Judgment pending on proposed rainforest dam in Belize

By Other News Sources on December 5, 2003 • ( Leave a comment )

The Coalition to Save the Macal River Valley
December 5, 2003

Lawsuit exposes concealment of key safety information by Belize government and Canadian company.

London: Hearings before the Privy Council
of London came to a close yesterday in the lawsuit against the
environmental approval of the Chalillo hydro-electric dam in Belize,
proposed by Newfoundland-based Fortis, Inc.

While the outcome is uncertain, it was clear that the judges were
troubled that the project was approved with key issues still
unresolved. The judges also criticized the government for its failure
to reveal key documents on the economics and safety of the project.
However, the court will also consider a plea from Belize’s Attorney
General to let the project go forward despite these concerns, because
of the size of the project and the fact the company had already
invested millions of dollars in it.

The court may decide on the case as early as December 25, though it may take considerably longer.

This was the first environmental lawsuit to reach the Privy Council of
England, and in two days of hearings, the courtroom was treated to
fireworks rarely seen at these levels of the legal system. It was also
the first challenge to a major decision of the government of Belize,
and many in Belize are hoping this case will make the government more
accountable.

The case already achieved a victory for justice when the government was
forced to repeal an unconstitutional law which purported to ensure the
construction of the dam “notwithstanding” the decision of any court.
The law was repealed just in time for the first day of hearings in this
case, in response to a strong warning from the Privy Council this
August. The government has also been forced to reveal key documents,
including the geology study, that Belizean communities downstream from
the proposed dam had requested for more than a year.

In addition, the hearing helped place the dam project on trial in the
court of public opinion worldwide: many of the top Canadian newspapers
featured the campaign, it was the lead story on the national CBC
afternoon and evening news programs, and it was reported on BBC World
Service. Below is a partial list of the articles on this case, and a
copy of an editorial by Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. appeared in the Toronto
Star.

Also, hundreds of people joined the petition on the StopFortis Web site (www.stopfortis.org), which now features 8,000 signatures. You can also take action at www.savebiogems.org/macal.

First day: Concealment of geological report on dam foundations

The first day of hearings was dedicated to an expos√© of how the
government and Fortis covered up a key report which showed that their
assessment of the geological foundations of the dam site were wrong.
The report, commissioned by Belize’s technical committee in February
2002 and completed in May 2002, had been requested for a year and a
half by environmental groups and communities downstream of the dam, but
was only released last week by lawyers for the government. The report
demonstrated major flaws in the company’s original assessment of the
proposed foundations of the dam including:

An incorrect claim that the dam site was made of granite (in fact it is made of sandstones and weak shales);

A map in which the company removed a fault line just upstream of the dam site; and

The potential for the proposed dam reservoir to “leak like a sieve” because of limestone caves upstream;

The concern that this project would be like the “disastrous” dam projects in Guatemala, built in the same limestone system.The judges expressed strong dissatisfaction for the way the government
and company had concealed information and had to have it “squeezed out
in dribs and drabs.” Counsel for the Belizean groups argued that
earlier decision if the report had been released earlier, it could have
made a difference in the court decisions in Belize that preceded this
one, and may have convinced the Privy Coucil to grant an injunction in
May.

BACONGO also argued that the government decided to build the dam
without having critical information on whether the dam would cause the
endangered scarlet macaw to go extinct in Belize, and what important
Maya archaeological sites in the region would be flooded by the
project.

Second day: Belize government pleas to allow construction to continue-even if approval was illegal

Belize’s Attorney General joined the government’s counsel, Edward
Fitzgerald (known in the UK for defending death row prisoners before
the Privy Council) in a plea to the court not to overturn the decision
to build the dam even if the approval process was illegal. Earlier, the
judges had questioned Fortis’ attorney, Rabinder Singh, on the
extraordinarily favorable terms Belize gave to Fortis (including
guarantees of high rates of return for 50 years, tax-free status, and
guarantees that the government would waive any laws to accommodate the
company). The Attorney General responded that Belize needed to give
such favorable contracts to foreign companies to attract foreign
investment. Belizeans in the courtroom cringed, knowing the history of
corruption in the country.

The Attorney General also argued that the dam would make Belize “energy
independent,” and cited inflated figures for the amount of electricity
the dam would produce.

The government of Belize’s optimistic claims for the Mollejon dam,
located downstream of the proposed dam, never materialized. That dam
produces only three-quarters the electricity its proponents had said it
would, and is now the major reason for the high rates of electricity in
Belize-the highest of any country in Central America. BACONGO’s
attorney, Richard Clayton, pointed out that the dam would only produce
5 MW of electricity, enough to power three medium-sized hotels, and
less than one year’s growth in Belize’s energy needs.

The government also argued that the flaws in the assessment of the
dam’s foundations were not important, and that granite and sandstone
were made of the same material-and therefore essentially the same.
Evidence in the court showed that this was like claiming that diamonds
and coal, or water and ice are “essentially the same” because their
composition is identical. BACONGO also argued that a change in dam
foundations requires a change in dam design. The difference in dam
foundations could add to the costs, and undermine the safety of the
project.

Demanding justice from Fortis and the Belizean government

The Coalition to Save the Macal River Valley will continue to demand
accountability from Fortis and the government, through full public
disclosure and debate. The Coalition will seek to obtain secret
contracts and documents about this project which the government and
Fortis are still keeping from people of Belize. The Privy Council has
helped bring out much of the truth about this project. Full disclosure
will show how unsafe, uneconomic and environmentally damaging this
project is, and the people of Belize will reject it.