TOLEDO, Fri. Jan. 19, 2024

The leaders of five Maya villages of Toledo have rejected the Government’s latest Maya Customary Land Policy draft which was dated December 8, 2023, but which was only just presented to the Appellants in the Maya Land Rights case on January 5. December 8 was the date that had been outlined by the Government to the Caribbean Court of Justice (CCJ) for the presentation of the draft for final review and comment by the Appellants. This latest draft was reviewed and approved by a Parliamentary caucus last month.

Just four days after the presentation of the draft, one of the Appellants, the Toledo Alcaldes Association (TAA), issued a preliminary statement in which it asked the 41 Maya villages of Toledo to reject the draft, and said it would go into the communities to obtain their feedback and discuss a united way forward.

The five villages who signed the resolution rejecting the policy are buffer communities of the Sarstoon Temash National Park and work closely with the Sarstoon Temash Institute for Indigenous Management (SATIIM), whose executive director is Maya Ch’oc. She is the daughter of Greg Ch’oc, outgoing Commissioner of Indigenous People’s Affairs whose 3-year contract with Government comes to an end on January 23. The Minister of Indigenous People’s Affairs, Hon. Dolores Balderamos Garcia, has said the decision to part ways was mutual.

The resolution on the draft policy was dated January 18 and was signed in the village of Conejo by the leaders of Conejo, Crique Sarco, Santa Teresa, Sundaywood and Graham Creek.

In eleven points, they outline their concerns and express their rejection of the draft policy, and state that the articles therein not only violate their traditional law and way of living, but also the CCJ Consent Order of April 2015. The resolution adds, “Moreover, we see this draft as a disrespect of the process of dialogue, since it is completely different from the previous draft on which we presented our proposals. None [of] what we proposed was considered.”

Based on their conclusions about the draft policy, the five villages say they will resort to denouncing the “new attempt of the government to violate our land rights” both nationally and internationally by means of the media and social media.

Going to the meat of the document, the leaders of the five villages call the draft very confusing, incomplete in parts, and therefore difficult to comprehend. They disagree that they must “apply” to register their land “because that means that the government will decide whether to accept it or not.” Instead, they say the Government is obliged to recognize their land according to traditional boundaries, given that the CCJ “already recognized our rights and ordered the government to protect it.” And while the policy has a glossary of terms, absent is a definition for “public purpose.” The village leaders feel that the policy, as it stands, gives the government the power to take their land under the guise of “public purpose,” even if they do not consent to the Government’s proposed projects. At point 9 of the resolution, the village leaders disagree with the proposal of “a 1-3 kilometer circular land within the center of the village.” They emphasize that they already know their traditional boundaries, and the Government is using a mechanism that will not recognize as Maya customary land the areas they use for farming and work. Also, they take issue with a timeline of 30 years of continuous occupation, which they say does not align with any logic. Finally, they disagree with the Sarstoon Temash National Park not being recognized as Maya traditional land. On this point, the draft policy, at section 16 under general guiding principles, says that village members can obtain special dispensation to access nearby national forest reserves and parks to fish, hunt and harvest forest resources for subsistence purposes.

For her part, Minister Balderamos Garcia told Amandala that she does not think this development is substantially different from what transpired a week and a half ago with the reaction of the TAA to the policy. She believes that the villages are getting “a little ahead of themselves,” and declared, “I don’t believe that I can say much more, except to say that there was a very constructive meeting between my people, our CEOs, our Senior Counsel and counsel from the Attorney General’s Ministry. There was a very constructive meeting between them and representatives of what we call the Appellants … Again, we have pledged, and we are going to carry through with further consultations … I can only add that, after those next rounds of consultations, as I had said before, not everybody will be totally happy, but it is for Government to make some tough decisions to promulgate what we believe can be acceptable when we compromise, and that is basically the approach we are going to take.”  She noted that two sets of consultations are planned for February.

For its part, the TAA expected to have met with 34 villages by this past weekend, after which they would present their position to the Government. Already, they have indicated that 15 villages who provided input up to Friday have rejected the draft policy. They say the scheme for titling and recognition is different from the delimitation principles and methodology, and that applying a radius that excludes even some homes and areas where they work and gather is unacceptable. The TAA notes that the Government is applying a prescriptive measure, basically saying it will limit their land.

The TAA considers the radius principle the most concerning aspect of the policy. That principle is contained at point 5 of the general guiding principles of the draft policy, which states: “Each Maya Village shall be entitled to apply for registration in its name of Maya Customary Land Tenure for the circular area of land comprised, in the case of villages with a membership of 500 people or less, within 1  kilometer of the village center; in the case of villages with 1000 members or less but more than 500 members, within 2 kilometers of the village center; and in the case of Maya Villages with more than 1000 members, within 3 kilometers of the village center, without the need for any further demarcation or proof of continuous use and occupation of that space, provided only that the requisite number of Village Members approve of the application for registration of the interest.” That requisite number is at least 75% of village members participating at a village meeting held within 12 months of the date of application. However, villages can only apply within a fixed period of 7 years from the enactment of the national legislation, which is expected to be drafted this year.

Notably, in the cover letter forwarding the policy to the Appellants, the Government’s attorney, Senior Counsel Andrew Marshalleck states, “Our client acknowledges the contents of Articles 28 of the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples. The reality now faced is that the land resources of Southern Belize are finite, and the Government must have regard not only to the claims of the Maya Villages to that space, but also to that of Third Party communities and implications for national development goals.” He goes on to tell the Appellants that “an appropriate compromise inevitably requires that the available space be shared. Our client considers that this is best achieved by reference to how the disputed spaces are in fact being occupied and used. Our client intends to give effect to such occupation and use.”

Marshalleck explained that the Government’s “general approach to recognition and registration has shifted from emphasizing demarcation to recognizing a nucleus in which Maya Customary Land Tenure is automatically recognized, and establishing a procedure for that nucleus to grow outward having due regard to Third Party Interests. This bypasses the need for demarcation prior to the issue of titles to core spaces. Demarcation is then important only for the recognition and registration of Maya Customary Land tenure outside that core space.”
   
The letter also makes reference to adverse financial consequences for the Government, and Marshalleck proceeds to indicate that those will reveal themselves as the terms of the policy are finalized, but that, for now, “the adverse financial consequences are at least the cost of extinguishing titles in the circular areas in which Maya Customary Land Tenure is automatically registered.” Marshalleck further explains, “At present, the Government intends to limit these consequences by limiting compensation to village members who continue to enjoy the land except by way of communal as distinct from individual ownership. The Government may further limit compensation to Third Parties by adopting principles of compensation that depart from a heavy reliance on opinions of market value.”