FFOS lawsuit thrown out

JADA LOUTOO

Work on the Churchill Roosevelt Highway extension to Manzanilla can resume after a High Court judge yesterday dismissed a lawsuit by the Fishermen and Friends of the Sea (FFOS) and discharged the injunction which halted work on the project.

In a ruling at the Hall of Justice in Port of Spain, Justice Kevin Ramcharan dismissed the FFOS’ legal challenge of a decision by the Environmental Management Authority (EMA) to issue a certificate of environmental clearance (CEC) for the highway extension. As he threw out all 14 grounds of contention raised by FFOS, Ramcharan also ruled the suit was filed outside of the three-month limit for bringing such challenges.

He also said he was not satisfied that the FFOS raised arguable grounds which had a realistic prospect of success, if taken to trial. According to Ramcharan, the EMA was established by Parliament to regulate and control infrastructure development in the country to mitigate damage to the environment. In his ruling, he said the FFOS advanced no evidence in support of its claim that the highway construction threatens the Aripo Savannas - an EMA designated environmentally sensitive area (ESA). Senior Counsel Anand Ramlogan, who leads a team of lawyers for the environmental lobby group, has already appealed yesterday’s ruling and a hearing is expected today.

FFOS secretary Gary Aboud, speaking after the court’s ruling, said the group “respectfully disagreed” with the judge. He is hopeful the Appeal Court would reverse Justice Ramcharan’s decision as, the FFOS’ fight is for, “the public good.”

In its lawsuit, FFOS contended the CEC was “unreasonable, illegal, procedurally improper, irrational, null and void and of no effect.” Attorneys for the Ministry of Works and Transport and the National Infrastructure Development Company (Nidco) argued that for every week the project is delayed, it costs taxpayers $10 million.

The EMA’s attorneys argued that the FFOS’ application for judicial review should be denied since there was no evidence to support its claims of an inadequate consultation process, failure to recognise the savannas’ status as an environmentally sensitive area and that the construction encroached on the stipulated buffer zone, among others.

The EMA’s lead attorney, Deborah Peake argued that the FFOS chose not to participate in the public consultations, and provided no justification for the delay in bringing their challenge to the CEC approval. She said the leisurely approach of the FFOS in coming to the court for relief was detrimental to the public’s interest.