BELIZE CITY, Mon. Sept. 27, 2021– According to local reports, the Ministry of the Attorney General missed the 21-day deadline to file an appeal of the Jalacte judgment award handed down earlier this year by the Acting Chief Justice, Michelle Arana. According to the spokesperson of the Toledo Alcalde Association (TAA), Cristina Coc, the government is now scrambling to file a late notice of appeal inside the Appeal Court.
The Government was ordered to pay the claimants, who reside in Jalacte village, a total of $6.3 million for GoB’s acquisition and occupation of communal lands for the construction of a road without first acquiring free, prior and informed consent, as is mandated by a prior Supreme Court ruling, affirmed by the Caribbean Court of Justice, that had laid out such a requirement.
The land was encroached upon when the government at the time (the Barrow administration) carried out a major road upgrade from the Dump Area of Toledo to the edge of Jalacte. Approximately 31 acres of communal lands were acquired by default as a result of the road works. The Government was ordered to pay damages to the villagers, but GoB reps indicated multiple times that they fully intended to file an appeal.
However, the 21- day appeal period passed after the perfected order was served on July 20, according to Cristina Coc.
Coc said that the community leaders from Jalacte reached out to the Government attorneys to renegotiate a settlement, recognizing the dire economic state that the country is in, but their offer was turned down and they were reminded of the administration’s intention to appeal.
Coc said that they understand that “somebody had dropped the ball.” and forgot to file the appeal before the deadline. The reason cited was administrative oversight, Coc said.
The Government is applying for an extension of the allotted period within which it can submit its notice of appeal. Coc said that they are in opposition to the granting of this extension.
This is expected to play out within the short term inside the Court of Appeal, since the COA Act does make provision in section 16(3) for parties to apply for an extension — provided that “the appellant shows to the satisfaction of the Court that he has been unavoidably prevented from filing his notice of appeal or grounds of appeal.”
The other party in the case, the people of the village in Jalacte, will be given the opportunity to oppose the extension of appeal.