It's been a long and difficult battle that pitted a multinational oil company with government backing against an indigenous community-based conservation organization-David versus Goliath, and then some! Well, the big news tonight is that David won, if only by a hair. In a lengthy judgement delivered this afternoon, Supreme Court Justice Samuel Awich ruled that the permit government issued to U.S Capital Energy to conduct seismic testing in a national park was unlawful because no EIA was conducted.
While SATIIM's lawyers Dean Barrow and Lois Young Barrow won on that critical point, they failed on three others: they didn't convince Justice Awich that the Chief Forestry Officer had no authority to issue a permit; or that seismic surveys cannot be conducted within the national park; or that SATIIM's legitimate expectations of continuing the management of the park had been breached. But they did convincingly demonstrate that because the work began without an environmental impact assessment - the permit to conduct seismic tests should be quashed. One of four, but the important one, and Barrow today told us that it's a victory nonetheless.
Dean Barrow, Attorney for SATIIM
"We won, the permission has been quashed. They clearly have to start the process all over and we can't prejudge how it is the Department of the Environment will find and we can't prejudge what it is that the Forestry Department will do if after the EIA is concluded, a new application for permission is made as I assumed it will be. But for sure, if when that stage is reached, and a new decision is made, and it is one that is not favorable to SATIIM, then there is a likelihood that we start all over again."
Alfonso Noble,
Mr. Barrow how can you say this is this a victory when the substantive case, and I am not a lawyer here, but basically all the points that you were arguing for were not upheld.
Dean Barrow,
"You could not have listened to the judge. There were four grounds. Three of which didn't succeed, the first of which succeeding, resulting in the relief that we asked for, which is that the decision of the Forest Department to issue that permit be quashed. It has been quashed. How would you say it is not a victory? The sole relief sought was the quashing of the permission granted by the Forest Department to U.S. Capital Energy to enter the national park and to conduct seismic surveys. I do not know if you didn't hear the judge. That permission has been quashed."
Alfonso Noble,
Mr. Barrow you say the process starts all over again. Will you have preferred that the process not begin all over again? Would you prefer this ruling to be final and assertive in that no seismic testing be allowed inside the national park, that the Chief Forestry Officer not be able to grant a permit to enter the park?
Dean Barrow,
"Clearly if there had been some ruling for all time, that the Chief Forest Officer does not even possess the capacity to do that, that would have been more to my liking. But remember that the court has also said that while it accepts that the Chief Forest Officer has that power, the power only extends to the collection of seismic data. The court signaled that if based on what is found, there is any intention to drill for oil, the government would need to de-classify or de-reserve the national park."
Alistair King, U.S. Capital Energy
"We're going to do the EIA anyway. We already have our terms of reference approved by the Department of Environment. We got the permit last week to let the people who are going to do the EIA into the park so that's an ongoing thing. We'll just keep going ahead like that."
As Alistair King pointed out the EIA is currently being carried out by Jan Meerman. SATIIM was also awarded costs as the government is ordered to pay a discounted trial cost.
