrect to suggest that they have annexed the Sarstoon - since they claim the whole country.
And while that pronouncement is sure to raise more public ire against Elrington, the Departments under his Ministry, namely the Referendum Unit, and the International Boundaries Commisison, are coming under fire from the Belize Progressive Party.
That's because there is a referendum pending in both Belize and Guatemala on whether the Guatemalan territorial claim to Belize should be taken to the International Court of Justice. The BPP says that these Foreign Ministry Departments have a responsibility to provide the general public with all information related to the pro's, the cons, and the risks of taking the claim to the ICJ.
But, according to the Green Party, these Government officials have been pushing the yes vote so much, they've been ignoring the cons and the risks of going to the ICJ. Here's Deputy Party Leader Wil Maheia explaining their issue with the Government's yes campaign for the ICJ:
Wil Maheia - Deputy Leader, Belize Progressive Party
"Government has basically gone around the country and Mr. Leslie had said that over a hundred meetings they have had and all of it is in favour of going to the ICJ. I just feel like the Belizean people are being shafted in a way by not being properly informed. There are so many risks and I want to use this opportunity right now, I mean look at all these fancy brochures and booklets and all the money that they are raising around the country or around the world recently basically to go and campaign. its a good thing the Petrocaribe money probably ran out otherwise that too would have been used to campaign for a yes vote. But I just think that we, the Belizean people, we owe it to ourselves, we owe it to the future generations, we owe it to this country, we need to hear both sides of the story."
Paco Smith - Chairman. Belize Progressive Party
"We look at the government's entertaining Guatemala's insistent that we change our laws to suit them as being part of that foreign policy. Fundamentally if it were done within a different context, when a foreign power isn't telling us what to do with our laws maybe it could be entertained but within this particular context, we have a very serious problem with that."
And the BPP believes that the biggest alternative to the ICJ is for Belize to approach the United Nations Security Council to resolve the claim directly.
Now, the UN Security Council is responsible for the maintenance of international peace and security, so it's kinda like calling the cops to settle a land dispute, without wanting to go to court.
Yet, the BPP is unapologetic. They today called for the political directorate to urgently take the territorial dispute directly to the UN Security Council under Article 39 of the UN Charter.
They say that Belize would have nothing to lose by making that attempt first:
Paco Smith
"We went through 9 different sessions at the BNTU presentation 'Stand Up For Belize'. During that time we took the opportunity to put fort our alternatives to go into the ICJ. As you know, there was representation on behalf of the government in the form of international and boundaries commission and they put the government's perspective forward. At one time did they ever say that what we're proposing cannot be done, it's a matter of interpretation and on several occasions we've spoken with the individuals from the other side and they have agreed that it's a matter of interpretation. In so far that is the singular narrative that is going out there, I expect that to come from those quarters, but our point is that we want to let the Belizean people know that there are options and alternatives out there."
Reporter
"Is there any likelihood that once a matter goes to the UN Security Council that they would likely say that it needs to be resolved at the ICJ, what will the article say in relation to that?"
Paco Smith
"That is definitely a distinct possibility and we acknowledge that, but the key is that as matter stand right now under the Compromis that was signed in 2008, if the Belizean public vote to go to the ICJ, number one, we already mentioned that we don't know what precisely Guatemala is asking. Number two, it's a binding decision that is unappealable with specter to Guatemala wanting at least half of our country, the risks going that route far outweigh whatever potential benefits the powers that be are saying we can derive from going to the ICJ. Now to directly answer your question, yes there is a possibility that the UN Security Council may say 'okay well we decided that you should take it to the ICJ'. In so doing, by virtue of taking it to the UN Security Council, that will in effect recalibrate Belize's foreign policy with regard to this, because the crooks of the matter is this, going to referendum under the aegis of the current Compromis is not in Belize's favour by any stretch of the imagination."
As you heard, they are also opposed to the idea of Government changing Belize's referendum laws from the 60% threshold, to a simple majority.
Email
Print