Close Menu
DemocracyGuyana.comDemocracyGuyana.com

    Subscribe to Updates

    Get the latest news from DemocracyGuyana.com

    What's Hot

    A Word of Caution to Young Professionals

    July 31, 2025

    In the homestretch of elections 2025, the PPP stares at a landslide victory

    July 31, 2025

    Weaponizing 0.019% of votes to rewrite history? That’s not legal reasoning-it’s political theatre.

    July 30, 2025
    Facebook X (Twitter) Instagram
    • About DG
    • Join as Volunteers
    • Become a Member
    Facebook X (Twitter) Instagram YouTube TikTok
    DemocracyGuyana.comDemocracyGuyana.com
    Jet Global Airways
    • Home
    • Diaspora
    • Guyana News
    • Global News
    • Artificial Intelligence
    • Business Opportunities
    • Advertise with us
    • Photo Gallery
    • Videos
    • World Newspapers
    • Contact Us
    DemocracyGuyana.comDemocracyGuyana.com
    Home»Featured»Re: Government Has a Right to Appeal Any Case in the Best Interest of the People
    Featured

    Re: Government Has a Right to Appeal Any Case in the Best Interest of the People

    Joel BhagwandinBy Joel BhagwandinNo Comments5 Mins Read5,015 Views
    Facebook Twitter Pinterest LinkedIn Telegram Tumblr Email
    Joel Bhagwandin
    Joel Bhagwandin
    Share
    Facebook Twitter LinkedIn Pinterest Email

    Melandi Janki et.al. have an issue with the Government of Guyana (GoG) moving to the Caribbean Court of Justice (CCJ) to appeal the case involving the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and ExxonMobil Guyana (EMGL) in relation to the provision of financial assurance. The manner in which they have protested this move by the Government suggests that the Government has committed a wrongful act. But the absurdity of such protestation seems to have escaped the proponents and others alike. What is so wrong withfiling an appeal to the CCJ, the highest Court of Appeal for Guyana, for the full and final determination of such legal matters? Of course, the Government is perfectly in order to do so because it is a matter that would have dire consequences for the country and its people, either way.

    The proponents strongly contend that the ruling handed down by the High Court whereby EMGL was ordered to lodge an unlimited parent company guarantee is provided for in the law and that the ruling is consistent with the law―that is, the Environmental Protection Act (1996) (the EPA Act), inter alia, the Environmental Permit (EP).

    Having previously examined the High Court’s ruling together with the Environmental Permit and the EPA Act, there appears to be an unfortunate error in the findings of the High Court’s ruling. The learned Judge relied, to a large extent, on Condition 14 of the EP as the basis for his ruling. However, there is no such provision under Condition 14 of the said Permit, wherein it is expressly stated that EMGL is obligated to comply with an “unlimited” Parent Company Guarantee Agreement. Rather, the provisions set out in Condition 14 establishes an insurance liability amount that conforms to that which is the norm in the international petroleum industry. In other words, insurance liability coverage that is in keeping with international best practice in the global industry.

    Further, the provisions in Condition 14.3 establishes that “the forms of financial assurance shall be guided by an estimate of the sum of the reasonably credible costs, expenses, and liabilities that may arise from any breaches of this Permit.” Emphasis hereofis placed on the phrase “estimate of the sum of the reasonably credible costs…”. Most unequivocally, there is absolutely no such provision in Condition 14 of the EP, or in any other Conditions set out in the EP that implies, or explicitly states that EMGLshall provide coverage for uncapped liability, viz-á-viz, an “unlimited” insurance coverage or parent company guarantee. Bearing in mind that there is no such thing as an “unlimited insurance coverage”.

    An insurance coverage is a financial risk mitigation and/or hedging instrument, which means that no insurance company will ever provide an unlimited coverage, simply because an unlimited liability cannot be priced.

    Moreover, specific reference was made to condition 14.10 by the learned Judge in his ruling where he stated that the conditions therein imposed upon Esso “unlimited parent company guarantee”. To the contrary, condition 14.10 actually stated that the Permit Holder and its Co-Ventures undertake to provide “adequate financial resources”, which contradicts the ruling of unlimited liability. The terms “adequate” and “unlimited” have very different meanings by definition.

    The procedure in ascertaining or quantifying the value of the liability insurance or assurance coverage and/or guarantee―is at best a subjective process. It is precisely for this reason that the EP did not impose a defined time frame by which such insurance must be obtained and be in place, other than to state, by a “reasonable” time frame. In this regard, due consideration has to be given to all of the other conditions that would have to be complied with by EMGL as set out in the EP in relation to minimizing and/or mitigating the potential adverse environmental damages or risks. For example, the safety procedures in place; training; and capacity building in oil spill response; coupled with the requirement for a capping stack in country and the maintenance of a subscription with a manufacturer of the equipment. These are some of the factors that would have to be considered in order to reasonably estimate the amount for the insurance liability.

    It is worth noting that prior to the 2010 catastrophic BP oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico which cost BP in excess of US$60 billion in liabilities, the capping stack device was not yet developed. It was after this event that the capping stack was developed which can be placed on top of a well head to control the flow of an emergency or unplanned release of hydrocarbons. The capping stack can be operated remotely to control the flow of oil and gas.

    While the threat of an oil spill could have dire consequences, which can be mitigated―equally, the cessation of oil production can also pose dire consequences for the economy and the people. To this end, at current levels of production and current crude oil prices, the revenue flow to the treasury finances over 20% of the national budget and at peak production, the annual losses from the oil and gas sector would be in excess of $2 trillion.

    More importantly, adequate provisions are in place in the laws of Guyana, namely the EPA Act and the Petroleum Activities legislation mandating that the oil companies (Contractor (s)) shall be fully liable in the event of an oil spill or any damage to the environment.

    Against the foregoing, it is the respectful view of this author that the Government is in perfect order to appeal the High Court’s ruling at the level of the CCJ.

    Featured Top Right
    Share. Facebook Twitter Pinterest LinkedIn Tumblr Email
    Joel Bhagwandin
    Joel Bhagwandin

    Related Posts

    A Word of Caution to Young Professionals

    In the homestretch of elections 2025, the PPP stares at a landslide victory

    Weaponizing 0.019% of votes to rewrite history? That’s not legal reasoning-it’s political theatre.

    WIN will lose the election because of its manifesto

    Juretha Fernandes, a picture of Machiavellianism

    The Biggest Idiot and Buffoon That Guyana Has Produced: A National Warning Against Azruddin Mohamed by U.S. Law Authorities.

    Leave A Reply Cancel Reply

    Top Posts

    What do you make of it? by Leonard Craig

    November 18, 2024744K Views

    President Irfaan Ali Emphasises Discipline and Accountability Over Project Delays

    November 13, 2024566K Views

    The Hollow Ambitions of Nigel Hughes: A Political Opportunist and Exhibitionist with Empty Promises.

    July 11, 2024100K Views
    Don't Miss

    A Word of Caution to Young Professionals

    Since the submission and approval of the list of candidates for the upcoming elections, I’ve…

    In the homestretch of elections 2025, the PPP stares at a landslide victory

    July 31, 2025

    Weaponizing 0.019% of votes to rewrite history? That’s not legal reasoning-it’s political theatre.

    July 30, 2025

    WIN will lose the election because of its manifesto

    July 30, 2025
    Stay In Touch
    • Facebook
    • YouTube
    • TikTok
    • WhatsApp
    • Twitter
    • Instagram
    Latest Reviews
    72

    Over 50 poisoned at wedding in Iraq

    8.9

    EAM Jaishankar Meets Guyanese PM Mark Phillips, Discuss Energy, Disaster Resilience And Defence Cooperation

    Most Popular

    What do you make of it? by Leonard Craig

    November 18, 2024744K Views

    President Irfaan Ali Emphasises Discipline and Accountability Over Project Delays

    November 13, 2024566K Views

    The Hollow Ambitions of Nigel Hughes: A Political Opportunist and Exhibitionist with Empty Promises.

    July 11, 2024100K Views
    Our Picks

    A Word of Caution to Young Professionals

    July 31, 2025

    In the homestretch of elections 2025, the PPP stares at a landslide victory

    July 31, 2025

    Weaponizing 0.019% of votes to rewrite history? That’s not legal reasoning-it’s political theatre.

    July 30, 2025
    Popular Categories
    • Global News
    • Election Rigging
    • Sports
    • Special News
    Do you want to associate with us
    • Business Opportunities
    • Advertise with us
    • Contact Us
    • www.democracyguyana.com Guyana – London – India

      For more information, contact us.
    DemocracyGuyana.com
    Facebook X (Twitter) Instagram YouTube TikTok
    • Home
    • About DG
    • Become a Member
    • Join as Volunteers
    • Forum
    • Advertise with us
    DG BRANCHES: GUYANA, USA, CANADA, UK, CARIBBEAN, AND INDIA
    © 2025 DemocracyGuyana.com.

    Type above and press Enter to search. Press Esc to cancel.