February, 2025 - Channel 5 Belize

Tracy Permitted to Call Herself Party Leader Through Freedom of Speech

Shyne Barrow has also taken legal action against Panton, aiming to stop her from calling herself the leader of the United Democratic Party. Barrow argued that this violated the court’s November ruling to maintain the status quo. According to Sheena Pitts, the Alliance’s chairperson, Panton and her supporters, as well as the media, are free to refer to her as the leader under freedom of speech.

Sheena Pitts, United Democratic Party

“The second aspect of the proceedings this morning is based on whether or not the honorable Panton could be restrained or gagged from saying anything in relation to the UDP, the UDP headquarters, whether or not she could be gagged from holding herself out as interim leader and that sort of thing. And I have to point out that application also included in it that order was intended to extend over to parties who are not parties to the proceeding, namely Hot Off the Press, Orson J. Ellington Mr. John Saldivar, and unfortunately myself, who have zero social media presence. And so, what really was shown today in arguments is that if it is that contempt, having not been established based on your alleged breach, then there can be no subsequent order to gag anyone where your application for injunctive relief is based on contempt. So essentially this morning, parts of the arguments really entailed freedom of speech and whether freedom of speech would be impeded by any injunctive relief, especially freedom of speech in a political space. And so having gone through the legal authorities, having listened to the arguments, the court concluded that the second application to injunct her restrained Honorable Panton and her associates and those persons I named before from exercising freedom of speech it could not, it cannot be obtained and the order as per it could not be granted. So, effectively, both applications by Barrow failed, and at the end the principle where cost follows the event, it meant that Honorable Panton and her learned attorneys are entitled to costs of the two unsuccessful applications.”

Court Decision Turns Barrow’s Position on Its Head

Earlier this week, News Five caught up with Opposition Leader Shyne Barrow after the election date was announced. During our interview, the Mesopotamia Area Rep didn’t hold back, criticizing us for letting Tracy Taegar-Panton call herself the leader of the United Democratic Party. Barrow was so sure of his stance that he outright dismissed any idea that she could or should be called the U.D.P. leader. However, Justice Hondora’s recent dismissal of Barrow’s contempt claims has turned that position on its head, along with his belief that we were complicit in allowing Panton to use the title. Here’s what he said on Tuesday.

Shyne “Moses” Barrow, Leader of the Opposition

“Certainly, I believe your media house has been somewhat irresponsible. I think that you have not followed the law as far as what the decision of the court has been and you have been willfully complicit in the confusion that we have out there in the public because, not because I say I am the prime minister, it doesn’t make me prime minister. So someone claiming to be leader of the UDP with a fake event that was not any sanctioned or authorized by the United Democratic Party, the people who were legitimately elected as the executive. The fact that Channel Five even gives any credence to that, when any lawyer will tell you that there is no way that any court will rule that October twentieth was in fact a legitimate event of the UDP. So it’s very, very irresponsible of Channel Five to even accept that there is any remote possibility of two leaders. There is one leader of the UDP and clearly when the judge in the High Court , Justice Hondora, returned the property of the UDP to the Central Executive of the UDP, that was deliberate and that was not Tracy Panton. So I don’t see how you will listen to her and not listen to the court.”

Shyne Barrow, “There are different layers here.”

King’s Counsel Peter Knox, representing Tracy Taegar-Panton, successfully argued that under freedom of speech, his client can call herself the party leader. However, Shyne Barrow insists that despite this decision, he and his Central Executive still have control over the party’s assets.

Shyne “Moses” Barrow, Leader of the Opposition

“There are different layers here. The application for restraining orders focused on her passing herself off as leader. So that was on a speech issue and with all respect to Justice Hondora, I don’t remember a defamation case, a case of speech lying or whatever, that has ever gotten an interim injunction. So that matter is not completely resolved, it’s just that we won’t get an interim restraining order, but there will still be damages at trial if we are victorious in our position, the main claim is that she should have been restrained and that there is only one leader and that October twentieth should have been invalid. Furthermore, the restraining order centered on her passing herself off as party leader; the issue as to assets of the UDP has not changed. The assets of the UDP, the Guardian, Wave, the UDP logo, that has not changed so I don’t see how she can say that she has now gotten permission to use our assets. If not, the judge would have amended the order and put her back in the headquarters and say, “Alright, you go upstairs and she goes downstairs.”

What does Court Ruling Mean for Shyne Barrow’s UDP?

Barrow’s initial reaction focused heavily on the Central Executive, holding onto the party’s assets. However, he did admit that it would have been beneficial, not just for him, but for the public as well, to have a clear-cut clarification. Despite everything, he remains in the U.D.P. headquarters, firmly in control as the Central Executive.

Shyne “Moses” Barrow, Leader of the Opposition

“That is evidence by where I sit right now. That is evidence by control of all of the party assets, including our logo, our letterhead, etc… So the judge did not amend the November eighth order to say that anyone can use the party assets, anyone can make use of the party organs, etc, etc. So everything remains in place and we will make that argument to the Elections and Boundaries and, if needs be, we’ll go back to court.”

Reporter

“But what you’ve said is inconsequential because your reality has just changed with today’s decision. The fact is that Tracy Panton will claim that she is rightfully, currently as things stand, a member of the UDP and that’s how she will present herself to the electorate. Yes, but you wanted that to be stopped. This decision has denied you that, so what are you going to say now to the UDP members and what is it going to look like in terms of the slate that you present that she said.

Shyne Barrow

“She was going to do that regardless, in our humble opinion, so nothing really changes and the Elections & Boundaries [Commission] will have to make a determination based on totality of facts. I concede that it would have been, not just in my interest, but in the public’s interest for there to be a definitive clarification given, in addition to what has already happened which is, I sit here in the UDP headquarters, in possession of the UDP headquarters, as the Central Executive of the UDP.”

Shyne’s Press Conference Gets Fiery

At this afternoon’s press conference, our colleague Marisol Amaya had a heated exchange with Shyne Barrow over Justice Tawanda Hondora’s ruling about the return of the U.D.P. headquarters and the party’s assets to the central executive. The confrontation escalated to the point where Barrow demanded Amaya correct what he saw as a misrepresentation of the decision.

Heated Spat Leads to Shyne Losing His Cool

The heated exchange eventually pushed Barrow over the edge, leading him to call Amaya by an inappropriate name. Here’s how the fiery back-and-forth unfolded.

(Video to be added)

Ship has Sailed’ on U.D.P. Mediation

With the 2025 general elections just around the corner, the United Democratic Party’s internal dispute remains unresolved. Today, the Belize High Court sided with Tracy Taegar-Panton, dismissing the two contempt claims brought by Moses ‘Shyne’ Barrow. Panton remains steadfast, insisting there’s only one United Democratic Party, and in her view, Barrow isn’t part of it. Despite her numerous attempts to mediate with Barrow, he has consistently refused. Now, as Panton puts it, ‘that ship has sailed’.

Tracy Taegar-Panton, Area Representative, Albert

“How many times have you been aware of us keeping the door open to Shyne Barrow and his followers take place in the interest of the party’s affairs, in the interest of the people’s affairs, in the interest of the country’s affairs, and he has said No to mediation at every juncture, I certainly believe, and I will say now, categorically unequivocally that ship has sailed for us. We will move forward. Up to last week, we made that in between extended an invitation, and he was so sure. That he was right footed on this matter that he dismissed it and he said publicly he had no interest in mediation. He, as far as I’m concerned, has closed that door.”

Tracy Preparing to Announce her Standard Bearer Picks

With less than two weeks to go before the official nominations for the 2025 general elections, the U.D.P. still hasn’t announced all its candidates. Tracy Taegar-Panton has confirmed that Lee Mark Chang is her choice for the Mesopotamia constituency and that she’ll be using red on the ballot sheet. Here’s more on that.

Tracy Taegar-Panton, Albert Area Representative

“We certainly have not officially sent out a flyer declaring who our candidates are, and we haven’t officially launched that. There will be an appropriate time when our delegates will be formally introduced. And let me say, the United Democratic Party has thirty-one standard bearers vying for the election. We maintain that that thirty-one were those candidates. For those of us who went to a contested or endorsement convention, with the exception of Mesop. And the Mesop matter came to be when the executive of committee of Mesop sought an audience with me and ask for a new standard bearer, which is their legal and constitutional right to do. And so there is now a new, based on the strength of that the new UDP standard bearer in Mesop in the name of Lee Mark Chang. There is one United Democratic Party that has thirty-one candidates. I’m not aware that there will be an election on March twelfth of this year. As far as I am concerned, there is one UDP. I don’t know what determination or consideration will be taken by the Election and Boundaries Commission. The ROPA, the Representation of Peoples Act, gave that discretion to the Election and Boundaries Commission. However, I am certain that they will have to take into account the judgment from today’s hearing where the preferred position of Shyne Barrow has not been entertained.”

Tracy Denounces Espat as Albert Standard Bearer

Earlier this week, we reported that Jose Uc Espat has thrown his hat into the ring for the 2025 general election in the Albert constituency. Espat, who initially started an independent party, has now joined forces with the United Democratic Party under Moses ‘Shyne’ Barrow. Today, Sheena Pitts, Tracy Taegar-Panton’s chairperson, explained why they believe Espat isn’t a legitimate candidate.

Sheena Pitts, United Democratic Party

“Don’t forget the backdrop of the argument of Barrow and his console that status quo anthem means before October twentieth, and everything should be before then so putting into its proper context, you can really have each of both ways, if status quo and means, which we know are clear, now no clearly what the court meant when he gave the order. But if we are to entertain his argument, and it means that status quo ante is prior to October twentieth, 2024, then it would mean those standard bearers prior to that. And certainly what Honorable Panton is saying, that the standard bearers under UDP Are those standard bearers from then with the exception of the Mesopotamia division where the constituency committee invited an audience and indicated that they are no longer desirous of being represented by Barrow and so there was a departure and by the UDP constitution, which permits that to happen and the procedure was followed and there is a different and new standard bearer. So although we, we like that there are persons. Who want to put themselves forward for service to the people and country. Unfortunately, you will be cajoled into boycotting procedures to, to get yourself in the foot of a person who can’t properly serve under the UDP banner. So in short, Mr. Espat did not enjoy his position through the procedural regulations of the UDP. And so it is the honorable, honorable Penton’s view that he is not the rightful candidate for the UDP in the Albert Division.”

CWU Still not Pleased with Government, Despite ESAT

On December eighth, 2023, the Government of Belize took over the Port of Belize Limited, and the interim board they appointed is still in place. Since mid-2024, the Christian Workers Union (C.W.U.) and PBL’s management have been negotiating a new Collective Bargaining Agreement for the stevedores. On January thirty-first, 2025, the C.W.U. issued a twenty-one-day notice of industrial action to the Minister of Labor. In response, the minister set up an Essential Services Arbitration Tribunal to resolve the dispute. However, the C.W.U. argues that the government can’t just rely on this tribunal, which includes three government representatives out of five members, to fix the mess they’ve created. The C.W.U. has warned the Government, the National Trade Union Congress of Belize, and the Belize Chamber of Commerce and Industries that moving forward with this flawed tribunal is nothing short of a farce and a tragedy for the workers and the people of Belize.

Leonora Flowers, President, C.W.U.

“Our concerns surround the fact that it does not bode well for the CWU, its members and all the workers of Belize that the government owns the company. The government as its management that has not made a decent offer to the stevedore and then when we reach an impasse and we indicated such and we sent this to the minister, the government turns around and empanels a tribunal and the government, again, chooses its three members to sit on a five-member panel. NO matter how you cut that, no matter how you slice it, that doesn’t look fair. There is no justice that we can await coming from such a makeup of the tribunal. And we don’t say this to cause any slight on the tribunal, they believe, they may want to believe that we are putting their integrity into impunity. We are not. We are not looking at the person, we are looking at how it looks on the face of it. We cannot ask the same government who owns the port to set up a tribunal to give us justice.”