C.C.J. Itinerant Sitting in Belize

There was an itinerant sitting of the Caribbean Court of Justice here in Belize City this morning inside Courtroom Number One of the Supreme Court.  The Maya Leaders Alliance, as well as representatives from the Attorney General’s Office, appeared once again before the appellate jurisdiction to present compliance and status reports in line with a consent order handed down in April 2015 involving Maya land rights.  Since then, the court has held several post-judgment sittings to monitor the implementation of the court order.  The M.L.A., led by spokesperson Cristina Coc, along with others from twenty-three indigenous communities in southern Belize, was present this morning.  This is the second itinerant sitting of the C.C.J. in Belize, with a previous session being held in April 2015.  Following today’s session, Coc spoke with the media.

Cristina Coc

Cristina Coc, Spokesperson, Maya Leaders Alliance

“Today, at the compliance hearing, we were subject to making reports, both sides, on the progress that we have made and some of the issues that remain with respect to the implementation of the consent order. You will appreciate and understand that the consent order, paragraph four in particular, talks about an order where the government has to cease and desist from granting any further concessions, whether that be permits or otherwise that might affect the use and enjoyment of the lands by the Maya people, of course without their free, prior and informed consent.  In light of not yet having legislative mechanisms to protect these rights that have been affirmed by the court, we moved to institute or develop a framework for dispute resolution in the interim.  The dispute resolution framework is really to help to address some of the incursions, the ongoing incursions.  Some of those include illegal logging concessions that are granted, oil exploration that is also being pursued on Maya lands, currently as we speak and to begin to look at where land might have been sold or granted to third party interests or even to government agencies.  And so we, with the assistance of the court and the supervision of the court, were able to agree on a dispute resolution framework.  That dispute resolution framework mandated that an authority would be appointed, mutually agreed upon by both parties.”