Tracy Wins Contempt Case Against Shyne in Court    

There’s big news from the United Democratic Party! With less than a month to go before the general election, Albert Area Representative Tracy Taegar-Panton has secured a legal victory in the High Court.  Earlier today, Justice Hondora threw out the contempt claims against the head of the Alliance for Democracy, which were brought by Moses ‘Shyne’ Barrow late last year. Barrow, along with his attorney, Christopher Malcolm, had pointed to a November 2024 court ruling that called for a return to the previous status quo. But the court has now made it clear that this ruling only applied to the occupation of the U.D.P. headquarters on Youth for the Future Drive in Belize City. Sheena Pitts, who was appointed chairperson by Panton, sheds more light on the decision.

 

Sheena Pitts, United Democratic Party

“On their contention, they’re saying status quo ante refers to him being definitively the party leader  and that when the order was granted, it definitively established that he is the party leader. And on our case the position of the Honorable Panton and her learned attorney is that that is not what the order established and what was argued before determining contempt or any injunctive relief is exactly what did the order grant. And so in the backdrop was, remember you will recall, a claim was filed for possession, and the claim for possession was filed in relation to the headquarters,  and attendant to the claim was the application for interim relief. And so when the interim relief was granted, it was granted in relation to possession of the headquarters. And so on the contention of the Honorable Panton and her learned attorney,  Peter Knox Casey, is that the order is confined to just that and the status quo ante refer in its context.  So the claim for position and the position of the headquarters so it would not be true and correct to say that when the order was granted, it extended itself to definitively declaring the honorable shine barrel party leader. And I can tell you, casing to the conclusion by the court that the court agreed with  Peter Knox Casey, that the order of November, it did not.  Definitively establish that the party leader is borrowed because that question remains to be determined and that the order issued November 8  is limited to  trespass where possession was granted back to Barrow.”