By: Omar Silva I Editor /Publisher

National Perspective Belize I Digital 2025

www.nationalperspectivebz.com

Belize City: Tuesday 16th July 2025

🟩 Editorial Commentary

The 13th Amendment Lies Naked—Exposed by the People and Defenceless Before the Constitution

The public consultation on the 13th Amendment held at Swift Hall was meant to persuade, but instead it confirmed what many Belizeans already feared: this proposed constitutional amendment is a dangerous overreach, a draconian measure cloaked in the rhetoric of public safety, but rooted in authoritarian control and constitutional betrayal.

Despite being promoted by government legal advisors, top police officials, and party loyalists, the architects and enforcers of this amendment failed to deliver any clause-by-clause explanation or rebuttal to the 14 pointed constitutional questions that continue to haunt this proposal. And they never will—because the answers would unravel the entire bill.

The 13th Amendment remains naked and exposed, unable to defend itself from the scrutiny of Belizeans who understand their rights. Its so-called “special zones” are not zones of safety—they are zones of suspended rights. The retroactive validation of illegal detentions is not justice—it is a declaration of impunity. And the claimed “safeguards” are verbal comforts, not legislative guarantees.

Voices from Swift Hall—ordinary citizens, teachers, community members—said it best:

• “Who will police the police?”
• “You’re not going back into the communities to understand the roots of crime.”
• “Rehabilitation, not incarceration.”

And when police officials talked about “reasonable suspicion” as a safeguard, they failed to say who defines it and who reviews it—leaving Belizeans at the mercy of unchecked, state-led profiling.

Belize does not need more laws that strip citizens of their dignity and protection. What it needs is accountable governance, equitable wealth distribution, and community-rooted solutions. The 13th Amendment offers none of these.

It is not a tool for peace—it is a constitutional sledgehammer, aimed at already marginalized communities, meant to silence rather than secure.

Let us be clear:

This is not reform.

This is constitutional vandalism.

And it must be rejected—loudly, fearlessly, and decisively.