NASSAU, BAHAMAS – We are facing an extraordinarily important moment in judicial history in The Bahamas as we await a decision on the trial of allegations in the Yntegra group’s Rosewood Exuma project.
As former Minister of the Environment, Romauld Ferreira, put it in the Supreme Court last week: “A lot is at stake…a great deal of what will be considered in this case sets the stage for what’s to come for future development in the country.”
In the trial of the judicial review of government approvals given to Yntegra for their Rosewood Exuma resort this week, we’ve heard technical arguments about failure to make key environmental documents like Yntegra’s Environmental Impact Assessment and Environmental Management Plan available to the public, failure of key documents to assess some of the most controversial aspects of the project, an unlawful consultation process, and a failure to conduct further consultation following major changes to the development.
Lawyers for Turtlegrass described how there was a “salami slicing” of the project into chunks as a way to circumvent the approvals process and disguise its full impact from public scrutiny. Only certain portions came before the public and key stakeholders like Turtlegrass and Over Yonder Cay for scrutiny, while some of the most controversial aspects did not. This is particularly problematic given what is at stake – the dredging of a
beautiful Exuma bay, the North Bay, to transform it into an industrial shipping channel, complete with an enormous seawall, dock, back-of-house facilities and other industrial infrastructure.
It is unfortunate that it has had to come to this – an expensive judicial review process that calls out the government for falling down on its duties to protect the environment and follow the law – but it is important and the broader implications should not be overlooked. When Justice Leif Farquharson rules on this case, he’ll set a precedent that could echo in The Bahamas for years to come, one that answers the question: are the 2019 environmental laws that Ferreira took to parliament after many years of advocacy by environmentalists toothless tigers that are just for decoration – or are they capable of protecting the environment that we all depend on and the rights of those affected by projects to have a genuine say in them?
What is curious is that at the same time as these points are being raised in court as part of the judicial review, we are seeing personal attacks about Bob Coughlin – the person spearheading this legal action and test of environmental laws – by online trolls. Coughlin, an Exuma resident for almost a decade, has long been established as an environmental advocate and a passionate philanthropist – one who has donated almost
$4 million to causes in The Bahamas since 2018, including millions to the organisation I once led, the Bahamas National Trust.
For reasons one can only speculate about, these trolls have been trying to make out all sorts of absurd things: that his legal action in support of environmental protection is a petty dispute born out of fears of competition. That Coughlin no longer even wants to pursue his eco-tourism project, when the reality is that he was forced to put it on hold because of the destructive environmental plans that are in dispute. That he is the only one who has an issue with this Rosewood Exuma resort, when in fact, neighbouring resort, Over Yonder Cay – one of the top rated resorts in the Caribbean – as well as the Save Exuma Alliance – consisting of most of the local islands and businesses in the Exuma area, and thousands of petition signers have expressed their concern with the project – over 9,000 to date. Most ironically, they claim, wrongly, that Coughlin received crown land for personal use, when in fact it is Yntegra who received crown land while having no development track record, when Coughlin instead bought his lease on Sampson Cay from a private owner.
The timing of these claims, in the week of the trial, suggest a patronising and cynical attempt to distract from the gravity of the case being heard, what it represents, and how important this decision is. With their simplistic, jingoistic and factually-dubious references to crown land, white foreigners, and the like – it’s not hard to imagine that those involved are engaged in a ploy to push the buttons of Bahamians who they apparently believe can be too easily distracted into ignoring the real issue here: that the government, has – in the words of those in the Supreme Court this week – “run roughshod” over environmental laws with its approvals for Yntegra’s Rosewood Exuma project and that this is truly a landmark case and the decision will have a long-lasting impact on future development. This is at a time when foreign direct investment (FDI) inflows into the Bahamian economy are forecast to increase by as much as two thirds over the next two years, according to the Inter-American Development Bank (IDB).So I call on my fellow Bahamians to stay focused. This is not a story about one man – it is a story about the future we want for our country and whether we are willing to sacrifice our ability to demand environmental accountability in all developments moving
forward. There is too much at stake to be thrown off the track by trolls.
As Ferreira says of the judicial review that now awaits Justice Leif Farquharson’s judgement: “This is the first set of litigation, serious litigation, that takes a deep dive into the Environmental Planning and Protection Act and the environmental impact assessment regulations…There’s a lot at stake here.”
-By Eric Carey, ONE Consultants, former Executive Director of the Bahamas National Trust.