What the presentation did was to offer insight into how countries of the commonwealth value human rights in practice and how present weak mechanism and political responses of the commonwealth has helped to perpetuate abuses. More precisely, it offers, a context into, the not so unique practice of ignoring the civil, social and political rights of citizens.
Belize is no different in this regard, the Maya’s of Belize fought for close to 30 years for customary land rights acknowledgement and used the courtroom as a tool to hold the state accountable for its lack of recognition. It finally succeeded in 2015. The strength and effectiveness of Civil Society,it seems, in using democratic tools like, international systems at the OAS, UN or national and regional courts, seems to be the last bastion of upholding commonwealth values in practice. What is clear is that Civil Society has a clear role in advancing rights, in an environment where political leader lack knowledge about their legal responsibility to their L.G.B.T citizens. This is reflected in in the idea that that L.G.B.T issues is a Western Imposition,despite, constitutions across the commonwealth, which speaks to all citizens rights. For Belize, the education, laws, religion, political system are western concepts that have been adopted already. The laws specifically, were adopted from the British. More precisely, the constitution, does not say fundamental rights extends only to heterosexuals and as such, leaders already have a legal responsibility to protect all their citizens. Regionally, among CARICOM member states political leaders, seems to play on national values, which is self-serving that reflect, the self-interest and personal prejudice of political leaders willing to absolve their legal responsibility. So what makes leaders resist acknowledging their legal responsibilities? Is anyone guess, one can theorize, personal prejudice, never meeting anyone L.G.B.T, being in the closet themselves, self-interest in sustaining personal power, are just some assumptions.
What is clear,is that courtroom process is just one layer in the march to equality, shadow reports in international treaty obligations, a regional court in the Caribbean and public engagement around diversity, seems to be the compliment.
In a process in 2011, U.N.D.P in collaboration with WIN Belize was able to organize a National Dialogue on Human Right where Michael Kirby appeared by video at the Radission in Belize. We influence that process and saw, the planning given life in the process.
It was clear, however, that U.N.D.P role is to provide technical assistance, as it maintains a fragile balance of diplomatic relations and supporting civil society in rights engagement in Belize. To have call our government to task, would have disturbed its diplomat standing. Furthermore, in advocacy, one realises that its about timing, strategy, human relations and politics and that getting attention for an issue can be either a cloudy or clear process.
It is clear to me that L.G.B.T advocates domestic and international is affected by political messages and that we have a responsibility to share strategies to help transform policy norming, development interventions, mechanisms and laws into a process that is accessible, reliable, and helpful in holding national system accountable for the lack of protections that exists. More importantly, international spaces are vital, in leverage political engagements, nationally. This also applies to international spaces that can be used to advance funding targeting areas, policy priorities and development positions on a global scale. In the end, the idea that we can progress with our rights, in societies that are accustom to marginalising groups, is to ignore fundamentally that no society will just acknowledge rights of a marginalised group without opposition.