Hon. Rodwell Ferguson, Sr. and the Current Election

Our driver, Brenton, was the son of a high level popular politician, Honorable Rodwell Ferguson, Sr.  

He is with the Peoples United Party, PUP and a Regional Deputy Party Leader for the South and has been very active education villagers about the ICJ (International Court of Justice or World Court) vote happening now and what a YES vote means and what a NO vote means. The government is very PRO and you see signs and billboards everywhere.  

There is a territorial dispute between Belize and Guatemala. Guatemala claims they own the territory due to a treaty from 1821.  The British did not agree with that because they said it covered land they already ruled. It has been up in the air ever since 1630! (The country was called British Honduras from 1862 - 1973. ) Belize gained its independence in 1981.

Right now there is a vote to go to the International Court to decide.  The Belizeans we spoke to do not want to do that as the country could be taken away and become Guatemala and Mexico.  They also feel that the current prime minister and goverment have been bought out and have alterior motives, so they want a YES vote to go to court.

There is a common feeling that the vote won't pass and the election day was postponed a week to get more people to the polls. Stakes are high and Hon. Ferguson has even had his brake lines cut in an attempt get discourge his activity in the election. (He is such a powerful, influential and controversial political leader that his children have had to all start their own businesses because they can't get hired in good paying jobs. So, one has a tour company Untame Belize, one runs the family hotel and one has a custom cake company...not sure about the other two.)

.

I hope this election goes well for the country. It's such a lovely country and uniquely Belize...to lose that would be so sad.  After getting to know his children, Brenton, RJ and Shalika, and spending so much time getting to know the  country, this vote really tugs at your heartstrings.

And..what about the Mayans?  What about thier right to the land ownership??

I hope when we return it is still the beautiful and unique Belize we have gotten to see.

Here is a really good breakdown of the conflict that is going on....

“YES” VOTE	“NO” VOTE
STRENGTHS
Y1.1 A legal opinion of 4 renowned legal experts, based on facts and the law of the matter, i.e. a) 1859 Convention and the Exchange of Notes between Britain and Guatemala of 1931, b) British and Belize possession of the territory in question for the last 200 years, coupled with the absence of any evidence of Guatemalan activity in the disputed area, and c) right of self-determination of the people of Belize manifested in her independence in 1981, do not support Guatemala’s claim.	N1.1 The Belize Constitution (Schedule 1) defined in 1981 our boundary which can be changed only by a 2/3 vote of the House. Signing of the Compromis was a violation of our Constitution by this Cabinet. Belize possesses a good title to the whole of its territory including islands that it presently administers, within the boundary limits set by the 1859 Convention between Britain and Guatemala.
Y1.2 Experienced national leaders of both political parties favour a YES vote, based on their assessment of the facts. They say we cannot lose – this is an “iron-clad, water-tight” court case. They share the opinion that going to the ICJ is our best and only chance to get Guatemala to respect border.	N1.2 Belize is an independent sovereign nation since 1981, sanctioned by UN General Assembly and vested with rights, responsibilities and benefits by way of its full membership.
Y1.3 The Guatemalan claim to Belize has “distorted the political development, delayed independence, limited the development potential and often caused grave concerns for the security of Belize”. It is high time to end the bilateral dispute, get the “monkey off its back”.	N1.3 The UN, OAS, Commonwealth, CARICOM, ACP and Non-aligned Movement periodically issue declarations in support of the independence and territorial integrity of Belize. GoB reports to each association on progress of the Guatemalan dispute. Such declarations carry a lot of weight internationally.
Y1.4 Since 2000, the Government of Guatemala (GoG) insists that the territorial dispute was eminently a legal one, and that the only possibility for a resolution was to submit the case to the ICJ or to arbitration.	N1.4 Guatemala (Serrano Govt) recognized Belize in 1991, but it reasserted its territorial claim 8 years later. The two countries have set up an “adjacency zone” 1 km wide on each side of established border for confidence building, good relations, and to deal with border problems.
Y1.5 In May 2018, Guatemala held her referendum and the results of the vote shows that the Guatemalan people have decide to take ICJ route, hence the pressure on Belize for a YES vote.	N1.5 Guatemalans agreed to a Yes vote with 89% in favour, but the voter turnout was only 26%. Is it that the other 77% of her electorate consider the Belize question irrelevant or could not care less.
Y1.6 The GoG, USA, OAS, UN? and other friendly countries expect a YES vote for Belize on April 10, 2019. There is pressure on GoB to deliver a YES vote, and the UDP Govt must definitely be in support of and campaign for a YES vote.	N1.6 Going to the ICJ would represent a huge “opportunity cost” and undertaking for GoB, e.g. a legal team in Europe, the memorial/ counter-memorial/and replies, small unit and office in the Hague, work group in Belmopan, and travel of Belizean officials to The Hague for proceedings and consultations, estimated at US$5m to $10m per annum, for at least 5 years.
Y1.7 If the ICJ process does not proceed according to expectation or Belize is unable to continue for a good reason, Belize can withdraw or discontinue proceedings, and the ICJ will take this case off the list.	N1.7 Instead Belize could opt to request a legal opinion of the ICJ on the validity of 1859 treaty, which would not entail great investment, time and/or commitment to implement the ICJ recommendations.
WEAKNESSES
Y2.1 Guatemala’s demand for a big chunk of Central America on the Caribbean coast is far older than Belize itself. The area was inhabited by the Maya, and in 1800s Spain agreed to let Britain cut timber in northern half of modern Belize. What land rights do the Maya have as indigenous inhabitants of the territories known as Belize today, irrespective of agreements and conventions between Spain, Britain and Guatemala?	N2.1 Going to ICJ is giving legitimacy and support to the false Guatemalan claim, and gives the ICJ authority, with mutual consent of Belize and Guatemala to change the 1859 treaty boundary, with no recourse for appeals.
Y2.2 Guatemala holds that it had “inherited” the region of Belize from Spain. Guatemala gave up her claim in 1859, in exchange for Britain (and Guatemala) building a road from Guatemala City to the Caribbean Sea (Art. 7). But the road never materialised, therefore Guatemala declared the treaty null & void. What other arguments/evidence does Guatemala have to strengthen her case about which we do not know.	N2.2 On 19/04/18, the Economist reported that it sounded like an “outrageous act of provocation” that on April 15 Guatemalan voters chose to file a claim at the ICJ demanding sovereignty over 53% of Belize. GoB congratulated GoG, saying the result “contributes further to the strengthening of democracy, peace and security”.
Y2.3  In going to the ICJ, there is nothing to win and too much to lose for Belize, while Guatemala has nothing to lose and much to gain towards their claim of Belize.	N2.3 A NO vote of Belize on April 10, 2019, would be an affront to those who supported us heretofore and those who could support going forward.
Y2.4 Integrity and trust of present GoB are concerns among the Belizeans people, and GoB’s ability and track record of winning international litigated cases are close to zero.	N2.4 A NO vote would make Belize appear to be not interested in a legal, fair and peaceful resolution to the long–standing dispute.
Y2.5 Our electorate is unprepared with knowledge of the pros and cons of this decision as GoB has delayed the education campaign, and the start of education campaign shows deficiencies in its approach, arguments and concrete plans in case of a NO vote. Present focus is on justifying a YES vote, and explanations are not in clear language for the electorate to digest and decide.	N2.5 Our GoB leaders have stated they have tried and given up on all diplomatic, negotiation options and now have no alternative avenues/ideas other than the ICJ.
Y2.6 Seemingly we are not ready to mount a winning fight at the ICJ in terms of the legal team, strategy & tactical strategy, financing, and what else?	N2.6 If GoG wants to be a bully, let her take Belize by force rather than GoB making it easy for them to take it. We need to show some courage, patriotism and force to fight for what is justly ours. We are not wimps – must go for a NO vote.
OPPORTUNITIES
Y3.1 A YES vote would convince Guatemala we are not her enemy, we want peace, more collaboration, trade, investment etc.	N3.1 A NO vote is a vote of no confidence in current leadership in Belmopan, hence a call for immediate national elections.
Y3.2 If Belize loses at the ICJ, Belize and Guatemala will probably accelerate integration, albeit bilaterally or in the SICA framework.	N3.2 Belize must put greater priority on its national defence, invest more on BDF and invest in the development of the south and the west.
Y3.3 Next year Taiwan will give Guatemala at last what Britain never built: a four-lane, $600 m highway, running 200 km (135 miles), from Guatemala City to the Caribbean coast.	N3.3 In any future scenario, Belize must protect its borders, encourage & develop border lands, build roads there and negotiate defence agreements with regional & bilateral “friends”.  The diverse, rich forest ecosystems can produce valuable products & services, i.e. a new frontier of economic growth for Belize.
Y3.4 What commitments, benefits, support, investments has/could Belize receive for a YES vote, a win or a loss at the ICJ?	N3.4 Belizeans will appreciate unity of mission, patriotism and statesmanship, and really build Belize as a model country, all towards building capacity to stand up to a possible external threat.
	N3.5 Belize must seek assistance from UK, EU, Mexico, Cuba, USA, Israel for its development, protection and security. SICA can have a major impact on negotiations with Guatemala to bring about peaceful co-existence in the near future.
THREATS
Y4.1 Inspired by potential success, and because of its size, Guatemala can and will mobilize a high-power legal team, diplomatic/public relation campaign, etc. to win this case, far superior to what Belize is capable of. You can bet GoG will use any and all means, whatever works, to get its way or compensation for the Belize territory lost.	N4.1 A NO vote could serve as an excuse for Guatemala to expand its aggressive tactics on our southern and western borders, support and expand its international campaign to impugn our national credibility and to initiate a military aggression any time.
Y4.2 There is a 5-15% probability of loss based on legal technicalities, human error, and even corruption, on the part of any of many parties involved in ICJ process. Multilateral and bilateral decisions are not only about fairness, justice and rights, but also about power, interest & bullying by some global actors.	N4.2 We do not know what the UK, EU, Mexico, Cuba, USA, Israel and others would do to punish Belize for a NO vote outcome.
Y4.3 We do not know exactly what Guatemala claims: all Belize, Sarstoon to the Sibun, Sarstoon up to Monkey River or just Toledo? Certainly the south, a beautiful and resourceful region is being targeted. Will all Belizeans in the south be accepted as Guatemalans?	N4.3 Would Guatemala invade us? And if so, what would be our response, could BDF respond? Do we have any agreements with friendly countries to intervene in case of a Guatemalan invasion?
Y4.4 If Belize wins, would Guatemala accept the judgment and forget once and for all her claim to Belize?	N4.4 Finally, would GoG go to the ICJ if she knew she will lose? NO, GoG expects to win, and she has said so in the campaign leading to her referendum in 2018.
Y4.5 If Belize wins and Guatemala accepts the ICJ judgment, border problems will likely continue because lots of Guatemalan communities close to the border are poor, hungry and landless, hence readily become illegal trespassers, migrants or refugees.
Y4.6 If Guatemala wins at the ICJ, would a diminished Belize be viable as a nation state? Mexico has explained that if Guatemala gets part of Belize, she reserves the right to take back north Belize which was granted to Britain in the late 19thcentury.
Y4.7 If Belize loses, what happen with Belizeans, current investors, asset owners in the ceded territories? Exodus, confiscation, refugees?
Y4.8 Guatemala is run by a neo-European minority that controls govt, army and economy, that has a poor track record, i.e. military violence, violation of human rights (vs the Maya majority and pockets of black people) and corruption.

The International Court of Justice: If the majority of the vote is a YES, 

then the dispute will be taken to the International Court of Justice (ICJ). 

The ICJ was established in 1945 as the principal judicial organ of the United 

Nations (UN). The Court’s role is to settle, in accordance with international 

law, legal disputes submitted to it by states and to give advisory opinions on 

legal questions referred to it by authorized United Nations organs and 

specialized agencies. The Court is composed of 15 judges, who are 

elected for terms of office of nine years by the UN General Assembly 

and the Security Council.

Moreover, if the parties agree, the Court can decide a case without 

confining itself to existing rules of international law.

A case may be brought to a conclusion at any stage of the proceedings

 by a settlement between the parties or by discontinuance. In case of 

the latter, an applicant state may at any time inform the Court that it 

does not wish to continue the proceedings, or the two parties may 

declare that they have agreed to withdraw the case. The Court then 

removes the case from its List.

By signing the Charter, a UN Member State undertakes to comply

 with the decision of the Court in any case to which it is a party. Since,

 furthermore, a case can only be submitted to the Court and decided by 

it if the parties have in one way or another consented to its jurisdiction 

over the case, it is rare for a decision not to be implemented.

If a state considers that the other side has failed to abide by the

 obligations incumbent upon it under a judgment rendered by the Court, 

the ICJ does not have any enforcement mechanism. The state may bring

 the matter before the Security Council, which is empowered to recommend 

or decide upon measures to be taken to give effect to the judgment, e.g. 

economic sanctions.

For the Belize/Guatemala case, the ICJ will comprise of 15 elected

 judges. However, 2 ad-hoc judges will be nominated to the court, 

one each by Belize and by Guatemala, respectively. Additionally, the

 countries will have the representation from an agent at the Court, 

whose function will be to submit documents on behalf of the country. 

The agent must have high diplomatic skills, good knowledge of foreign 

policy, and extended knowledge of international law.

In preparation for adjudication, the Ministry of Foreign affairs (of Belize) 

will organize a multidisciplinary team including legal counsel, international 

law experts, and the team that will conduct all the research, compile 

documents and evidence for the court.

Since Guatemala is the claimant country, they would submit a memorial,

 i.e. a presentation of her case, of up to 150 pages of volume, substance 

and annexes on the dispute. Belize would receive the memorial and respond 

with a counter-memorial (admit, deny or comment on a memorial on 

international law.

The ICJ’s decision in cases of dispute between countries is not predictable

 and after the final judgment, there is a legal responsibility by both countries 

to implement and enforce the ruling.

Based on the cases shown in table 1 below, the entire process with take 

about 5 years from the moment the application for instituting proceedings

 is submitted until a final judgment is rendered.

 Tentative Conclusions: Given all our social, economic and governance

 problems in Belize, it would be wise to postpone the whole ICJ process. 

Taking into account the above analyses, I can understand why the YES

 vote should be preferred and also why the NO vote has a justifiable cause, 

simply stated because: a) we are not ready, b) the opportunity cost would be

 extremely high for us to prepare for and participate in the ICJ proceedings,

 c) the tangible (maybe intangible) benefits, if we win, are negligible at best, 

and d) there is a probability, though low, we could lose something at the ICJ.  

At least these issues/questions should be addressed before the people agree 

to a YES vote.

There is no reason to fear the ICJ. However, the entire process of fighting a 

case in The Hague will be time-consuming and expensive, much more costly 

and challenging than any case the GoB has ever undertaken. But GoB is 

absolutely confident and positive about winning and resolving this 

unfounded claim once and for all. What we know for sure is that both 

Governments want to win, and both will/should do all in their power to 

be triumphant, otherwise why go?

On the side of Belize, why take the risk of going to the ICJ if we are not 

sure our leaders and economic capability are really fit for this enormous 

undertaking? It could be wise for us to wait on better times. In time, there 

is hope that the leadership and the economy of Belize will improve, there 

is hope that Guatemala will be better governed and focused on bilateral 

cooperation and development, and there is hope that SICA and our Central 

American networks will produce positive results to the level that the 

Guatemalan claim could become a non-issue, an irrelevant point in our 

bilateral relations.

In summary, the SWOT analysis points to 5 major factors of risk and 

 uncertainty for proceeding to a YES vote:

• Lack of knowledge on the exact land claims and the “legal”and any other justifications 
• of Guatemala.
• Levels of integrity, trust-worthiness and transparency of GoB as shown by lack of confidence
•  in recent policy decisions, e.g. signing the Compromis, being “soft”on the Sarstoon issue, 
• and committing to a bias YES vote campaign from the start.
• Ability and resources of Belize (and who would help Belize) to mount a winning legal team, 
• strategy and effort at the ICJ.
• Probability of Belize losing at the ICJ and having a game plan to cope with the fallout for 
• affected Belizeans.
• Credibility, ability and interest of Guatemala to implement an ICJ judgment in the case of 
• victory for Belize.