John Saldivar Hangs on by the Skin of His Teeth
John Saldivar
Former area representative John Saldivar lives to fight another day, as the embattled U.D.P. politician secured his candidacy for Belmopan by the skin of his teeth. On February fifth, 2023, Saldivar’s name will be on the ballot, along with Retired Colonel George Lovell and businessman Emil Torres. The trio is competing for the post of standard bearer for the United Democratic Party in the nation’s capital. On Saturday, the National Party Council met to determine Saldivar’s political future by way of a vote. When the final numbers were counted, Saldivar emerged victorious by a mere two votes, forty-two in favor of his candidacy and forty against. The vote was taken as part of an appeal process that the former Minister of National Security triggered following a decision by the U.D.P.’s special committee to bar him from running for public office. This, of course, succeeded his designation by the U.S. State Department as a significantly corrupt individual. Earlier today, we spoke with U.D.P. Chairman Mike Peyrefitte about Saturday’s N.P.C. meeting.
Mike Peyrefitte
Mike Peyrefitte, Chairman, United Democratic Party
“The special committee had met and convened after the U.S. designation of Mr. Saldivar. As a special committee we made a decision and then immediately Mr. Saldivar made triggered an N.P.C. meeting to review that decision and the decision of the special committee was that Mr. Saldivar should not be allowed to contest the Belmopan convention that would determine whether he would represent the U.D.P. in the next general convention. But the N.P.C. voted on Saturday to reverse that decision and so the N.P.C.’s decision is that Mr. Saldivar be allowed to contest the convention that would be coming up early next year. So that is where it is at this point.”
Isani Cayetano
“In terms of natural justice, one is ordinarily allowed an opportunity to appeal a decision made by perhaps a lower body, if I could use that description. In this case, John Saldivar went ahead to appeal the decision of the special committee. Did not the party leader say that the decision at the special committee would have been final and binding?”
Mike Peyrefitte
“Well it would have been final and binding as far as the special committee is concerned. It’s like, for example, if I go to the magistrate’s court and a magistrate makes a decision, that decision from the magistrate’s court is final and binding but it can be appealed to a higher body and that was what happened.”
