Belize loses brown sugar-import case against Trinidad and Tobago

BELIZE has failed to prove its complaint of an alleged failure by Trinidad and Tobago to apply the common external tariff (CET) on brown sugar imported from outside the region from November 2018-June 2020.

This was the finding of the Caribbean Court of Justice (CCJ) on Tuesday, as it delivered its decision in the trade dispute filed by the Central American nation over brown sugar imports in the region last year.

Belize filed a lawsuit claiming TT breached the Revised Treaty of Chaguaramas by failing to apply the 40 per cent tax on imports of brown sugar from Guatemala and Honduras.

The CET is a single tax rate agreed to by all members of Caricom on imports of a product from outside the Caribbean Community. Goods imported from third countries are subject to the duties listed in the CET, but goods imported from Caricom countries, certified to be of Caricom origin, do not generally attract these import duties. These Caricom-origin goods enjoy duty-free status.

President of the CCJ Justice Adrian Saunders, in delivering the court’s decision, said Belize had the burden of proving the allegations, including providing direct or circumstantial evidence to support its claim.

However, he said the court found there were “severe shortcomings in Belize’s evidence” which were not cured by reference to circumstantial evidence.

The court emphasised the importance of maintaining the CET, especially on the importation of brown sugar from extra-regional, as it was important to member states which produced the commodity.

"In the present circumstances, this court re-emphasises the importance of maintaining the CET especially in respect of a product such as brown sugar which is of demonstrable importance to the member states such as Belize which manufactures that product.

"No one disputes that Belize has made very significant investment in its agricultural sector in general and in sugar cultivation and production specifically.

"The CET does not guarantee producers of sugar in Belize an assured market, but those producers are entitled to the protection of the market that the tariff is intended to provide. The court also urges the Community to superintend the conclusion of the monitoring mechanism for sugar as quickly as possible to ensure that the benefits intended to ensure to the regional sugar producers are not frustrated and impaired.

As the court also found that Belize was entitled to bring the claim on behalf of its sugar producers, the judges ordered each state to bear its own costs.

Belize had alleged that because of the treaty violation, Belize Sugar Industries Ltd (BSI) and Santander Sugar were losing sales to these countries. It was also alleged that the Caricom secretariat had failed to ensure TT imposed the CET.

At the trial, Belize contended its evidence demonstrates that from November 2018 to June 2020, brown sugar which was produced outside the Caribbean region entered TT without the tariff being imposed. This was denied by TT.

Also presiding over the appeal were Justices Jacob Wit, Winston Anderson, Maureen Rajnauth-Lee, Denys Barrow, Andrew Burgess, and Peter Jamadar.

Representing Belize were attorneys Andrew Marshalleck, SC, and Samantha Matute-Tucker.

TT was represented by attorneys Terrence Bharath, Amrita Ramsook, Coreen Findley and Sasha Sukhram.