Controversy Brews Over Pension Scheme for Foreign Judges

A new bill before the House is stirring some serious debate over how Belize attracts and retains judges. Lawmakers are weighing up a proposal that introduces a first‑of‑its‑kind pension plan, designed to bring in top judicial talent from abroad and keep our courts stable for the long haul. There’s resistance from some quarters. Critics say the plan could give the executive too much control over judges’ financial security. Here’s a look at how that debate unfolded in the House on Friday.

 

Godwin Haylock, Area Representative, Queen Square

“I understand the reason behind the pension for the judge, that we want to attract more competent judges, that we want to have them more long term rooted in Belize so that they can develop our own juris prudence. My only bone of contention is the vesting period of the five year for pension. It is historic and the first time this country will see a pension period of five years. the public service, they have a fifteen-year pension period. Parliament has two consecutive term or at least eight years. So, five years is a first for Belize.”

 

Tracy Panton, Leader of the Opposition

“The bill promises judicial independence, however it is the Executive who will determine all the critical financial arrangements under this new bill, salaries, allowances, contribution rates, pension levels, spousal pensions. They are not in the bill, but determined entirely by regulations made by the Executive.”

 

 

 

Francis Fonseca, Minister of Foreign Affairs

“It is very important that we move away from this issue of having judges on contacts who can then, you are then at the whim and mercy of the administration. You have to the wonder if I decide this particular case in this way, will they renew my contract in one or two years. Yu have to move pass that. And this I am very proud that this administration, our attorney general is leading that effort.”