Photo: Parliamentarians debate Belize Constitution (Eleventh Amendment) Bill, 2021
BELMOPAN, Fri. Aug. 11, 2023
“If not now, when?” questioned Prime Minister John Briceño in an interview before the Belize Constitution (Eleventh Amendment) Bill, 2021 was presented for second reading and debate, which lasted almost an hour and a half. And then, after the 25 members of the ruling party present in the National Assembly chambers voted in favour, no third reading was moved. This means the bill will not be sent to the Senate for its concurrence. But was that the plan all along? The Leader of the Opposition, Hon. Moses “Shyne” Barrow, who insists that the bill is meant specifically to bar him from electoral politics, says there is a possibility the People’s United Party was trying to distract the people from his no-confidence motion against the Prime Minister, the Portico Senate Inquiry and other matters of national importance.
The Bill was first introduced in the House of Representatives on July 2, 2021. More than two years later, just before 7:00 p.m. on Wednesday, August 10, 2023, the National Assembly staff sent a notice to the members of the House Constitution and Foreign Affairs Committee to attend a meeting the next day to “further consider” the bill. The amendment proposes “additional grounds for the disqualification of a person as a member of the National Assembly.” In the draft bill it is proposed that someone who has “served a sentence of imprisonment for more than twelve months, imposed by a court in or outside of Belize” be included among those disqualified from holding such a position.
After the Social Partners had appealed to government that there be a comprehensive review of the Belize Constitution, there was the impression that Government had agreed to have any outstanding proposed constitutional amendments be dealt with by the People’s Constitution Commission (PCC), which was officially launched in November 2022.
When the Chairman of the Constitution and Foreign Affairs Committee, Hon. Julius Espat, emerged from the meeting on Thursday of last week, he explained that the reason that the bill was being brought back at this time was because it was the only constitutional amendment which was tabled before the PCC was conceived. He added, “We were informed by the House that we have to report back to the House.” Hon. Espat then voiced that “it is for the people of Belize to decide what calibre of leader they want to lead the country.” When confronted with the fact that the people in Mesopotamia did vote for Hon. Barrow, Hon. Espat responded, “Garrison constituencies are not based on legitimate votes. Analyze that. You’re dealing with a constituency of 800 people that have been manipulated for years. That’s not democracy.” When challenged that there may be other constituencies which fit the same profile, Hon. Espat remarked that that is why Belize is going through a redistricting exercise to solve the problem.
Hon. Barrow has accused the PUP of weaponizing the Constitution “rather than face him at the ballot.” Hon. Espat said Barrow is no one to fear.
Hon. Barrow, in his own interview last Thursday, reported that the social partner and civil society senators notified him that their position to reject a piecemeal approach to amending the Constitution has not changed. But this did not deter the PUP from debating the amendment bill inside the House of Representatives. PM Briceño rejected the idea that bringing back this one constitutional amendment outside of the PCC process undermines the Commission’s work. He repeated the argument that the amendment was in process before the PCC was constituted. When pressed on the matter, he accused the media of giving too much importance “to the issue of the Leader of the Opposition. I think it is something simply whereby there has to be a correction.” The PM says he does not think it is right that a person who committed a crime in Belize or the Commonwealth is blocked from running for office, while someone who did so outside of Belize, like Melchor or Chetumal, can run. He affirmed, “So, we have to find a balance – to fix [this]. But then we will also give the PCC an opportunity, hopefully when they come up with a new set of rules. But for now, we need to be able to try to see how we can fix that discrepancy.”
Ahead of the debate inside the National Assembly on Friday, Minister of Constitutional and Political Reform, Hon. Henry Usher explained on second reading of the bill that in the 2-year “cooling off” period that exceeded the required 90 days for constitutional amendments, there were only two comments sent to the Committee. One had to do with the Leader of the Opposition and the other came from Caleb Orozco, who argued that if the criminal act is something that would not have resulted in a term of imprisonment in Belize, then the amendment should not apply.
The Minister explained that the amendments have to do with terms of imprisonment for actions that are serious and violent crimes, as well as crimes relating to corruption, so that the country could be in compliance with UNCAC. He then questioned, “We’ve heard throughout the day the calls for reducing violent crime in our country, yet we would allow somebody with a criminal conviction in the past to sit in this honourable House?”
When Hon. Barrow contributed to the debate, he described it as a dark day for Belize, and told his colleagues across the aisle, “and your bilateral partners are watching; the world is watching.” Barrow told Usher, in particular, as Minister of Religious Affairs, “We are a nation of religious beliefs … and we don’t condemn people in perpetuity.” He highlighted that for this reason the Constitution currently singles out people serving a sentence. Minister Espat, for his part, persisted with his view on the matter and said, “We all — from both sides, I believe — agree and embrace reform. But the highest office in the land has to have minimum requirements—just like every Belizean, when you want to be a BDF, or you want to be a police officer, has to show a police record. It is there for a reason.”