Access to justice: Judicial Review Act 2010

Sep 22, 2023 Letters

Dear Editor,

We, the undersigned, have all been involved in several Judicial Review court cases addressing oil & gas issues which are or have been held utilizing the online Zoom platform.

In almost all of these cases, access to the Court hearing has been severely limited apart from appellants, defendants, and their lawyers. Journalists and other persons including citizens who are associated with such cases or have an interest in these cases or are members of the public have been restricted in many if not all of these cases.

As far as we know, there are no rules or matters of sensitivities which should restrict these online hearings. Access of the public to attend Court hearings is a public right and curtailment of this fundamental right should not be, in effect, imposed. We are concerned that this practice is in effect denying the right to information and public participation in matters of public interest. We are of the opinion that broad access should not only be allowed for specific appellants but entire communities who may be impacted and even members of the public who may have an interest as envisaged in the Judicial Review Act 2010.

The Guyana Judicial Review Act 2010 7. (I) states that “Upon the filing of an application for judicial review under section 4 (l)(b), the Registrar shall immediately cause notice of the application to be published on two Sundays in any daily newspaper circulating in Guyana.

(2) A notice under subsection (1) shall specify the name of the applicant, the administrative act or omission which is the subject matter of the application, the nature of the relief being sought, and any other relevant matter” and invite any person with a more direct interest in the matter to file a similar application, or to apply to be joined as a party to the proceedings, within fourteen days of the last publication of the notice.”

It is clear, based on above, that the Judicial Review Act requires the publicizing of such cases once filed with the expectation that all those who have an interest are notified not only about the case but the time and hearing of such cases.

Another contentious issue, raised in all the Judicial Review cases cited is the right of persons directly affected or as members of the public and citizens of Guyana to bring such cases. According to Justice Sandil Kissoon’s ruling, re EPA’s breach of statutory duty of EEPGL’s environmental permit, referenced the Judicial review Act 2010 saying that, “The Act mandates a broad approach to standing, public interest litigation and, in particular, public interest matters pertaining to the environment as enshrined at Article 149(J) 2 of the Constitution of the Co-operative Republic of Guyana which does not attract the application of narrow common law orders as to standing.”

Senior counsel, Ralph Ramkarran in commenting on the Judicial Review Act referred to “the exponential rise in the number of public law and constitutional law cases in Guyana and the extension of the locus standi principle thereby enabling members of the public who may be only marginally or indirectly affected by a decision, sometimes by merely being citizens of Guyana, to institute legal proceedings in public law and constitutional cases.” (SN 20/5/2023 Ramkarran criticizes ‘murky waters’ comment on Judge Kissoon’s judgement)

While we appreciate the convenience of having these cases heard utilizing online platforms, this should not be at the expense of access for the press, stakeholders and other members of the public who have an interest in these matters.

The cases where access has been narrowly curtailed include:

Radziks & Singh vs EPA & Schlumberger Guyana Inc.
Henry et al vs EPA & EEPGL on renewal of environmental permit for Liza 1
Hughes& Radzik re EPA and Esso legal right to pursue Gas to Energy Pipeline
Radzik vs EAB Chairman & member re GtE Power Plant
Henry et al vs EPA re Exxon Mobil Guyana flaring

As such, we are requesting clarification and changes to be instituted re access to court hearings for these ongoing cases and any other Judicial Review Case hearings held utilizing the Zoom or other online platforms.

Regards,

Danuta Radzik

Vanda Radzik

Fredrick Collins

Sherlina Nageer

Elizabeth Hughes

Discover more from Kaieteur News

Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.

Danuta Radzik, Elizabeth Hughes, Fredrick Collins, Sherlina Nageer, Vanda Radzik

Latest News