Lack of Concern on Environmental Security
Trinidad and Tobago as a developing nation seeking developed world status by 2020, has been
propelled by the revenue obtained through international trade in the energy sector. This foreign
direct investment has contributed to a pace of development that has left sustainability measures
ample room for progress. The issue therefore becomes one of sustainable development and to
what extent are the voices of the public are heard in determining the level of sustainability.
Societal concerns and issues raised about these international corporations are left unaddressed or
measures are too lengthy for immediate resolution. One such example is seen in The Southwest
Tobago Fishing Association Ltd. v. The A.G of Trinidad & Tobago; Tobago House of
Assembly; The Environmental Management Authority and Petroleum Geo-Services Limited,72
the Claimant sought an injunction against Petroleum Geo-Service Ltd, restraining it from the
conduct of seismic surveys in traditional fishing grounds. The Claimant’s case is based on a
breach by PGS Ltd. of a condition in their CEC; the failure of the Authority to properly monitor
the licensed activities of PGS Ltd. and the negligence of the State and the THA in allowing the
licensing of such activity.
Enabling Judicial Scrutiny of Environmental Decisions: Public Interest Litigation
The ability to engage in judicial contest is a strategy to ensure that environmental decisionmaking properly considers issues that are important to the public. A necessary element in
environmental democracy is the ability to engage in judicial contest since challenging the State is
often undertaken by NGOs on behalf of members of the public. The origin of public interest
litigation can be found in Section 5 of the Judicial Review Act, No. 60 of 2000 (JR Act). The JR
Act, by virtue of Section 5(2) b, has been ratified so far in three environmental matters by civil
society, namely the bpTT case, the ALNG case and the ALUTRINT case. Public interest
litigation has not been extensively used since the passage of the JR Act, and perhaps it has
become disreputable for its use in challenging the environmental decision-making process.
72
HC Deb 29 July 2008
51