BELMOPAN, Belize, CMC – The Belize government has defended its decision to revisit the controversial Eleventh Amendment even as Opposition Leader Shyne Barrow said, “It’s a weaponization of the Constitution of Belize to attack your political opponent.”
The Eleventh Amendment, once enacted, seeks to disqualify individuals with criminal convictions from running for public office as members of parliament.
Barrow, who is in the process of filming for a Disney documentary on his life and also gearing up for an endorsement convention this weekend where his leadership of the United Democratic Party (UDP) is being fully supported, said the government’s motive is clear.
Barrow served almost a decade in a United States prison following a shooting inside a nightclub in New York.
Two years ago, the John Briceño government sought to introduce a law prohibiting persons with criminal records, including felonies, from running for office.
On Thursday, the Constitution and Foreign Affairs Committee met to revisit the legislation. Barrow said that the move can only be described as a “weaponization of the Constitution,” adding, “I cannot describe it as anything other than what it is.”
But Julius Espat, the Chair of the Constitution House Committee, said, “As a responsible committee, we had to bring it back to the House.
“The Standing Orders say that a constitutional change takes 90 days. After 90 days, the House, if the committee does not call a meeting to address this, then the House will have to decide to take it back, and they usually will.
“So it has to go back. And so, a decision was made that let’s do it through the committee, a meeting was held, and the Honorable Barrow gave his presentation. We asked for a vote; it was unanimous that it goes back to the House. It’s not that we are approving anything; we are taking back the amendment to the House for second reading,” Espat said.
But Barrow recalled that the last time the legislation was put forward, “all of the senators wrote to the prime minister to complain that they did not appreciate the piecemeal approach, I quote, to amending our constitution and that they would prefer a holistic approach.
“And so, that is what stayed the Eleventh Amendment because we had a House Committee meeting about it, and it was debated and discussed, and there were many members who said, yes, we understand that piecemeal is not the best way, and we need to look at this comprehensively.”
Espat dismissed suggestions that the decision to bring back the legislation is in response to the no-confidence motion carried by Barrow against Prime Minister Briceño.
“That is normal to come up in anybody’s mind. That’s the first thing somebody would think of, and I think, if you’re a human being, it could be part of the formula. We are politicians. It’s something that’s on the table…”
But Barrow insists that the move is designed to thwart his rise in local politics despite his jail term in a United States prison.
“Here we are now, two years later. There has been no activity from someone convicted more than a year to suggest that the country is in grave danger if this constitutional amendment is not put forward.
“My party is endorsing me on Sunday, but it is also an endorsement by the (ruling) PUP (People’s United Party) if it counts for anything…but it proves that I have the PUP, along with my party.
“We have them rattled; we have them shook; we have them frightened. Why else would they be coming with this ad hominem legislation that does not address the current issues?”
However, Espat said that despite serving his time in a US prison, Barrow could not live in the United States “because after you did your time, they decided you were not fit to remain in the country.
“Right or wrong? That’s a decision they made. We ask our people if a convicted criminal can lead us. We are not deciding on it; that’s a decision we have to make. Would I ask you this question, would you allow a convicted rapist to be your child’s babysitter, even though he has spent time? Ask yourself that question. Those are critical questions that we need to ask ourselves,” he added.
Barrow said he is prepared to challenge the legislation in court.
“Absolutely, but I do not believe it will pass in the Senate. I do not believe that it will pass in the Senate, so we’ll take it one step at a time. I do not believe the independent senators will support such a legislation,” he added.
and then 