Protection and Advocacy Systems Inc., the Center for Independent Living, the Saipan Swim Club, St. Paul Episcopal Church and other non-profit organizations, including schools.
Seven former garment workers filed an ex-parte motion requesting the U.S. District Court for the NMI to stop the donation, but Bellas said he was only following an order from the same court approving the release of over $600,000 in garment funds to schools and non-profit organizations.
Bellas said he decided to turn over the check earlier than scheduled to avoid a possible confrontation because he was informed that garment workers would be coming to his Garapan office.
He met with the workers gathered outside his office and told them: “You want my help. I wish I could have a court order that tells me to do something. But I can’t until I get a new court order which say ‘don’t do it,’ ” referring to the release of funds.
In an interview, he told the Variety: “I got a court order directing me to do something and I don’t have anything else telling me not to do it except for the letter to the editor and the protest.”
The former garment workers who filed a motion for a temporary restraining order were Amalia Guanlao, Annie Lactao, Melba Nimfa Amurao, Norida Malaca, Cristeta Santos, Edna Sablan, and Erlinda Reginio Carandang.
At about 3:30 p.m., Variety learned that staff at federal court e-mailed the nine-page motion to Chief Judge Alex Munson, who was off-island.
The former garment workers said they should receive the funds.
They requested the court to schedule “the motion for preliminary injunction at the appropriate time.”
They also requested the court to “appoint an attorney for us at the hearing.”
The petitioners said the settlement agreement “envisioned that the[Garment Workers Trust Fund] shall be distributed, used, or disposed taking into consideration, at all times, the interest of the members of the class in accordance with the terms of the settlement agreement.”
They added, “We believe that whatever grounds for the denial of the applications of certain class members for benefits or hardship-based assistance were, they do not change the fact that they are still members of the class.”
The petitioners said that while the settlement agreement permits the trust fund to be used or disposed in other manners, other than direct distribution to members of the class, “such other manners must be primarily in the interest of the members of the class only and consistent with the spirit underlying the settlement agreement.”
They said “there is nothing in the settlement agreement that allows the trust fund to be used, distributed, or given to any individual or group who are not members of the class.”
According to the petitioners, “Some members of the class were denied their share of the settlement fund due to various reasons, most of which relating to failure to register at designated deadlines and/or submission of required documents.”
