7 News Belize

PUP Tells Judge PM Barrow Abused 'Special Warrants' For Unapproved Spending
posted (November 21, 2019)

Last night, we brought you coverage of the lawsuit that Leader of the opposition,  John Briceno and Julius Espat, the Chairman of the Public Accounts Committee, brought against Prime Minister Dean Barrow, and his administration.

They say that Prime Minister Barrow, acting as the Minister of Finance, has engaged in the unlawful spending of 1.3 billion dollars in public funds. As we told you, they claim he failed to get prior parliamentary approval for the spending of all that money, and that he tried to legitimize those expenditures by going to parliament and passing supplementary appropriations to cover the amounts that were spent years prior to that. 

That old practice of spending money and then accounting for it years after the fact, is as we told you, a common practice that administrations of both political parties have made routine.  These claimants assert that this a bad practice that needs to stop, but they also have a big issue with the way the Prime Minister got access to those 1.3 billion dollars.

Part of the PUP's complaint against the PM is that he got access to those monies from the Consolidated Revenue Fund through what is known in the Finance Ministry as special warrants.  According to the rules, these special warrants is that they are designed to be executed when the country is facing an emergency, such as a natural disaster. The attorneys say that the Belize Constitution contemplates these types of emergencies as expenses which are, quote, "urgent and unforeseen". End quote. 

The PUP's case against the PM is that he abused the special warrants by declaring the public spending of those 1.3 billion dollars as "urgent and unforeseen". They also say that "urgent and unforeseen" in the constitution has a specific meaning, which the Prime Minister used loosely. 

So, for the majority of today's hearing, the attorneys for both sides got a chance to make submissions an attempt to convince the Chief Justice of their position.

Senior Counsel Andrew Marshalleck argued the case of the claimants, and he went the evidence to try and convince the Chief Justice of their perspective.

When the case concluded this evening, we got a reaction from the claimants:

Hon. Julius Espat - PAC Chairman/Claimant
"I am glad that I was part of this. From what I understood, we had 4 claims and 2 of them, they attorney conceded, meaning the important one was in the auditor general's report 2012-13 report where she stated that money was spent without parliament's approval, they conceded, so they said that was unconstitutional, it was not the judge saying that, it was the defence attorney saying that, they agreed that it was unconstitutional. The second one was all the supplementary allocations that was listed, which is close to 1.3 billion dollars, they conceded that was also unconstitutional. The two other topics that were discussed were the unconstitutionality of the finance and audit act reform, when it pertains to using a contingency fund instead of the consolidated fund, that had arguments back and forth - I don't see how they can win, but judgement is reserved for that and the other one is if it constitutional what they did with the amendment to the Petrocaribe Act, that one had debates back and forth and I still cannot see how the judge will go against that one but we can definitely say, that two of four they have conceded already on the unconstitutionality. What was revealing to me, was that they are not saying that they were right, they have agreed they were wrong, now they are pleading to the court and asking for leniency because we are a little Caribbean nation and that's how we do things, unlike the first world countries. That was surprising that a defence attorney for the government of Belize would use as a pleading factor with the judge, that's how I saw it."

Hon. John Briceno - Leader of the Opposition/Claimant
"Some people may be asking, why are you doing this, do you want to tie your hand, as many people believe we will form the next government. I think it is very important for not only this government but for future governments to ensure that we work within the budget, that we work within the constitution, that we work within the law and that we should always be held accountable for our deeds, for our actions and that if we do not follow the law, that we should be held accountable for it and have to pay whatever the law prescribes."

Reporter
"Sir, there is a strong suggestion, at least from the FIN SEC, that some of the supplementary appropriations they had to work on were inherited from the previous PUP administration. What is your comment on that?"

Hon. John Briceno 
"Well, it does not where it came from, if it was wrong then, it is double wrong. As I mentioned yesterday, the Prime Minister, when this happened under our government, was critical, very vocal about it. And he made a commitment that it would not happen under his government. Fast-forward to today, now we have 1.3 billion dollars that were spent under his watch that did not follow the process, and did not get the parliamentary approval - or the House approval - at the right time. They spent the money, and then they came and told us, well, this is what we have done with your money, if it was wrong then, it's double wrong today."

So since the PUP's case is that the PM misused the special warrants to spend the money, we asked one of their attorneys to explain why this contingency fund issue is so important to the governance of the country for "urgent and unforeseen" expenses. Here's how he described it:

Eamon Courtenay, SC - Attorney for the Claimants
"The whole provision in the constitution is for an appropriation bill, which would be the approval of the amount estimated for revenue and expenditure every year. The constitution goes on to provide that you should create a contingency fund which is like if you're doing any project, you always billing a 5 or 10 percent contingency for any cost overrun. In the case of the constitution, what it is says that if it is urgent and unforeseen expenditure that is required, so it is something that you have a hurricane, you have a massive fire, you have a flood or anything like that could not have been predicted but you have to deal with it. The amount given to a particular ministry, let's say roads are damaged, the budget for roads will be x million but because of this particular natural disaster, you need to spend more. You got to the contingency fund, which parliament has already approved as part of the budget. You use it, you come back to parliament and report that you have spent money out of that contingency fund that had already been approved; we now need money to replenish the fund. That is the language of the constitution and the reason for that, is that parliament wants to approve the budget and a limited amount for any contingency that is urgent or unforeseen and when you use it, you bring it back to parliament to report, then you get it replenished. The point of the matter is, which the leader and deputy leader have tried to establish in this case, is that for too long, the government has been spending hundreds of millions of dollars without accountability and secondly, contrary to section 117 of the constitution, it is remarkable in my view, that my learned friend council for government come to court and concede an unconstitutional act on behalf of the government and yet ask the Chief Justice to show the leniency. When you contravene the highest law of the land, there are consequences for it and you cannot in my respectful view, ask the court to say, we broke the constitution but just give me a little pat on the wrist."

"Year after year, from 2004 to present, everywhere there are urgent and unforeseen expenditure in every ministry. You have to ask yourself, whether or not that is true and I think you know what the obvious answer is but he has to say that because that is the only way he can try to legitimise what the prime minister did. You cannot issue a special warrant unless something is urgent and unforeseen. Huge amounts, hundreds of millions were paid on salaries, that is not urgent and unforeseen."

Home | Archives | Downloads/Podcasts | Advertise | Contact Us

7 News Belize