Enriquez Invokes FOIA to Force Disclosure of State Legal Fees

Social activist and public interest litigant Jeremy Enriquez has formally invoked the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA), requesting a full accounting of legal fees paid by the Government of Belize in defending challenges to the 2025 General Elections and electoral boundaries.

In a six-page letter dated August 18, 2025, Enriquez asked Attorney General Anthony Sylvestre to disclose the amounts paid to each attorney or firm representing the State in litigation for an injunction against an “unconstitutional national election.” He requested that the information cover cases filed since January 1, 2025, and that each payment be itemized by name and total amount. Enriquez grounded his request in Section 12 of the FOIA and reminded the Attorney General that Section 16 requires a response within two weeks of the application.

Enriquez argued that transparency on legal expenditures is critical to public trust, especially as state funds are used to defend electoral boundaries widely criticized as malapportioned. He pointed to previous controversies over government legal fees, including claims that millions were paid out during the Blue Bond negotiations and to law firms linked to political figures. He said disclosure would affirm good governance and prevent perceptions of political patronage, adding that Belizeans deserve to know whether litigation costs were proportionate, justified, and delivered value for money.

CONTEXT OF REDISTRICTING DISPUTE

The FOIA request comes as Enriquez continues to press the courts to rule on whether the 2025 elections should have proceeded without redistricting. He has consistently argued that disparities in constituency sizes—some with fewer than 3,000 voters and others with more than 10,000—violate constitutional principles of equal representation.

He maintains that the Government’s use of public funds to resist redistricting preserved political advantages but undermined democratic fairness. According to Enriquez, such spending raises questions about whether litigation could have been avoided or resolved more cost-effectively, and whether the Elections and Boundaries Commission fulfilled its constitutional duty to ensure equal voter distribution.

COMPLAINT AGAINST HIGH COURT JUDGE

Parallel to the FOIA demand, Enriquez has also lodged a judicial misconduct complaint against Justice Tawanda Hondora. In letters sent to the Judicial and Legal Services Commission (JLSC) on April 23, May 22, and most recently August 11, Enriquez contends that Justice Hondora mishandled aspects of his redistricting case. He points to the judge’s decision to assign himself to hear a bias application and to rulings that were later stayed by the Court of Appeal.

Enriquez has warned that prolonged inaction on his complaint risks eroding public confidence in the judiciary, particularly while fundamental constitutional questions remain unsettled. He has asked that, if the JLSC does not act within 28 days, the matter be referred to the Belize Advisory Council.

WIDER TRANSPARENCY DEBATE

Enriquez frames both matters—the redistricting litigation and the FOIA demand for legal fee disclosures—as part of a larger struggle for accountability in governance. He notes that past reports have identified millions in legal spending without sufficient transparency, and argues that routine disclosure should be standard practice across ministries.

He emphasizes that public funds belong to citizens, not to governments, and that expenditure on legal services must be scrutinized alongside other priorities such as health, education, and infrastructure. Transparency, he insists, would strengthen public confidence and ensure that legal representation obtained on behalf of the State reflects principles of efficiency, fairness, and good governance.