Angore’s four clans challenge Petroleum Minister’s decision on PDL8 beneficiaries
News that matter in Papua New Guinea
Angore
landowners burn down LNG machinery at PDL8 in PNG.
Image for illustration
only. For image info, go to https://mine.onepng.com/2018/06/angore-landowners-burn-down-lng.html
Angore’s four clans challenge
Petroleum Minister’s decision on PDL8 beneficiaries
PORT MORESBY: Landowners of four clans in Angore have
filed an application with the National Court challenging a March 30 decision by
Petroleum Minister Kerenga Kua on the identification of beneficiary clans.
The landowners are from
the Petroleum Development Licence Eight (PDL8).
The court proceedings were reported by The National:
Four clans challenging
decision
July 21, 2022The
NationalNational
LANDOWNERS of four clans in Angore have filed
an application in the National Court challenging a March 30 decision by
Petroleum Minister Kerenga Kua on the identification of beneficiary clans.
The landowners were from the the four clans of the Petroleum Development
Licence Eight (PDL 8).
They were represented by Hari John Akipe, chairman of Halepura clan; John Poi,
chairman of Tope clan; Hamiya Jula, chairman of Jaluma clan; and, Philip
Pokopi, chairman of the Tapu Yalo clan.
Lawyer Judy Nandape appeared before Judge Oagile Key Dingake at the Waigani
National Court on Tuesday to seek leave to apply for a judicial review of Kua’s
decision.
The PDL 8 clans wanted a review of a decision contained in the Ministerial
Determination which was published in the National Gazette on March 30.
This was in relation to the identification of the beneficiary clans in the
Papua New Guinea Liquefied Natural Gas (PNG LNG) project impact areas of Angore
Wellhead Block 1715 PDL 8, in Tari-Pori, Hela.
Petroleum secretary David Manau, Kua and the State were named as defendants.
Judge Dingake noted that there was no representation by the State and queried
that.
“Why do you want to go ahead with hearing when proper service had not been
effected?” Judge Dingake said. “You have a duty as a counsel not to push
anything.
“You have not complied with service of notice.”
The court then ordered the plaintiffs to ensure that the notice of hearing of
the leave application was properly filed and served on the State immediately.
Judge Dingake also fixed Friday 22 as the date for the matter to return to
court for a hearing.
Comments
Post a Comment