Legality of Bridging Deed in question

Feb 02, 2020 News

Details surrounding the inking of a bridging deed in 2016 between Natural Resources Minister, Raphael Trotman, and the Stabroek Block oil and gas companies are finally beginning to unfold.

Minister of Natural Resources, Raphael Trotman

Some persons have got their hands on the document that the Government has kept hidden from the Guyanese people for four years.
After his perusal of the much sought after Deed, Attorney-at-Law Christopher Ram, has come to the conclusion that Trotman did not have the authority the Deed proffers he did to ground it in the Petroleum (Exploration and Production) Act.
The Deed even bears an ‘Invalidity’ clause which appears to strike at the very heart of the agreement.
The clause states ‘If a provision of this Deed is found to be illegal, invalid or unenforceable, then to the extent it is illegal, invalid or unenforceable, that provision will be given no effect and will be treated as though it were not included in this Deed, but the validity or enforceability of the remaining provisions of this Deed will not be affected.”

Christopher Ram

If Ram’s statement in his Stabroek News column is correct, then this clause in the Deed would logically infer that the entire document is not legal, as its very existence is purportedly grounded in a section of the law that makes no mention it.
The Deed seeks to ground itself in Section 10 of the Act. The Deed states, “Pursuant to Section 10 of the Act, the Minister has entered into this Deed together with the Contractor parties to set out the process whereby the 1999 License and the 1999 Petroleum Agreement will be replaced by a new petroleum prospecting license and petroleum agreement in respect of the Contract Area.”
But Ram had noted that the Section specifies four matters as grounds for entering into agreements, namely the granting of a license, the conditions attaching thereto, the procedure to be followed in exercising any discretion granted to him under the Act and any matter incidental thereto.
He said that Trotman should explain how Section 10 of the Act gives him the “supernatural” power to revive a “dead” agreement, as there is no mention in the Section of a Deed.
Ram noted that the Minister is granted the power to enter into an agreement “not inconsistent with the Act” i.e. the four specified matters.
Ram’s argument would not just strike at the heart of the Deed, but it would call into question the validity of the Stabroek license currently in force.
It has also been pointed out by the Transparency International Guyana Institute (TIGI) that the Production Sharing Agreement (PSA) is illegal on the grounds that its award to Exxon and partners was not in keeping with the Procurement Act. Government has shown no interest in rectifying this.
Activist Ramon Gaskin is going after the license too, as he believes that several of its provisions are in contravention with the law.
He is preparing to file a lawsuit, calling for the contract to face a judicial review. The government and the oil companies have been written to, with a request for several documents.

Discover more from Kaieteur News

Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.

Latest News