decision

Mayur Renewables V Mirisim [2024] PGNC 7 - decision

Litigation

Sabin

Filing Year For Action

The Plaintiff is Mayur Renewables, a company intent on developing renewable energy in Papua New Guinea. The Defendants were Minister Mirisim (current Minister for Forests), Faith Barton (Chairperson of the National Forest Board) and the Papua New Guinea Forest Authority.  In January of 2022, Mayur Renewables were granted permits to conduct carbon offset projects in the Western province of Papua New Guinea by then Minister for Forests Minister Schnaubelt. In May of 2022, the new Minister for Forests, Minister Mirisim, cancelled (or attempted to) cancel the permits granted to Mayur Renewables. The Plaintiff therefore sought, among other reliefs, an order quashing Minister Mirisim’s decision to cancel the permits. The Court granted an order quashing Minister Mirisim’s decision to cancel the Plaintiff’s permits on the following grounds. 

The Defendant argued that the Forestry Act, the Act empowering ministers to grant permits for forest-related projects, contained no provision for the grant of forest carbon concession trading permits. The Court ruled that this justification was a mere afterthought as such a reason was not given at the time the permits were cancelled and therefore fell foul of the duty to give reasons at the time of pronouncing the decision enshrined in Papua New Guinea’s law. The Court also opined that the decision to grant the permits in the first place was well founded because such a decision took account of and was in line with the need for urgent actions to be taken to prevent further deforestation and to deal with the climate change emergency. Such an argument was further supplemented by the preamble of the Forestry Act 1991 referring to conserving the Nation’s forest resources. The Court viewed this objective as the most important one stated in the Act, especially in light of the UN’s proclamation that climate change requires drastic action and is the defining issue of our time.

Moreover, the Court ruled that the decision to cancel the permits was Wednesbury unreasonable due to, among other things, the carbon offset scheme being calculated to sustainably manage the forest in light of the climate emergency. This emergency calls for urgent and immediate steps and the cancellation would serve as a retrograde step in the fight against climate change. In support of this proposition the Court cites the first 5 principles in the IUCN World Declaration on the Environmental Rule of Law and suggests that the previous decision to grant the permits were more in line with such principles.

The Court also found that Minister Mirisim failed to follow the proper process for cancelling the permits such that he failed to consider the serious climate related challenges being faced globally as well as Papua New Guinea’s international and domestic obligations (eg. the Paris Agreement) in resepct of the climate change risks currently being faced.

Furthermore, the Court further found that Minister Mirisim’s decision was vitiated by bias due to his bias toward logging and against carbon offsetting projects. This was evidenced by his cancellation of the permits without due process, his reasoning for the cancellation being given as afterthoughts long after the cancellation and his general pro logging bias.

Therefore, the Court granted an order for certiorari quashing Minister Mirisim’s decision to cancel the Plaintiff’s permits and also ordered a permanent injunction preventing the Defendants from cancelling the Plaintiff’s permits (except in very specific instances) or taking any other action that will seriously affect the Plaintiff’s implementation of its projects. The Court also reiterated restraining orders it made in previous rulings, such as in Robin Kami V Aset Meriah, wherein an immediate ban was ordered on the further grant of Timber permits and logging in Timber Rights Purchase Areas until the relevant authorities fully comply with the various orders of the Court including but not limited to providing detailed reports of all logging and climate changing activity (which as yet has not been complied with).