With an equally characteristic flair, he lauded himself: “These are splendid proposals that the government is introducing and I’m not blowing my own horn. This is the effort, this is the work of the government of Belize, the Cabinet. But the truth is that these are fantastic proposals by way of enshrining the reform agenda and I think all of us that are members of Cabinet, all of us that are members of this party, all of us that are members of the government of Belize can feel extremely pleased with the fact that we are delivering so early on this fundamental commitment to the people of Belize.”

There is mention in the recitals to the Bill of: extended powers of the Senate to "initiate and conduct public inquiries into mismanagement or corruption by persons in the central government or public statutory bodies;” provisions for recall of representatives before the expiry of their normal term of office; three term limits for holders of office of the Prime Minister and the vesting in the Government of all the oil and petroleum have found and to be found in Belize.

But the devil, as they say, is in the details.

When an analysis of the provisions of the Bill is undertaken, one very quickly must part ways with the Prime Minister. What is unraveled in the Bill is the stuff that is the ethos of anti-democratic societies- independence of the judiciary being encroached; fundamental civil liberties, as the Americans call them, being extinguished. In the next several articles then, and especially since we have less than 90 days before this Bill is passed into law, we will here examine these provisions in more detail.

At the outset, we must say that we find it most curious, indeed, that the government has not seen it fit to post this Constitution (Sixth Amendment) Bill on the government website. The contents of this Bill are of sufficient national importance warranting its ready accessibility to all citizens. This Bill does and will not only affect one area of Belizean life as the Agreement for the Purchase of Medical Services does, but this Bill speaks to fundamental changes  in the rights, freedoms and  indeed the lives of ALL Belizeans (even those yet unborn) from now until the Constitution is again amended.

This is the very essence of the hypocrisy that this government has so far demonstrated: one set of rules for others and a different set of rules for themselves.

It is important to caution, further, that constitutional amendment will not occur until and unless there is another government with the political will and a three fourths majority that these rights and freedoms will be restored.

But we digress, now to the meat of the matter. This week then, we examine the first of the proposed constitutional amendments- the controversial crime preventative detention. Before we proceed, a little of constitutions and amendments of constitutions.

The Constitution of Belize

On the 20th September, 1981, the Belize Constitution was passed into law by Her Majesty, Queen Elizabeth II. The first two articles in the Constitution are very important- these state that Belize is a democratic country and that the Constitution of Belize is the supreme law of the land.

The Constitution of Belize, like others in the Caribbean, brings in one document, hundreds of years of human experiences relating to how we are to treat each other and how we are best governed.

The Constitution then, is not amended, altered or changed on a mere whim. Constitutional changes are usually proceeded with after extensive consultation with the citizens, whose rights, after all, will be altered or in extreme cases, taken away.

Indeed, our Referendum Act makes provision for this type of consultative mechanism before a citizen’s rights are altered or taken away.

Section 2 of the Referendum Act mandates that before there is an amendment (or change) of any of our fundamental freedoms and rights guaranteed under the Constitution, such proposal SHALL be put to the people in a referendum. So that while the House of Representatives can enact laws for the peace, order and good government of the country, it must consult the people on certain issues that potentially limit those rights.

This government, however,  at the same time proposing to take away some of our rights, is amending the Referendum Act to do away with this people process mechanism allowing our people to voice their opinion on the matter. This is extreme and signals a sinister trend. It is clear that the government, by proposing this amendment to the Referendum Act, is trying to avoid the wrath of the public being expressed in a referendum, which is necessary before the Constitution is amended to provide for the preventative detention law. This is not only sinister, it is anti-democratic; but that is a story for another day.

The proposed amendment -Preventative Detention

Perhaps the most draconian proposed constitutional amendment ever conceived by any government, whose effect and implication will be felt by the citizens at the very moment the ink from the Governor General’s pen dries on the paper making it law, is the preventative detention measure.

What is being proposed by the government is an amendment to section 5 of the Constitution in a fundamentally undemocratic way.

The government proposes to allow the security forces to now lock up and detain a citizen not for a maximum of only 48 hours, but now at the minimum- 168 hours. In other words, for 120 hours more than the Constitution of Belize now allows.

The more frightening effect of the proposed constitutional amendment is the fact that during that 168 hours period, a citizen’s human rights are extinguished. A citizen will have no right to be informed why he is detained; no right to communicate with an attorney in private or parents or guardian (in the case of minors); no right to apply to the courts to challenged the lawfulness of his detention; and no right to be brought before a court.

Not only is the effect dangerously anti-democratic, it is inimical to peace, order and good government- and therefore contrary to the rationale why a government is given this awesome power under our constitution to make laws.

The government will say of course, that these constitutional amendments  will only apply to persons suspected on reasonable grounds of being involved in the commission of, or being likely to commit a serious crime or that they are necessary to stop children from engaging in criminal activities or anti-social behavior.

No one disputes that crime needs to be seriously addressed, but the crux of the matter is- whether government is seriously addressing the problem or is instead merely spinning out band aid solutions. Let’s not even mention their complete inability to address the rise in the cost of living and basic commodities such as rice, flour and beans.

One does not need to “imagine the possibilities” to recognize the extent of potential abuses such a constitutional amendment will wreak on the ordinary citizen and in  particular those who live in these “Special Police Areas”, primarily in Belize City.

The Prime Minister himself had to concede  in the House: “We understand that people feel that there have been abuses in the past-not people feel- there have been abuses on the part of the police … there have been egregious abuses on the part of the police and the fear is that this power would be abused by the police.”  One wonders then, why in the face of the obvious, would the government still proceed (as they seem intent on doing) to pass this constitutional amendment?

The Prime Minister says, however, that “we are being gripped by a crisis and a crisis requires extreme measures, extreme responses.”

The Prime Minister, that same person  who 14 years earlier in 1994,  when he was  Attorney General and Minister of National Security, was the architect of the amendment to the Crime Control and Criminal Justice Act (Act No. 28 of 1994), empowering the Minister of National Security to declare certain areas as “Police Special Areas”, enabling any member of the security forces, without warrant and using such force as is reasonably justified, to undertake searches, arrest and detain, to seize and detain any vehicle and to cordone off the area for three hours in any period of twenty four hours and thereby restrict freedom of movement of persons and vehicles in the area.

This law fathered by the Prime Minister is same law which was employed by members of the security forces over a month ago when they descended on the home of an upstanding citizen, much to the vexation of the general public. Now this law is being proposed to be included in our Constitution plus more.

It needs stating too that the proposed amendment will effectively erode the sacred human rights of Belizeans which find their source and basis in international conventions such as the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, 1948; American Declaration of Rights and Duties of Man, 1948; European Convention for Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedom, 1950; International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, 1966; and the American Convention on Human Rights, 1969. 

Belize became a signatory to the European Convention in 1953 and later in 1981; the Universal Declaration of Human Rights in 1981; the American Declaration of Rights and Duties of Man in 1991 and the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights in 1996. These are international conventions which our country must adhere to.

It is clear that the government has decided to take the route of amending the Constitution rather than passing an ordinary legislation to deal with these matters because the Prime Minister knows well that any such ordinary legislation would eventually be struck down by a court as unconstitutional. By amending the constitution itself, however, the government believes that a citizen then cannot go to the court and complain that his rights have been infringed since the Constitution itself would allow the preventative detention.

We note with  interest that not even US President Bush was  so bold as to attempt to urge the US Congress to amend the United States Constitution in a like manner after 9/11 when a plethora of laws were enacted to address the 21st century global war on terrorism. What the US President sought, and did achieve, was the enactment of the ubiquitously infamous Patriot Act; but many of these provisions (and this is the kicker) were in relation to enemy combatants, and not fellow citizens, in the war on terrorism. Coincidence or not, there are provisions in the Patriot Act which mirrors the proposed preventative detention measures which our Prime Minister now seeks to pass into law and justify using against Belizeans on the basis that “these are extreme times”.

It must be noted in any event that the Patriot Act, which was enacted in October, 2001, is a transient law, (to deal with terrorism) requiring reauthorization of the United States Congress every four years. For instance, the provisions of the 2001 Patriot Act expired on December 31st, 2005 and thereafter Congressional authorization was sought. Since its passage too, several legal challenges have been brought against that Act and the Federal Courts have ruled that a number of the provisions are unconstitutional.

We fear that the same cannot and will not be said of the proposed constitutional amendment for one simple reason: how can something be said to be unconstitutional, if the constitution is changed and expressly provides for such actions to be taken.  And changed by a few men (call them representatives or whatever) who ignore the rights of the people to express themselves on the matter.

That is the reason why citizens cannot continue in their slumber. That is the reason why we must arise, in the immortal words of the National anthem words, for the time to safeguard your liberty is before you have lost it. The problem with waiting too long is that if we do not rapidly awaken, our longstanding right of protection to personal liberty will have been extinguished: and then, we fear, not the Baymen, indeed, not even the Queen may be able to save us.