The government of Guyana, through the Office of the Attorney General, has taken steps to defend the landmark Gas-to-Energy project in the face of yet another challenge. The project, aimed at transforming the country’s energy landscape and providing low-cost electricity, has encountered opposition from Vanda Radzik and Elizabeth Hughes, who initiated legal proceedings against the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
The key contention raised by the Applicants is the alleged lack of requisite permission for Esso Exploration and Production Guyana Limited (EEPGL), ExxonMobil’s Guyana subsidiary, to conduct activities on the lands designated for the gas pipeline route to the power plant.
The Attorney General, Mohabir Anil Nandlall, discussed the government’s substantial public, economic, and pecuniary stake in the Gas-to-Energy project, in his application to join the case. The State underscored that a judgment against the Permit would have adverse consequences, including potential breaches of contracts already entered into for the construction of the power plant, financial liabilities, and disruptions to the State’s developmental trajectory.
EEPGL has also applied to be added as a party to the legal proceedings. Despite opposition from Counsel for the Applicants, Justice Priya Sewnarine Beharry has ruled in favour of the government’s submissions. Justice Sewnarine-Beharry acknowledged the Attorney General’s unique position as the government’s principal legal advisor.
Both the Attorney General and EEPGL have been added as parties to the proceedings. The Office of the Attorney General expressed confidence in the State’s position, stating, “Given the State’s substantial public, economic, and pecuniary interests in the Gas-to-Energy Project and its benefits to the Guyanese public, we believe that intervention as the guardian of the public interest is essential. We are committed to providing the court with the evidence necessary to safeguard the State’s interests and ensure the realisation of this transformative project.”
Notably, the applicants in this case had also challenged the Gas-to-Energy project via an appeal to a decision by the EPA not to require a separate environmental impact assessment (EIA) for the power plant. Guyana’s Environmental Assessment Board (EAB), empowered to review the EPA’s decision, upheld the decision by the EPA, allowing the project to move forward.
