Photo: Map showing location of proposed Port of Magical Belize project
BELIZE CITY, Thurs. June 22, 2023
Stake Bank Enterprise Ltd. (SBEL), which has invested in the construction of Port Coral—the first of three proposed cruise ports to receive approval—announced a win at the Court of Appeal that it has described as a “significant victory.” On June 20, the Court ruled that a decision of High Court Justice Lisa Shoman be set aside, and that Stake Bank’s challenge of the environmental clearance that was granted for the Port of Magical Belize project be remitted for hearing in the High Court. With this development, Stake Bank now feels it is one step closer to having Portico Enterprise Ltd.’s environmental clearance quashed.
Portico received notice of environmental clearance for its project in April 2021. Stake Bank later applied for judicial review, arguing that the environmental clearance granted by the National Environmental Appraisal Committee (NEAC) and Department of the Environment (DOE) was unlawful, as statutory requirements were not met.
At the High Court, Justice Shoman ruled that the application for judicial review was not submitted within the prescribed 14 days as required under practice directions that were formulated during the period when Covid-19-related restrictions were in place. However, the Court of Appeal declared that the application was filed on August 9, 2021, even though the High Court judge had treated the application as if it was filed on August 10.
Portico received environmental clearance six months after the roundly condemned “Definative” Agreement which was signed on October 1, 2020. Stake Bank highlights that, “In that so-called agreement PEL claimed in clause 5.1.3 that they had already secured their ECP; clearly that was fraudulent misrepresentation as there was no ECP granted to Portico at the time the ‘Definative’ Agreement was signed. The ECP is the primary condition precedent for any such Definitive Agreement to be signed with the Government for projects of this magnitude.”
Stake Bank, in a release on the day of the Court of Appeal’s oral verdict, affirmed that it “continues to experience overt and covert attempt[s] at undermining its economic interest to the ultimate detriment of the hundreds of Belizean[s] currently employed on this project.” In a letter to Attorney General Magali Marin-Young dated June 5, Stake Bank reminded her that in its own Definitive Agreement signed August 25, 2017 for its Port Coral project, the Government of Belize “had expressly covenanted to, inter alia, support Feinstein and the Company in the effort to successfully construct, operate and maintain the cruise ship docking facility…”
One of Stake Bank’s attorneys, Senior Counsel Glenn Godfrey, also wrote in the June 5 letter that his client has already invested in excess of BZ $100 million in the Port Coral project. Stake Bank had asked the Government a few weeks ago to give an undertaking by June 8 that it would declare the Portico Definitive Agreement null and void and would refrain from taking steps to pass supporting legislation in furtherance of the Port of Magical Definitive Agreement. The letter continued by reminding the government that to do so would be “clear violation of the unambiguous and unequivocal promise and/assurance given by them to our Client under the Stake Bank Definitive Agreement.” It went on to state, “Further, it is our client’s belief that by comparison, the proposed fiscal incentives as stated in the Port of Magical Belize Definitive Agreement if accepted amounts to preferential treatment and is contrary to good administrative decision making…Furthermore, should the GOB decide to validate the Port of Magical Belize Definitive Agreement they would be acting in bad faith and in essence, effectively hindering the efforts of our Client by promoting the interest of their competitors.” That first deadline was not met and Attorney General Marin-Young told Amandala today that the Government has not responded to an extended deadline of June 20 either. Stake Bank had warned the Attorney General that failure to comply with their request would result in the company instituting legal proceedings without further notice.