分类： politics

In a decisive ruling, the High Court has dismissed the United Democratic Party’s (UDP) challenge regarding the use of the color red in the 2025 general election, concluding a seven-month legal saga. The controversy erupted when the Elections and Boundaries Commission assigned the color red to two factions within the UDP, sparking internal conflict. UDP Leader Moses ‘Shyne’ Barrow and Deputy Leader Alberto August contested the decision, filing for a judicial review just nine days before the election. However, the court found the challenge moot, as the election had already taken place, and results were declared. The People’s United Party (PUP) emerged victorious, securing 26 of 31 seats. The court also noted significant delays in the claimants’ prosecution of the case, further undermining its validity. Hector Guerra, the attorney for the Elections and Boundaries Commission, explained the ruling, emphasizing the impracticality of revisiting a settled election issue.

In a recent legal development, the court did not address the central issue of the United Democratic Party’s (UDP) color dispute. The case, initiated by Barrow, was merely an application for leave to seek judicial review, not the substantive hearing on who has the right to wear red. Attorney Hector Guerra clarified that while the color controversy was part of the arguments during this preliminary stage, the judge did not rule on the core matter. The judge’s decision was based on two preliminary points: the delay in prosecuting the claim and the fact that the issue had become moot. Guerra emphasized that for judicial proceedings to proceed, the court must first grant leave, ensuring the claim is timely and not merely academic. This case highlights the procedural complexities in legal disputes within political parties.

The United States has reached a critical milestone as the government shutdown enters its 35th day, tying the record for the longest shutdown in the nation’s history. This unprecedented standoff, reminiscent of the 2018 shutdown during President Donald Trump’s first term, stems from a bitter impasse between Trump and congressional Democrats over healthcare and funding priorities. The prolonged gridlock has left hundreds of thousands of federal workers without pay, disrupted essential public services, and created widespread uncertainty across the country. Airports are experiencing significant delays due to staffing shortages, food banks are struggling to meet surging demand, and an estimated 42 million Americans relying on the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) are facing growing desperation as their monthly benefits remain in limbo. The shutdown’s ripple effects extend beyond domestic borders, impacting US-funded initiatives in countries like Belize, where programs supported by agencies such as USAID, the State Department, and the Peace Corps have been halted. These initiatives, which focus on climate resilience, education, governance, and security partnerships, are now in jeopardy. Social media accounts for these agencies have remained inactive since October 1, with posts citing the lapse in appropriations. While essential diplomatic and consular functions continue, non-urgent activities like visa processing, exchange programs, and grant disbursements are being handled only “as the situation permits.” With no resolution in sight, the shutdown continues to fuel concerns for both domestic and international stakeholders.

The Supreme Court has dismissed a legal challenge brought by Moses ‘Shyne’ Barrow regarding the use of the color red in the 2025 general election, deeming the case ‘moot’ and filed with ‘unreasonable delay.’ Barrow, alongside co-claimant Alberto August, had contested the Elections and Boundaries Commission’s (EBC) decision to allow candidates aligned with Tracy Panton’s Alliance for Democracy to use the United Democratic Party’s (UDP) signature red. Barrow argued that these candidates were not genuine UDP members and accused the EBC of ‘acting in bad faith.’

Justice Hondora, presiding over the case, ruled that the matter had been ‘overtaken by events’ since the election had concluded without any challenges to the results. The judge emphasized that revisiting the EBC’s decision at this stage ‘serves no useful purpose.’ Barrow had also sought to prevent Panton’s candidates from identifying themselves as UDP members, but he later conceded that this request was no longer relevant.

The court further criticized the delayed handling of the case, noting that while Barrow filed the application on March 3, it remained inactive until July. Justice Hondora stressed that acting ‘promptly’ requires more than just filing an application and leaving it unattended. With Tracy Panton now serving as the Leader of the Opposition, the court found no practical reason to revisit the EBC’s decision.

Barrow and August were represented by attorney Matthew L. Morris, while the EBC was represented by Hector Guerra of Marine Parade Chambers. The ruling effectively closes the chapter on this contentious issue, allowing the political landscape to move forward.