Media requests for a copy of the so-called “compromis” that Belize and Guatemala are due to sign next month for later submission to the International Court of Justice (ICJ), to settle the longstanding dispute.
Amandala tried to procure the document from the Ministry of Foreign Affairs last week and again this week, but to no avail, and we were told that we can’t see the document until officials of the two governments sign it.
We know that last week Tuesday, Cabinet gave the green light for the Belize Minister of Foreign Affairs to put his signature on the “compromis” – but still, there was no public information on exactly what that agreement entails.
Amandala understands from very credible sources, however, that the agreement entails the following elements: a request to the ICJ to settle Guatemala’s claim against Belize; a request to the court to decide the rights of Belize and Guatemala with respect to Belize’s territory; and a determination by the court on exactly where the boundaries of Belize lie. Both governments are expected to mark out boundaries in keeping with the ruling of the ICJ, if it ever gets to that stage.
The parties, we understand, will have to make both written and verbal presentations to the ICJ, and the process could well take over three years to reach a conclusion, but there is one essential point – the decision of the ICJ would be FINAL and BINDING.
Belizeans were told by the political directorate in 1981 that they should not fear going into Independence, because all the country’s territory would remain intact. Part I and Schedule 1 of the Belize Constitution of 1981, in fact, define the country’s territorial lands and seas, and the location of our borders – notwithstanding the Guatemala position.
Section 2.2.b of the Referendum Act requires that “any proposed settlement with Guatemala for resolving the Belize/Guatemala dispute” should be put to Belizeans via a national referendum.
The “compromis” calls for both Guatemala and Belize to hold the referenda together, and the thinking is that it is only if the people of both countries agree with taking the matter to the ICJ that the countries will submit the agreement, to be signed next month, to the ICJ.
The general thrust of the question, we understand, will ask the people of Belize whether they want to submit the “legal claim” that Guatemala has against Belize to the ICJ, so that they can determine the boundaries of the two countries.
Guatemala claims that its borders should extend further east into the lower half of Belize, and it has also claimed Belize’s cayes.
The Organization of American States (OAS) recommended last November that Belize and Guatemala should go to the ICJ to settle the dispute, after attempts to resolve the conflict through diplomacy failed despite years of efforts.
Two weeks ago, Prime Minister Dean Barrow, in speaking of the “compromise,” said that after Cabinet approves the document, extensive public consultations would be held, the National Assembly gets to vote first and then the referendum would be held.
It is now evident that before any of that happens, the official Foreign Affairs representatives of Belize and Guatemala will get to sign off on the document.
A representative of Foreign Affairs has told our newspaper that the document won’t be made public until after Belize and Guatemala reps put their signature to the so-called “special agreement,” or “compromis.”
Some critics have said that Government is “putting the cart before the horse” by not asking the people of Belize, first, if they are interested in going to the ICJ, before proceeding to sign an agreement with Guatemala, even while that document remains a secret from the people of Belize.
In speaking with the media about the agreement, Barrow said, “I concede, as a lawyer, that there is always a thing called litigation risk, and that is why it is not ultimately what I feel; it is what the Belizean people feel.”
On October 22, Foreign Affairs Minister Wilfred “Sedi” Elrington told 7 News that Belize and Guatemala would probably sign off on the agreement in November at the OAS in Washington. He told the TV station that he was sure they could get a copy of the document, but when 7 News tried the following day to obtain the document, they were told they could not get it until after the signing.
No one has yet explained to us why all the secrecy.