Troy Thomas and Quadad DeFreitas v Attorney-General of Guyana and Esso Exploration and Production Guyana Ltd., 2021
Date filed: 21st May 2021
Status: in the High Court
The Legal Claims: This case could stop around five gigatons of greenhouse gas pollution! It is widely regarded as the biggest climate change case in the world. However, this case goes to the heart of the problem by identifying greenhouse gas pollution as the cause of global overheating and ocean acidification.
Article 149J(1) of the Constitution states that everyone has the right to an environment that is not harmful to his or her health or well-being.
Article 149J(2) requires the State to protect the environment, for the benefit of present and future generations, through reasonable legislative and other measures designed to prevent pollution and ecological degradation, promote conservation, and secure sustainable development and use of natural resources while promoting justifiable economic and social development.
Dr Thomas and Mr DeFreitas claim that by authorising oil and gas extraction and production, the Government of Guyana is violating their right to a healthy environment as guaranteed by the Constitution.
They ask for declarations, including declarations that greenhouse gas pollution from oil production violates their constitutional right to a healthy environment.
The Story of the Case:
The case was filed in May 2021 as a Fixed Date Application which is the procedure used when there is no dispute on evidence.
The assumption was that there can be no real dispute that burning fossil fuels emits greenhouse gas pollution which then causes climate change, ocean acidification and other harmful impacts which make the environment harmful to human health and wellbeing.
The case was allocated to Justice Franklyn Holder. On 27th September 2021 the judge converted the case to a Statement of Case which requires the litigants to produce evidence of the impacts of greenhouse gas pollution as in the Affidavit of Witness Statement.
The judge also added Esso Exploration and Production Guyana Ltd. (Esso) as an Added Respondent, despite the fact that the litigants cannot enforce any constitutional rights against Esso. (See flysheet). The judge has since retired.
Both the Attorney-General and Esso have filed defences and both have applied to strike out the case on the grounds of lack of evidence.