Court Rules 2020 Gang States of Emergency Unconstitutional, Awards Detainees $22K Each

Several men who were labelled as gang-affiliated and detained under two States of Emergency have been awarded twenty-two thousand dollars each by the Court of Appeal. The court ruled that the emergency proclamations imposed on the southside of Belize City in 2020, and the mass detentions carried out under them, were unconstitutional.  Each claimant was awarded fifteen thousand dollars in compensatory damages for the loss of liberty and another seven thousand dollars in vindicatory damages for the State’s constitutional breaches. The judgment, delivered yesterday, covers Civil Appeals 18, 19 and 20 of 2025.  Writing for the court, Acting Justice of Appeal E. Andrew Marshalleck described States of Emergency used to suppress gang violence as “bandages rather than cures.” He warned that using such measures as a routine response could undermine the fundamental rights protected under Section Three of the Constitution.  The court rejected the Government’s argument that spikes in gang violence justified the measures imposed in March and July 2020. It clarified that Section 18 of the Constitution requires evidence of a specific event so severe that public safety cannot be protected through ordinary law-enforcement measures. Justice Marshalleck said emergency powers were not intended to address regular criminal activity arising from social or economic conditions.  The ruling comes amid longstanding debate over the use of States of Emergency to contain gang violence. On May 21, 2025, former Commissioner of Police Chester Williams told the media that he stood by the decision to invoke those measures, arguing that they were necessary to prevent further violence and protect lives.

Chester Williams, CEO, Ministry of Transport: “You have two different judgments coming from the high courts. We’d call them conflicting judgments so where you have conflicting views coming from the same level of court because again the fact that these courts are the on the same level precedents would not work and so when we have issues like that then it has to go to the higher court for the higher court to be able to resolve the issue. So the Prime Minister has made it clear the matter is going to go to the Court of Appeal and we’ll see what the Court of Appeal says. If we do not get satisfaction from there then we can go all the way to the CCJ which is our apex court and whatever decision they would have made then would be binding on the courts below.”

Reporter: I know that was under your tenure, do you believe that anything was wrong in allowing that SOE to happen during that time? 

Chester Williams, CEO, Ministry of Transport: “I maintain my position and I am happy to see that the current commissioner also has the same view that if you have a situation where police work, police strategies have been unable to diffuse the level of violence that is taking place within the society the government does have a responsibility to act and do what needs to be done to make the society safe. Unfortunately the SOE is one of the mechanisms that can used and it does work. People all across the country if you look at the discourse on social media they speak about it and they want to see more being done in respect of this. And so if it works to be able to not just make society more peaceful but at the same time too it also serves as a means to preserve the life of these young men who are gunning down each other on our streets. And so I believe that if we just stand by and see them killing themselves then we are no better than them when in fact we stand in a position where we can make it better, where we can stop them from doing what they’re doing. I always believe that we must do what needs to be done to make the society safer as well as to save the lives of our young people.”

The Court of Appeal also identified constitutional violations in the detention process. These included blanket detention orders that cited broad reasons such as “gang activities” without providing supporting facts, as well as the failure to establish a review tribunal as required by law.  The ruling followed a High Court judgment that awarded more than three hundred thousand dollars in compensation to thirteen detainees. Deputy Solicitor General Samantha Matute, along with Jarvis Lou and Alea Gomez, represented the Government. Attorneys Leeroy Banner and Leslie Mendez appeared for the affected detainees