Probe International home
Donate Now
Campaigns
Large Dams
   buttonThree Gorges
buttonChinese version of Three Gorges
buttonMekong
Financing Disaster
buttonFortis - Belize
   buttonEDC
buttonCIDA
buttonADB
buttonWorld Bank
Odious Debts
Mining


Newsletters
   buttonPI in the News
buttonProbe Alert
buttonCampaign letters
buttonThree Gorges Probe
 News Releases
 Books & Reports
 Take Action
 Search
 About Us
 Links
 Big dams
 Cambodia
 China
 Who Funds Us
 Multimedia Gallery
 Login

Belize dam trial: Victory, what victory?   by Gráinne Ryder
True, Fortis narrowly escaped an injunction to stop construction of the Chalillo dam. Three out of five judges decided the Belizean government's environmental approval of the dam was not illegal, just flawed. February 11/2004

Welcome!

You have requested a document that resides in the member content of Probe International, part of the Probe family of websites. We operate one of the world's largest group of environmental and consumer websites.

To access our archives we ask that you register with us (this is a one-time only registration, following which you will have unlimited access to our member content).

If you have already registered, please login.

If you would like to register, and obtain the document you requested, please select the appropriate category:

We welcome your feedback. Email us at FeedbackWelcome@probeinternational.org.

The following text excludes some non-indexable words. For the full text, please register.

When Britain’s Privy Council ruled last month Canadian-backed Chalillo dam Belize should go ahead, Fortis CEO Stanley Marshall declared victory company people Belize. ("Environmentalists lose battle stop Canadian dam Belize," January 29, 2004, www.cbc.ca)

Victory, what victory? True, Fortis narrowly escaped an injunction stop construction Chalillo dam. Three out five judges decided Belizean government's environmental approval dam not illegal, just flawed.

But two out five judges wanted project stopped. They said dam's environmental impact assessment, which paid Canadian International Development Agency, failed comply with Belize’s Environmental Protection Act, "so flawed important errors about geology site" unacceptable. They said "Belize has enacted comprehensive legislation environmental protection direct foreign investment, if has serious environmental implications, must comply with legislation. rule law must not sacrificed foreign investment, however desirable."

Even more disturbing, dissent noted Fortis’ failure disclose "highly relevant" information Belizean courts confirming its consultants, Toronto firm AMEC, had made serious error would require changes dam’s design.

"Not even most protracted determined paper chase could have got true facts" case, wrote dissenting Judge Lord Walker. One report kept under wraps nearly two years, until just days before Privy Council's final hearing, warned Chalillo reservoir could "leak like sieve" due presence karst limestone. report two consulting geologists pointed "disastrous history dam building" under similar conditions neighbouring Guatemala.

Fortis failed inform Belizeans about these risks how affects public safety dam's final costs. One thing certain court documents: Belizeans, not Fortis, are on hook if anything goes wrong. Back 2001, Fortis signed an agreement with Belizean government protects company liability event dam fails reservoir leaks construction costs double.

Even best-case scenario, Belizeans will paying almost twice market rate Chalillo's output, losing one country's prime tourist attractions. One four people Belize earn their living nature-based tourism, country's leading industry.

That's victory Belizeans. That's tunnel vision monopoly abuse Canadian power company.

Gráinne Ryder Policy Director Probe International.

To read the full text of this item, please login or register above.