And speaking of the ninth amendment, the Bar Association of Belize has gotten legal opinions on it from two international legal experts.
They are Ghanian Professor of Public Law at the University of the West Indies, Albert Fiadjoe and Australian Associate Professor at the University of Sydney, Peter Gerangelos.
Fiadjoe comes down squarely against the ninth, concluding that, quote, "the legality of the Belize (Ninth Amendment) Bill is suspect and may itself be struck down for inconsistency with the Constitution." End quote. He contends that, quote "the Constitution of Belize contains a fundamental set of negotiated provisions which can only be altered with the consent of the Executive, Legislature, Judiciary and the People. No one entity has the power of unilateral action."
Fiadjoe urges the bar to ask the Supreme Court of Belize for a declaration that Section 2 of the Ninth Amendment Bill and Statutory Instrument No 70 - which renationalized Telemedia - are unconstitutional.
Gerangelos is not so sure, however. His conclusion is tentative. He says quote, "if the Constitution itself provides the mechanism for its own amendment, and if a proposed amendment law is enacted pursuant to that mechanism, then the content of the amendment cannot be challenged. If there is a constitutional challenge, the court is limited only to examining whether the correct amendment procedure was followed."
We note that his position is precisely that of the government of Belize. Government has not issued a response to these opinions.
Importantly, the opinions are given on the original bill. That means they do not reflect the modifications to the ninth amendment made as a concession to the Council of Churches. That famously removed the language barring court enquiry into the validity of any law passed to alter the Constitution.
Email
Print