ICJ DEBATE IN BELIZE, OVER GUATEMALAN CLAIM AGAINST THE U.K. or something, I don't understand?

ICJ debate view from a Belizean who has lived in Guatemala for a long time.

"Hi,

I was in Guatemala City for 7 years doing my bachelor degree and never did I
experienced any hostility for being a Belizean. In fact the Guatemalan
citizenry were very curious to know about Belize and the general sentiment
was that Belize was never theirs and never would be. Besides, the thought
that they already had enough problems at home, to try and create more was
absurd. During the Falklands war they did sided with Argentina, but they
also knew that the war was just a diversion from the economic and social
evil that was plaguing the Argentines at the time. And the Guatemalans know
that their military governments of the past had this issue as a card that
could be used any time. In fact President Shell Laugerud was just about to
use it when the earthquake of 1976 occurred.

The problem, as I see it is that the Belize Claim is well incrusted in their
Constitution and a Constitution is not easy to amend (although Mr. Barrow
did), so they cannot just disregard the issue. President Serrano Elias
tried, but he ended in exile accused of corruption.

Perhaps the good thing, that is if any good could come from the ICJ, is that
if it rules against Guatemala, then and only then will the Guatemalan
Government have a good reason to amend their constitution.

Luis"

******  I think anybody in Belize thinking that Guatemala would change the Constitution, IF the ICJ ruling went against them, and take out the CLAIM, is living in CUCKOO LAND.  A NEGATIVE ruling at the ICJ for Guatemala will change NOTHING.  ******** My opinion of what bullies do.
                     ____________________________________________

In my opinion, the lawyers in the UDP Cabinet have put our borders at risk with the ICJ for their OWN REASONS.

"Beverley, whilst agreeing wholeheartedly with the thrust of your
comments, allow me to make one correction. The citizens of the
Falkland Islands (many of them British passport holders) were indeed
consulted and it was at their request that Britain came to their
rescue. Both the inhabitants of the Falklands and also the inhabitants
of Gibraltar have for many many years expressed a clear wish to remain
part of the United Kingdom,a fact which has been respected by
successive British governments.

I think Ray has made a very important point by challenging the
importance of agreements made or broken two hundred years ago.  It is
what the present day people want that matters, not some horse trading
over an unbuilt road long long before Belize even existed.
The ICJ vote is a nonsense. Why would we go to court to confirm status
which the United Nations accepted unanimously years ago by two hundred
and forty odd votes to nil with only one against (and no prizes for
guessing who that was)?
As far as I can see the only people who want to go to the ICJ are
lawyers (and again no prizes for guessing why)" 
             ___________________________________________

  +*****  Far as I'm concerned, the ICJ business, is TREASON by the lawers for the UDP in Cabinet.  I only know of TWO?  Dean Barrow and Elrington.  Every other party cabinet minister owes his job and has to toe the line of these two, or lose their extra salaries and perks.  It is a GANG with a Mafia Don, after all.  So what these two want, they get.  Belizeans should be BEWARE about them.  What could be done, I do not know?  
                _______________________________________________ 

A few points on the ICJ thread:

1) someone please tell Ms Nikki that as at 2004 there were some twenty odd unresolved territorial disputes in the western hemisphere. The figure being used by ranking USA govt cabinet official was 29.

2) UDP, in all fairness, did not invent the ICJ option. In fact, the UDP has bairly been engaged and have had to be dragged along by Assad Showman all along. Some insiders will say he is still dragging Sedi along today.

3) Yes, Bill, to some extent the distraction argument carries some validity. Guatemala does have her share of internal political turmoil much of which has a severe international conjunctivitis effect. I say to some extent because Belize is equally if not more disposed of heading to the ICJ....when sitting at the OAS table (since mid-2000.)

4) The only reason I am concerned about a "ICJ ruling" is that we are looking not so much at a strict ruling by aloof Judges but more a political settlement given how the case is expected to be framed for the judges to consider. What exactly will the judges be asked to rule on? Don't assume you know that. Ask!

5) I will vote and i will vote often by influencing my circle of amigos and conocidos...after I've gotten more relevant information esp as it relates to the point raised in #4 above.

6) Incidentally, the entire process is budgeted at well above $9 million USD. But, at that level, money becomes irrelevant with so many foreign actors sweetening the pot.

That's my 2 sense, with lots of honey.

trevor
   _______________________________________

TREASON TO MAKE MONEY?  BY UDP CABINET LAWYERS?

I don't know where this came from :

" The question has been revealed / leaked on FB.

The citizens of Guatemala and the Facebook denizens are better informed than most Belizeans:

"Do you agree that any legal claim of Guatemala against Belize relating to land and insular territories and to any maritime areas pertaining to these territories should be submitted to the International Court of Justice for final settlement and that it determine finally the boundaries of the respective territories and areas of the Parties?"

Meanwhile the Belize Foreign Minister WIlfred Elrington has gone on record describing the KREMANDALA infiltrated Belize Coalition For Justice opposing the Referendum as "Garbage In Garbage Out".  "






On 24/10/2012 06:50, Hugo Lambrechts wrote:
> If you don't understand anything, look for the dollar, and you will find your answer.
> Who is making money here? "Stupid lawyer crap"? Not so stupid if you think of who is laughing all the way to the bank.
> Also, think of the other legal battles the government is embroiled in.
>
>
> On Wed, Oct 24, 2012 at 3:21 AM, Ray Auxillou <hillviewhacienda@yahoo.com hillviewhacienda@yahoo.com

>> wrote:
>
>    I think it is plain stupid this ICJ business.  I'm terribly disappointed
>    in the UDP for even considering this nonsense.  From Independence, we are
>    who we are; with recognized borders.  Why would you jepeordize that?  This
>    has got to be the most stupid lawyer crap EVER in the political party.
>
>    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>    **