PPP/C’s breaking of campaign promise to renegotiate oil contract forced me to court

PPP/C’s breaking of campaign promise to renegotiate oil contract forced me to court — Glenn Lall

Jun 28, 2022 News

Tax waivers to ExxonMobil…

Kaieteur News – Kaieteur News Publisher Glenn Lall has responded to the contention raised by ExxonMobil’s subsidiary Esso Exploration and Production Limited (EEPGL) that he “sat on his hands” and exercised “undue delay,” in bringing the court action over the tax waivers granted to the oil company, its affiliates and expat staffers by the Guyana Government.

Kaieteur News Publisher Glenn Lall.

In a document submitted to the High Court, Lall explained that he was forced to take the issue to court after the People’s Progressive Party/ Civic (PPP/C) Government reneged on their campaign promise to renegotiate the lopsided oil contract which the previous government had been signed with Exxon. In his written submission, the newspaper publisher cited reports in which he noted despite repeated calls by members of civil society, both the then A Partnership for National Unity +Alliance For Change (APNU+AFC) Government which signed the Petroleum Agreement and the Contractor (Exxon Mobil) adamantly refused to make the contract available until 15 months after when the Government bowed to pressure to release the agreement.
Further, Lall relied on the public statements by leading members of the then Opposition, PPP/C, that it would renegotiate the contract once it got into government following the 2020 elections. “The applicant [Lall] honestly believed that the then Opposition would renegotiate the contract and this belief was reinforced by the commitment made by the PPP/C in their manifesto during the 2020 elections,” the court document explained.
As a result of the failure and reneging by the PPP/C Government of the pre-election promise, the Kaieteur News Publisher said he was forced to bring the proceedings to Court at the earliest opportunity.
“The applicant submits that any delay caused in bringing these proceedings were unintentional and reasonable in the circumstances,” the court document added. The response was filed after Exxon initially put up strong arguments that Lall could have approached the High Court sooner with his application. The ExxonMobil’s subsidiary had put up strong arguments in Court that Lall has no right to file a court case challenging its terms of agreement with the Government of Guyana. Further, the company said that Lall is guilty of undue delay in bringing the court action.
In fact, in the response to Lall‘s legal challenge to the Government of Guyana over the discriminatory tax provisions of the Stabroek Block Production Sharing Agreement (PSA), EEPGL contends that Lall should not be granted the reliefs he is seeking because “he sat on his hands for five years” and allowed Esso and its co-venturers to expend huge sums of money [to the tune of billions of US dollars] which could now be wasted.
In January this year, the Kaieteur News Publisher filed an action to challenge the Petroleum Agreement, dated June 27, 2016 between the Guyana Government and the oil companies. According to Lall the agreement between the oil company and the government grants exemptions to persons other than licensees, which violate the Petroleum Exploration and Production Act, the Financial Administration (and Audit) Act, the Prevention of Discrimination Act, and the Constitution.
EEPGL which was added as respondent in the matter is arguing to have Lall’s case thrown out on several grounds.
In an initial affidavit filed in its defence, the oil company has extensively contended inter alia that Lall in his capacity as a private citizen cannot file an action in court to challenge a legally binding agreement between the Government and an oil company but it is for the Attorney General of Guyana to take on that role in the interest of the public in a civil suit.
But in the same document, the oil subsidiary said that based on the advice of its Attorneys-at-Law, it is to believed Lall is “guilty of gross and undue delay.” In explaining their contention EEPGL noted that “The Applicant [Lall] has been aware of the Petroleum Agreement and its contents since in or around the month of December, 2016, the Applicant did not see fit to challenge it or to seek the reliefs he is seeking until the 12th day of January, 2022…Nor has he explained anywhere in the Affidavit in support of the [Fixed Date Application] FDA as to any reason why it took him in excess of five years to institute these proceedings.”
The Added Respondent [EEGPL] had therefore contended that “it would be unconscionable to allow the Applicant the reliefs that he is seeking when he has sat on his hands for five years and allowed Esso and its co-venturers to expend these huge sums which could now be wasted.”