Belmopan Land Development Corporation Claims Cotton Tree Land

Glen Ysaguirre

According to Ysaguirre, the land in question had been tangled in the courts for a number of years and a decision was eventually handed down in favour of Belmopan Land Development Corporation.  An appeal is presently before the courts over the quantum of the settlement.  But the acreage is privately held and Ysaguirre says it was never under the ownership of a deceased Asian titleholder.

Glen Ysaguirre, Representative, Belmopan Land Development Corporation

“We are pretty surprised that somebody decided to target that property and the ownership, that property has been in the possession of Belmopan Land Development Corporation and its shareholders from mid to early 90s.  So it’s been with that company for over twenty-five years or more and it’s titled property.  They actually held titles for about two thousand, six hundred acres and then sometime between 2001 and 2003 there were two portions acquired by the government from that company.  Those two portions, I think, amounted to about one thousand, five hundred acres or thereabout and the company was in a dispute with the government as to the settlement, the quantum of the settlement for that property and they went to court for it and eventually a decision and a judgment was issued in, I think it’s October 2018, and the company was awarded a settlement for the portion that was acquired. My objective and intent was to establish publicly, for all those concerned and seem to have their eyes on that property, that that’s a property with active ownership and that we will protect and defend our ownership and rights in that property.”

Isani Cayetano

“How did you come to find out that indeed the property in question belongs to the Belmopan Land Development Corporation?”

Glen Ysaguirre

“Well, I think there was an announcement by Mr. Petillo the week before that he was going to hold a meeting at a particular location outside of Cotton Tree.  Now I know that we had this property outside there, but inter-district travel was not permitted at the time and it was not until we saw the footage on Sunday of the event that he had there on Sunday or supposed to have had that we realized that we need to go out there and confirm.  And so we did and we decided to make public our position on the ownership and control of that property.”