Latest update January 17th, 2025 6:30 AM
Aug 12, 2023 Court Stories, ExxonMobil, Features / Columnists, News, Oil & Gas
Kaieteur News – Esso Exploration and Production Guyana Limited (EEPGL), the operator of the Stabroek Block and subsidiary of oil major, ExxonMobil recently told the Court it has a legal right to pursue the Gas-to-Energy (GTE) pipeline project without the prior consent of land owners within the Right of Way (RoW) of the infrastructure, since the Government of Guyana (GoG) has exercised its legal authority to acquire private lands to facilitate the initiative.
However, the two citizens, Vanda Radzik and Elizabeth Hughes, who instituted legal proceedings against the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) for issuing the Permit, responded to this claim in an Affidavit to the Court dated July 28, 2023. In the document, the applicants through their Lawyers, Melinda Janki and Abiola Wong-Inniss pointed out that the oil company failed to provide evidence to support its “legal right” claim to the High Court.
Radzik and Hughes in their seven-page Affidavit told the Court that the deponent, Albert Tkachev- who submitted arguments on behalf of Exxon on July 14, 2023- has unfortunately erred and misrepresented the basis of their case that the EPA failed to ensure Esso had the legal proof when it applied for the Permit on June 24, 2021. To this end, the citizens noted that the Agency acted unlawfully by granting the Permit for the project on November 25, 2022.
The applicants said, “The deponent has not exhibited any document of title, any lease (or application for a lease) or any agreement between Esso and any landowner or occupier. He has not provided any proof that Esso has the legal right/ ability to conduct the activity without the consent of the landowner or occupier.”
Further, they told the Court that the company also did not provide documents under Regulation 17(2) (ii) before EPA granted the Permit.
This regulation states, “An application for an environmental authorization…shall contain the following information…(c) proof that the applicant either owns the facility or has a lease or other agreement with the landowner or occupier to enable the applicant to conduct the activity on the facility or has legal rights or ability to conduct the activity without the consent of the landowner or occupier.”
The citizens noted that while the deponent referred to a number of extracts in the Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) conducted by Exxon for the project and other documents, the exhibits do not amount to the proof required by law.
For instance, they pointed out, “The letter of 23rd June (exhibit AT-2) is not even from the owner of the land but from Winston Brassington. The letter merely says that the ‘necessary land acquisition shall be undertaken in keeping with the project schedule for 2024…the letter also states that GoG commits to working with EEPGL representatives “…in ensuring the mutuality of agreement regarding the finality of the route””.
To this end, the citizens argued that the route of the pipeline was not final up to June 23, 2021 and therefore did not meet the application requirements of Regulation 17(2) (ii).
Additionally, they pointed out that the deponent referred to Order Number 18 of 2021 made on August 7, 2021 which authorized the Guyana Lands and Surveys Commission (GLSC) to enter lands for the “purpose of surveying or otherwise examining” the lands with a view of acquisition. As such, the applicants explained Esso was not authorized to conduct any activities relevant to construction, commissioning and operations of the onshore natural gas pipeline.
Similarly, in another letter that was supplied to the Court by the deponent, dated July 29, 2021, Esso was authorized to carry out geotechnical surveys and environmental studies for the project. This authority, the citizens argue, does not amount to proof of any legal right.
“The EIA is not a title document, or a lease or an agreement between Esso and a landowner or occupier, and does not give Esso any legal right/ ability to interfere with public or private land. In these EIA extracts, Esso merely takes it upon itself to state what the government will do,” the citizens argued.
Radzik and Hughes went on to state that they do not believe Parliament intends to suspend the effect of national law, such as Regulation 17, merely because an applicant fails to comprehend and comply with written instructions and requirements when completing an application before it starts a project.
They go on to note, “I am further advised by my Attorneys-at-Law and verily believe that Guyana is a state based on the rule of law, not the rule of men, that the Agency has a duty to ensure compliance with the Regulations and does not have any ‘discretion’ to allow Esso to evade compliance with national law…”
It was reported that Exxon told the Court it had a legal right to pursue the project. See details in link below.
https://www.kaieteurnewsonline.com/2023/07/19/exxon-has-legal-right-to-pursue-wales-gas-project/
Court case
On March 27, 2023, Radzik and Hughes moved to the High Court, challenging the Environmental Permit granted to Exxon for the pipeline component of the project. The 12-inch pipeline, some 225 kilometers will be used to transport gas from the Liza One and Two fields in the Stabroek Block to the Wales Development site.
Through their lawyers, the citizens are seeking an Order of Certiorari to quash the decision made by the EPA to award an Environmental Permit to ExxonMobil Guyana to undertake the GTE project activities, on the grounds inter alia that the decision was in breach of the provisions of the Environmental Protection Act (Cap. 20:05), and more particularly, the Environmental Protection (Authorisation) Regulations.
The citizens outlined that ExxonMobil in its application, dated June 24, 2021 includes details of the project site, the proposed route of the pipeline and the areas to be used and affected by the project, which includes residential properties, commercial properties and state-owned properties. Be that as it may, the application did not include or provide any proof of ownership, a lease or other agreement with the land owners of the said area.
Notwithstanding, the EPA granted EEPGL a Permit to undertake the project on November 25, 2022. Subsequently, the Minister of Public Works, Juan Edghill in January 2023 passed various orders to acquire lands for the purpose of the project, pursuant to the Acquisition of Lands for Public Purposes Act, Chapter 62:05.
Jan 17, 2025
SportsMax – With the stakes high and the odds challenging, West Indies captain Kraigg Brathwaite has placed an unyielding focus on self-belief and bravery as key factors for his team to deliver...Peeping Tom… Kaieteur News- Accusations of conflict of interest have a peculiar way of rising to the surface in Guyana.... more
Sir Ronald Sanders (Antigua and Barbuda’s Ambassador to the US and the OAS) By Sir Ronald Sanders Kaieteur News–... more
Freedom of speech is our core value at Kaieteur News. If the letter/e-mail you sent was not published, and you believe that its contents were not libellous, let us know, please contact us by phone or email.
Feel free to send us your comments and/or criticisms.
Contact: 624-6456; 225-8452; 225-8458; 225-8463; 225-8465; 225-8473 or 225-8491.
Or by Email: [email protected] / [email protected]