Dear Editor,
In a ruling that should send shockwaves through Guyana’s corridors of power, Jamaica’s Constitutional Court on Thursday delivered a stinging rebuke to executive arrogance. The court unanimously voided a 2020 mining permit for Bengal Development Limited in the ecologically fragile Dry Harbour Mountains, declaring unconstitutional a minister’s override of the Natural Resources Conservation Authority (NRCA)’s expert rejection.
Prime Minister Andrew Holness, acting as NRCA minister, had dismissed the regulator’s warnings of “irreplaceable” biodiversity loss and community harm, approving the bauxite, peat, and sand quarry anyway. The justices – Sonya Wint-Blair, Andrea Thomas, and Tricia Hutchinson-Shelly – were unequivocal: a minister cannot substitute political preference for technical judgment without rigorous, evidence-based justification. No amount of 76 slapped-on conditions could sanitize the illegality.
“𝗧𝗵𝗲 𝗰𝗼𝘂𝗿𝘁 𝗵𝗮𝘀 𝗻𝗼𝘁 𝗯𝗲𝗲𝗻 𝗮𝘀𝗸𝗲𝗱 𝘁𝗼 𝗱𝗲𝗰𝗶𝗱𝗲 𝘄𝗵𝗲𝘁𝗵𝗲𝗿 𝗱𝗲𝘃𝗲𝗹𝗼𝗽𝗺𝗲𝗻𝘁 𝗶𝘀 𝗴𝗼𝗼𝗱 𝗼𝗿 𝗯𝗮𝗱 𝗳𝗼𝗿 𝗝𝗮𝗺𝗮𝗶𝗰𝗮,” 𝗝𝘂𝘀𝘁𝗶𝗰𝗲 𝗪𝗶𝗻𝘁-𝗕𝗹𝗮𝗶𝗿 𝘄𝗿𝗼𝘁𝗲. “𝗪𝗵𝗮𝘁 𝘁𝗵𝗲 𝗖𝗼𝗻𝘀𝘁𝗶𝘁𝘂𝘁𝗶𝗼𝗻 𝗱𝗼𝗲𝘀 𝗻𝗼𝘁 𝗮𝗹𝗹𝗼𝘄 𝗶𝘀 𝗳𝗼𝗿 𝗮 𝗺𝗶𝗻𝗶𝘀𝘁𝗲𝗿 𝘁𝗼 𝘀𝘂𝗯𝘀𝘁𝗶𝘁𝘂𝘁𝗲 𝘁𝗵𝗲 𝗱𝗲𝗰𝗶𝘀𝗶𝗼𝗻 𝗼𝗳 𝗮 𝘀𝗽𝗲𝗰𝗶𝗮𝗹𝗶𝘀𝘁 𝗿𝗲𝗴𝘂𝗹𝗮𝘁𝗼𝗿𝘆 𝗯𝗼𝗱𝘆 𝘄𝗶𝘁𝗵𝗼𝘂𝘁 𝗱𝗲𝗺𝗼𝗻𝘀𝘁𝗿𝗮𝘁𝗶𝗻𝗴 𝗮 𝘀𝗼𝘂𝗻𝗱 𝗮𝗻𝗱 𝗿𝗮𝘁𝗶𝗼𝗻𝗮𝗹 𝗯𝗮𝘀𝗶𝘀.
𝗚𝘂𝘆𝗮𝗻𝗮’𝘀 𝗘𝘅𝘅𝗼𝗻 𝗔𝗱𝗱𝗶𝗰𝘁𝗶𝗼𝗻 𝗘𝘅𝗽𝗼𝘀𝗲𝗱
Now contrast this constitutional clarity with Guyana’s grim reality, where ministerial overreach isn’t the exception – it’s the operating system. The Sherlina Nageer case against the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and ExxonMobil Guyana Limited (EEPGL) lays it bare. Nageer sued for disclosure of Exxon’s Liza Phase 2 spill insurance and parent guarantees – basic safeguards required by law to protect Guyana from catastrophe.
𝗛𝗶𝗴𝗵 𝗖𝗼𝘂𝗿𝘁 𝗝𝘂𝗱𝗴𝗲 𝗦𝗶𝗺𝗼𝗻𝗲 𝗥𝗮𝗺𝗹𝗮𝗹𝗹 𝗱𝗶𝘀𝗺𝗶𝘀𝘀𝗲𝗱 𝗶𝘁 𝗳𝗼𝗿 “𝗹𝗮𝗰𝗸𝗶𝗻𝗴 𝗲𝘃𝗶𝗱𝗲𝗻𝘁𝗶𝗮𝗿𝘆 𝗳𝗿𝗮𝗺𝗲𝘄𝗼𝗿𝗸,” 𝘄𝗵𝗶𝗹𝗲 𝗘𝘅𝘅𝗼𝗻 𝗮𝗻𝗱 𝘁𝗵𝗲 𝗔𝘁𝘁𝗼𝗿𝗻𝗲𝘆 𝗚𝗲𝗻𝗲𝗿𝗮𝗹 𝗺𝘂𝘀𝗰𝗹𝗲𝗱 𝗶𝗻 𝗮𝘀 𝗿𝗲𝘀𝗽𝗼𝗻𝗱𝗲𝗻𝘁𝘀 𝗼𝘃𝗲𝗿 𝗡𝗮𝗴𝗲𝗲𝗿’𝘀 𝗼𝗯𝗷𝗲𝗰𝘁𝗶𝗼𝗻.
The Appeal Court upheld Exxon’s joinder, claiming permit cancellation relief implicated the oil giant.
𝗧𝗿𝗮𝗻𝘀𝗹𝗮𝘁𝗶𝗼𝗻: 𝗮 𝗰𝗶𝘁𝗶𝘇𝗲𝗻 𝗱𝗲𝗺𝗮𝗻𝗱𝘀 𝗰𝗼𝗺𝗽𝗹𝗶𝗮𝗻𝗰𝗲 𝗱𝗼𝗰𝘂𝗺𝗲𝗻𝘁𝘀, 𝗮𝗻𝗱 𝘁𝗵𝗲 𝘀𝘁𝗮𝘁𝗲 𝗷𝗼𝗶𝗻𝘀 𝗘𝘅𝘅𝗼𝗻 𝘁𝗼 𝗯𝗹𝗼𝗰𝗸 𝗵𝗲𝗿.
This isn’t anomaly; it’s pattern. Government routinely aligns with Exxon against Guyanese challenging oil permits, compliance gaps, and missing protections – all under the banner of “safeguarding revenue.” Justice Sandil Kissoon’s 2023 evisceration of EPA conduct as “reprehensible” secrecy exposing Guyana to “calamitous disaster” should have triggered reform. Instead, the state doubled down, litigating alongside the very company whose lapses it should police.
𝗧𝗵𝗲 𝗥𝗲𝘃𝗲𝗻𝘂𝗲 𝗟𝗶𝗲 𝗨𝗻𝗿𝗮𝘃𝗲𝗹𝘀
Here’s the brutal truth: “revenue protection” is the fig leaf for regulatory surrender. Jamaican justices shredded similar economic puffery as “sweeping generalisations” without data, demanding feasibility studies over aspiration. They defined a “healthy and productive environment” as sustainable development preserving natural capital – not exploitation excused by barrel-count fantasies.
𝗚𝘂𝘆𝗮𝗻𝗮 𝗶𝗻𝘃𝗲𝗿𝘁𝘀 𝘁𝗵𝗶𝘀. 𝗣𝗲𝗿𝗺𝗶𝘁𝘀 𝗽𝗿𝗲𝗰𝗲𝗱𝗲 𝗽𝗿𝗼𝗼𝗳; 𝗰𝗶𝘁𝗶𝘇𝗲𝗻𝘀 𝗹𝗶𝘁𝗶𝗴𝗮𝘁𝗲 𝗮𝗳𝘁𝗲𝗿 𝗳𝗮𝗰𝘁𝘀 𝗼𝗻 𝘁𝗵𝗲 𝗴𝗿𝗼𝘂𝗻𝗱; 𝗘𝘅𝘅𝗼𝗻 𝗲𝘅𝘁𝗿𝗮𝗰𝘁𝘀 𝘄𝗵𝗶𝗹𝗲 𝘁𝗵𝗲 𝗘𝗣𝗔 𝗽𝗹𝗮𝘆𝘀 𝘀𝗶𝗹𝗲𝗻𝘁 𝗽𝗮𝗿𝘁𝗻𝗲𝗿. 𝗪𝗵𝗲𝗻 𝗴𝗼𝘃𝗲𝗿𝗻𝗺𝗲𝗻𝘁 𝗷𝗼𝗶𝗻𝘀 𝗘𝘅𝘅𝗼𝗻 𝗮𝗴𝗮𝗶𝗻𝘀𝘁 𝗱𝗲𝗺𝗮𝗻𝗱𝘀 𝗳𝗼𝗿 𝘀𝗽𝗶𝗹𝗹 𝗶𝗻𝘀𝘂𝗿𝗮𝗻𝗰𝗲 𝗱𝗶𝘀𝗰𝗹𝗼𝘀𝘂𝗿𝗲, 𝗶𝘁’𝘀 𝗻𝗼𝘁 𝗱𝗲𝗳𝗲𝗻𝗱𝗶𝗻𝗴 𝘀𝗼𝘃𝗲𝗿𝗲𝗶𝗴𝗻𝘁𝘆 – 𝗶𝘁’𝘀 𝗮𝗱𝘃𝗲𝗿𝘁𝗶𝘀𝗶𝗻𝗴 𝗱𝗲𝗽𝗲𝗻𝗱𝗲𝗻𝗰𝘆. 𝗥𝗲𝘃𝗲𝗻𝘂𝗲 𝗱𝗼𝗲𝘀𝗻’𝘁 𝗺𝗮𝘁𝗲𝗿𝗶𝗮𝗹𝗶𝘇𝗲 𝗳𝗿𝗼𝗺 𝘀𝗽𝗶𝗹𝗹𝗲𝗱 𝗼𝗶𝗹 𝗰𝗹𝗲𝗮𝗻𝘂𝗽 𝗯𝗶𝗹𝗹𝘀 𝗼𝗿 𝘂𝗻𝗲𝗻𝗳𝗼𝗿𝗰𝗲𝗱 𝗽𝗲𝗿𝗺𝗶𝘁𝘀.
𝗖𝗼𝗻𝘀𝘁𝗶𝘁𝘂𝘁𝗶𝗼𝗻𝗮𝗹 𝗥𝗲𝗰𝗸𝗼𝗻𝗶𝗻𝗴 𝗢𝘃𝗲𝗿𝗱𝘂𝗲
Jamaica’s eight claimants – residents, farmers, biologist Wendy Lee – proved executive override breached their Charter right to “a healthy and productive environment free from environmental abuse.” The court agreed, nullifying the permit and barring mining. King’s Counsel Michael Hylton nailed it: ministers can differ from experts, but must show “a demonstrably better reason” and explain it publicly.
𝗚𝘂𝘆𝗮𝗻𝗮 𝗱𝗲𝘀𝗽𝗲𝗿𝗮𝘁𝗲𝗹𝘆 𝗻𝗲𝗲𝗱𝘀 𝘁𝗵𝗶𝘀 𝗱𝗶𝘀𝗰𝗶𝗽𝗹𝗶𝗻𝗲. 𝗡𝗮𝗴𝗲𝗲𝗿’𝘀 𝗳𝗶𝗴𝗵𝘁 𝗺𝗶𝗿𝗿𝗼𝗿𝘀 𝘁𝗵𝗲 𝗝𝗮𝗺𝗮𝗶𝗰𝗮𝗻 𝘀𝘂𝗰𝗰𝗲𝘀𝘀: 𝘄𝗵𝗲𝗻 𝗿𝗲𝗴𝘂𝗹𝗮𝘁𝗼𝗿𝘀 𝗳𝗮𝗶𝗹 𝗮𝗻𝗱 𝗲𝘅𝗲𝗰𝘂𝘁𝗶𝘃𝗲𝘀 𝗼𝘃𝗲𝗿𝗿𝗶𝗱𝗲 𝘄𝗶𝘁𝗵𝗼𝘂𝘁 𝗲𝘃𝗶𝗱𝗲𝗻𝗰𝗲, 𝗰𝗼𝗻𝘀𝘁𝗶𝘁𝘂𝘁𝗶𝗼𝗻𝗮𝗹 𝗲𝗻𝘃𝗶𝗿𝗼𝗻𝗺𝗲𝗻𝘁𝗮𝗹 𝗿𝗶𝗴𝗵𝘁𝘀 𝗯𝗲𝗰𝗼𝗺𝗲 𝗹𝗶𝘃𝗲 𝗰𝗹𝗮𝗶𝗺𝘀. 𝗧𝗵𝗲 𝗗𝗿𝘆 𝗛𝗮𝗿𝗯𝗼𝘂𝗿 𝗽𝗿𝗲𝗰𝗲𝗱𝗲𝗻𝘁 𝘀𝗰𝗿𝗲𝗮𝗺𝘀 𝘁𝗵𝗮𝘁 𝘁𝗲𝗰𝗵𝗻𝗶𝗰𝗮𝗹 𝗯𝗼𝗱𝗶𝗲𝘀 𝗮𝗿𝗲𝗻’𝘁 𝗱𝗲𝗰𝗼𝗿𝗮𝘁𝗶𝘃𝗲; 𝘁𝗵𝗲𝘆’𝗿𝗲 𝗰𝗼𝗻𝘀𝘁𝗶𝘁𝘂𝘁𝗶𝗼𝗻𝗮𝗹 𝗳𝗶𝗿𝗲𝘄𝗮𝗹𝗹𝘀 𝗮𝗴𝗮𝗶𝗻𝘀𝘁 𝗽𝗼𝗹𝗶𝘁𝗶𝗰𝗮𝗹 𝗲𝘅𝗽𝗲𝗱𝗶𝗲𝗻𝗰𝘆
𝗧𝗵𝗲 𝟱𝟵𝟮 𝗚𝘂𝗮𝗿𝗱𝗶𝗮𝗻’s 𝗖𝗵𝗮𝗿𝗴𝗲
Enough. Guyana’s government must internalize Jamaica’s lesson before another Liza-scale scandal forces judicial intervention. Ministerial overreach isn’t governance; it’s governance failure. Joining Exxon against citizens demanding basic compliance isn’t protecting revenue; it’s protecting impunity.
The choice is binary: adopt Jamaica’s evidentiary standard – justify overrides with data, not diktat – or watch courts eventually do it for you. Exxon isn’t Guyana’s benefactor; it’s a tenant with obligations. Time to evict the rubber stamp and restore the EPA as regulator, not enabler.
𝗧𝗵𝗲 𝟱𝟵𝟮 𝗚𝘂𝗮𝗿𝗱𝗶𝗮𝗻 𝗱𝗲𝗺𝗮𝗻𝗱𝘀:
Immediate EPA reform to insulate from ministerial fiat.
Full Exxon permit transparency, including all insurance and guarantees.
Legislation mirroring Jamaica’s standard: no override without public, evidence-based justification.
𝗗𝗲𝘃𝗲𝗹𝗼𝗽𝗺𝗲𝗻𝘁 𝘄𝗶𝘁𝗵𝗼𝘂𝘁 𝗱𝗶𝘀𝗰𝗶𝗽𝗹𝗶𝗻𝗲 𝗶𝘀 𝗽𝗹𝘂𝗻𝗱𝗲𝗿. 𝗚𝘂𝘆𝗮𝗻𝗮 𝗱𝗲𝘀𝗲𝗿𝘃𝗲𝘀 𝗯𝗲𝘁𝘁𝗲𝗿 𝘁𝗵𝗮𝗻 𝗘𝘅𝘅𝗼𝗻’𝘀 𝗽𝗿𝗼𝗰𝗲𝗱𝘂𝗿𝗮𝗹 𝘀𝗵𝗶𝗲𝗹𝗱. 𝗝𝗮𝗺𝗮𝗶𝗰𝗮 𝗷𝘂𝘀𝘁 𝘀𝗵𝗼𝘄𝗲𝗱 𝗵𝗼𝘄. 𝗪𝗶𝗹𝗹 𝘄𝗲 𝗹𝗲𝗮𝗿𝗻, 𝗼𝗿 𝗹𝗶𝘁𝗶𝗴𝗮𝘁𝗲 𝗶𝗻𝘁𝗼 𝗼𝗯𝗹𝗶𝘃𝗶𝗼𝗻?