And, on the outside of this discussion right now is the Belize Progressive Party. They have asked to be a part of the public education campaign, but say they have been ignored.
Their position is no to the ICJ - but not because it's wrong to go to the court, not at all. They say they problem is the special agreement signed in 2008, which set the stage for the ICJ. That does not contemplate the possibility of paying Guatemala monetary damages for Great Britain's failure to fulfill the terms of the 1859 treaty. Here's how leader Patrick Rogers put it at a press conference today:...
Patrick Rogers- Leader of the BPP
"The problem is that this document does not leave room in there for the ICJ judges to say Guatemala you are right, England did you wrong. Belize never did you wrong. England needs to pay. Belize you inherited that territory, pay 30% and England pay 70%; something like that is what I would hope could resolve this matter. And it can but not under this arrangement that we are going to the ICJ. But now, you are crazy enough to do something that no other country has done in this world- to put up more than half of your territory to litigation risk; that is stupidity that is utter stupidity. So, you can call me emotional, I know I am not. We've been saying you know what Belize, the ICJ option; it is not that we are discounting it totally but under this special agreement, no, no, no. We have got to vote NO to reset the button and maybe get another special agreement with the people's involvement that will table to the Guatemalan's and get to the ICJ under a new special agreement, not this one."
Both PUP and UDP representatives were in Washington at the OAS for the signing of the special agreement in 2008.
Email
Print