Is the Appeals Board of the Central Bank impartially appointed? And can the Prime Minister make such an appointment without being biased? It took three days in court and about 15 hours of argument before Chief Justice Abdulai Conteh to try and get to the bottom of that vexing issue and at the end of it – government’s attorney Lois Young Barrow said it was probably the most Technically complex case she had ever argued; the Chief Justice complained that his pen had run out of ink.

And it all goes back to mid-March when the Central Bank sent the Belize Bank a directive instructing it to refund the US$10 million in Venezuelan grant funds. The Bank says that they had no redress because was no Central Bank Board of Appeals to appeal to. And when the Appeals Board chaired by Justice Samuel Awich was appointed by the Prime Minister, its partiality was in question because of public pronouncements made by the PM demonstrating bias against the Belize Bank.

A thicket of issues in a case that can prove pivotal for both sides. At the end of it Lois Young Barrow seemed upbeat.

Lois Young, Attorney for Government
“It went well.”

Janelle Chanona,
Miss Lois part of what the Belize Bank is seeking to do is attack the Prime Minister’s words and you made a point of saying they pinned their case on what he said at press conferences and various events to say he has bias and so we have been constitutionally violated.

Lois Young,
“Yes that was the beginning of their case. It was totally ridiculous. The Prime Minister was so balanced, I think that the ordinary well informed Belizean would say Mr. Prime Minister you are too fair to everyone. Instead they took it the other way and said he is unfair to them. He never mentioned them in the first place.”

Janelle Chanona,
Mr. Nelson went to great pain to say this is all about the money and government is solely attacking on all fronts so it can get back money.

Lois Young,
“Well at the end of the day they’ve chosen to ignore that there was another directive along with that first directive to return ten million, there was another directive which is to give us the evidence to why you felt you could keep the ten million from Taiwan. They’ve totally ignored that. They’ve decided and they are focusing, for them it is all about the ten million but for the Central Bank, if you look at the complaints that the Central Bank has, you will find that the Central Bank is telling bank you have engaged in a scheme of layering to hide the money that was passing through your account. Those are transgressions of your banking license, they are transgressions of the Money Laundering Act and there are other things beside just the ten million at the end of the day.

You will see a picture of the Belize Bank moving away from being a strict bank getting into a trust business, taking on fiduciary responsibilities and doing all of that in an effort to layer the processing of this money for what end.”

The Belize Bank’s QC, Vincent Nelson declined comment. He appeared along with two British and two Belizean attorneys. The Chief Justice has reserved judgement.