The courtroom of Chief Justice Kenneth Benjamin was filled to capacity this morning for a session of the Caribbean Court of Justice. Observers, both from the general public and the legal community, crowded in to hear arguments made in the Maya Customary Lands Rights case, which was argued before the Caribbean Court of Justice.

But, before that case could begin, the Court delivered the consent order which was entered into by the Mayan claimants and the Government of Belize. The court formally declared that the judgment of the Court of Appeal is affirmed meaning that Maya Customary Land Rights exist. The court also formally accepted Government's undertaking to develop - in consultation with the Mayans - the necessary administrative and legal steps to protect those land rights. That will include land ownership rights at the Lands Department, and any other agreed upon terms between the Mayan communities and the Government.

A very important portion of the consent order is that the Government has to consult with the Mayan people about how outside persons or entities will get permission to exploit resources inside Maya Customary Lands. The Government cannot grant concessions, permits, for resource exploitation - such as logging permits and oil exploration concessions, and land titles - without first consulting with the Villages which own that land. Notably, the court also declared that it retrains the jurisdiction to supervise that the Government commitments are carried out. It has set April 30, 2016 as day when the litigants will report back to the court as to progress of the implementation of Customary Land Rights System.

Outside of court, we spoke with the new Executive Director of SATIIM - she said that it is a great victory for the Mayans:

Froyla Tzalam - Executive Director of SATIIM

"If you listen to a lot of the arguments as SATIM has done previously with Greg as spokes person and leading the legal charge, it's a vindication. We're very happy with the results. I'm sure if Greg was here he would be saying the same thing, it's what has been argued all along. It's an affirmation of our rights and because of that, if we are the owners of our land, we must be party to any thing that happens to our property. We have never asked for squatters rights, we are not squatters, we're indigenous people, aboriginal people and certainly the judgment that was read out today made no mention of squatters. So I am definitely agree with how the judge pronounced his judgement."

Reporter

"Do you believe there is room for Maya and non Maya to exist and live peacefully and together?"

Froyla Tzalam

"I think your question has 2 answers. First of all, it is the recognition of customary land ownership within the Maya communities. If you have other non Mayas living within that area, then that would have to also bring their rights under the customary land system. They should be no reason why you couldn't have one or the other or why you only have to have one. I believe that the fact customary land ownership now is going to be a legal system, it's going to be legalised is a step in the right direction.'

Daniel Ortiz

"How would you answer to those critics who say that because of this case coming out the way it has been decided, it has created a special interest group? Because Mayas in Toledo have such a large control now based on the way the legal arguments have been decided - but there are other persons living in Toledo as well."

Froyla Tzalam

"Again, I think your question is very similar to what Aron is asking. Where do we go from here? And I think we can only answer that when we start to implement the system."

With that judgment finally declared, Antoinette Moore, attorney for the Mayan Claimants, began outlining her submissions on why the Mayans deserve damages for all the years when their customary land rights were ignored.

She went back to the mid 90's in which the Government of the day granted logging permits for approximately 500,000 acres of land sitting within the 38 villages belonging to the Mayans. She also focused on the concessions that the Government entered into with companies such as US Capital Energy for resource exploitation within the Mayan Customary Lands. She also pointed out how lease holders who received their documents from the Lands Department forced Mayan villagers off their property and destroyed their lands to make way for whatever development they intended to use the land for. She submitted that her clients were entitled to damages for 20 years of struggle against the Government's indifference to protect their rights, which created these incursions until customary land.

Denys Barrow, attorney for the Government of Belize responded that the Government is not liable for any damages, and that any damages which were done against the Mayans should be sought against the persons who committed them. Additionally, Barrow submitted to the court that the level of damages sought has only grown now because of the outcome of the consent order, and it was not being pressed for before this. He vigorously objected to these damages be granted because it would be, in his opinion, unfair to be exposed to this new claim. Also, Barrow submitted that the court should not grant an award of damages against the Government based on untested allegations of who owned the land in question.

After the case, we spoke with both attorneys:

Denys Barrow - Attorney for GOB

"Position of the government is that in relation to golden stream, a claim should have been brought against the man who they say did the damage and question whether the land belonged to that man or to the Maya village needed to have been determined in the course of court proceedings properly brought. So government says, not a penny for that. We did not do anything, we are not even sure if that land was owned by Mr. Johnson as he claimed or owned by Mr. Cal and they claim. So that is something government should not pay for. In relation the matter of moral damage, there is the fact that Belize is not owned now, is not controlled now by the descendants of the European invaders and conquerers. It is we, all of us who are here right now who own Belize. I lay the point that they Maya are not entitled to damages for the privation of their rights, for the oppression which they have suffered any more than the Africans, they other Indian persons, East Indians, Garifuna, Mestizo, everybody. So everybody has a claim against the colonial system, which we inherited upon independence. It is now at the stage where, these claims have been brought forward and government is in a position and it has magnificently done - to say, you know what? Let us give the Maya their wise and put their system of land ownership on a legal statutory legislative footing. So this is what government has agreed to do. Government should not be made to pay, you and I should not be made to pay any damages to the Maya for the wrongs they have suffered through the years."

While that was happening in court, outside on the ground the Maya people were protesting. A crowd of people from communities and villages in the south came out with their signs and posters making known their demand for land. But the issue is not that simple. It is a highly divisive issue with the National Mopan Maya Council demanding individual land rights on one side and the leader of the Maya Leaders Alliance and Toledo Alcalde Association embracing the communal land victory on the other side. We met with the groups this morning at the Battlefield Park and got the account from two sides of the spectrum.

Candido Chun - Vice Chairman, National Mopan Maya Council

"We are here for individual land title, we want land title. Once you have land title, you have security. We do not have land, we need individual land title."

Courtney Weatherburne

"And the communal land will present more challenges for you all?"

Candido Chun

"Of course, yes, exactly so. This communal system is old fashioned, this thing is not working for the Mayas, it's not making it. What we need is individual land title, that's what we're here for."

Edgar Cal - Village Council Chairperson, Santa Elena

"We want, I want my land title. That is why we're here suffering under this hot sun and we will be waiting what the court ruling and we are not agreeing with communal land. As Cristina is predicting saying she is Maya Leaders Alliance but we haven't elected her, she is not elected by the people. She and her husband are running an organisation as a business. The reason why I say as a business is that, they are not bring to us the financial statement, how they are paying their lawyer, how they are getting here to this court, that's why we are here and we are showing them and we want to show them that yes, we are not supporting communal land."

Hellen Cagbon - Secretary NMMC, Santa Cruz

"Cristina doesn't attend meetings to our villages. She only have meetings with the claimants and then we don't have any idea of how she spend the money or where the money is being spent."

Cristina Coc - Spokesperson, Maya Leaders Alliance and Toledo Alcalde Association

"The Maya people that are standing here around me right now and if you look at the faces here, we are not here to fight the government anymore. All the struggle and fight over whether or not the Maya people own those lands. Whether or not those lands are the property of the Maya people. That issue has been put to rest. The court now for several years, the supreme court of Belize, twice. The inter-American commission, the court of appeals, and now the highest court in this land, that we answer to, the Caribbean court of Justice has affirmed that Maya people in southern Belize, practice a unique system of land tenure. And arising from that practice, from the use and occupation of those lands gives us rights to the land that we currently use and occupy. It has affirmed our rights as Maya people to those lands. So that question of whether or not we want leases or we want to own our land communally or we want to have title - those lands belong to the Maya people."

"Unfortunately my brothers and sisters on the other side are very confused, they don't realise that they too have won. Even though, they're very confused on how they have won. If you look around me right now, you're looking at the faces of men and women, who are traditional leaders in 38 of our Maya communities. These are not people that are looking after their own individual interests. These are people that are looking at safe guarding the interest of each and every member of their communities. Within our communal and collective ownership of our land, there is individual derivative rights to property. The people on the other side are very confused because, within the rights we have to these lands, those people have the same protection for their own individual land if that is what they seek. Only now, they don't have to subscribe to the government to ask for permission to lease those lands. They need to go to the authority, which is their community by a collective majority to seek and register their interest in those lands."

So we took it back to the other side - to the anti-communal land group and asked if indeed, they were the ones confused or misinformed. they told us that it is not a question of bewilderment but of upholding basic human rights.

Dalia Sho - Pueblo Viejo Resident

"It is not a matter of confused ma'am if I may respond to that. It's a matter of us being respected. First of all, we shouldn't have been here because as a Belizean, we have that right, we're entitled to own a piece of land in any part of this country. For example, I can live in any part of this country and own a piece of land but what will become of my people, my Maya people, who are afraid or ashamed being miseducated about a piece of land. Have they told our people what is the benefit of owning a titled land? Have they told the people the advantage and disadvantages of being in a communal land? That's what I want them to educate my people."

Courtney Weatherburne

"Looking at the scene out here, there is a clear division here. How does this scene now affect the over all image of the Maya community? That image of unity. Because as you see, there's a clear divide here."

Dalia Sho

"It looks like a segregation yes, but I must say, we are here because we have been disrespected in the sense that out rights - our human rights have been violated because of false representation, misrepresentation."

Herminio Sho - Pueblo Viejo Resident

"One of my main reason for be here is, is to represent the people who have been misinformed in terms of this communal land issue. We have people here that are out here both sided. If you look at it, we're one people, we want to call ourselves indigenous people but trust me, this is not kind of indigenous thing. People have a voice, and I think people need to voice the opinion they have in mind."

The CCJ has reserved its decision on the question of whether or not the Mayan Claimants are due any damages that they have now claimed.