In a major court room battle that started in September 2010, Madang National Court Judge, David Cannings has handed down a decision allowing Ramu Nickel to dump toxic mine tailings into the sea.
On behalf of 1040 plaintiffs, Louis Medaing and 10 others sought to prevent Ramu Nickel from causing public or private nuisance through their deep sea tailings placements (DSTP) system. They also sought to highlight that the Environment Act of the Papua New Guinea and the Constitution will be breached.
The judge highlighted that the National Goals and Directive Principles are the core values and proclaimed aims of the people of Papua New Guinea. He said they cannot be ignored.
He said, the DSTP has been and will be contrary to National Goal No.4. It amounts to an abuse and depletion of Papua New Guinea's natural resources and environment - not their conservation - for the collective benefit of the people of Papua New Guinea and for the benefit of the future generations, he said.
Further, the judge said, DSTP constitutes an unwise use of our natural resources and environment, particularly in and on the sea bed and in the sea. It amounts to a breach of our duty of trust for future generations for this to happen. It is a course of action that shows deafness to the call of the people through the Directive Principle to conserve and replenish our sacred and scenic marine environment in Astrolabe Bay.
The judge also held that the operation of the DSTP will interfere with the people's use and enjoyment of their customary land including the sea. He also held that there will be likely serious environmental harm to the Astrolabe Bay and the plaintiffs are coastal people who depend on the sea for maintenance of their livelihood and way of life. And yes, the operation of the DSTP is unlawful, unwarranted and unreasonable.
However, having said all these it came down to the question of costs and investor confidence. The judge had to rule in favour of the corporate world over the thousands of people whose lives depend on the sea.
- rait man's blog
- Log in to post comments
Comments
Where is PNG heading to, when the only and final institution to
Where is PNG heading to, when the only and final institution to abide by the laws of the nation has breach the fundermental laws for the sake of wealth and development. Once democratic nation that stood by the word People Power has now been ruled by unseen forces.
I posted this comment in the Facebook forum "Sharp Talk" but
I posted this comment in the Facebook forum "Sharp Talk" but also wanted to show my disappointment here on ACT NOW PNG about the ruling:
I think the Cannings decision is deplorable. Because it does not allow for long term protection of the majority of our human society. It is a decision that could be excused if it had taken place fifteen years earlier when society across the entire planet was still unaware of the irresponsibility of corporate practice and the way they weaken governments all over the globe.
Cannings could have made his decision a turning point against the tide of predatory capitalism. He could have made himself the steward of human survival. Instead his decision reeks of weak indecisive courtroom lawmaking - a decision that does -not at all -lay a proper foundation for human comfort, safety and confidence in our systems of law.
In short, the decision looks like a display of negligence of moral and ethical responsibility by a court of the land.
Justice is ideally timeless. Court decisions are supposed to demonstrate due consideration. What kind of due consideration did Cannings display? For whom?
The decision does not take into greater account the vast majority of the poorer and often illiterate members of our society. The laws of the land should favour the helpless especially when they have won a court battle. Now people who clearly struggle to fund each step of the court process have to raise an appeal to a higher court. Is the system hoping that the fears and claims of people for their living environment might just wither on the vine?