EPA must ensure oil exploration permits comply with new 2025 Oil Spill Bill – VP

…financial assurances must now align with new legal standards, says official

Vice President Bharrat Jagdeo has issued a clear directive to the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), emphasizing that all new oil exploration permits must fully comply with the recently passed Oil Pollution Prevention, Preparedness, Response and Responsibility Bill 2025.
Central to this compliance, he stressed, is the requirement that financial assurances provided by oil companies must now reflect the full extent of their legal liabilities under the new legislation.
The sweeping piece of legislation mandates strict oil spill prevention, emergency response protocols, and clear accountability for polluters, in alignment with international conventions like the International Convention on Oil Pollution Preparedness, Response and Cooperation (OPRC).
The Opposition has refused to back the Bill.
Additionally, the Bill will play a pivotal role in safeguarding Guyana’s environment, affirming the government’s long-term commitment to responsible resource management and environmental protection.
“So entirely clear, now with the new law in place; the way I see it is that permits from the EPA would have to ensure that they are responsible and the financial assurances they give must be consistent. They’re responsible for all, first of all, they’re responsible for all of the damages caused. That is the clean-up cost of the damage caused from a potential oil spill and two for consequential losses.
“So, the EPA, the new permits from the EPA, must seek a financial assurance that would ensure that all of their potential liabilities are covered,” the Vice President said.
The new law, which is seen as a landmark in strengthening Guyana’s regulatory oversight of the oil and gas sector, mandates that all operators must be financially prepared to manage the environmental fallout from oil spills. This represents a shift from previous regimes, under which critics often cited insufficient safeguards and unclear liability standards.
Jagdeo explained that with this legislation now in force, EPA-issued permits must reflect the law’s provisions, ensuring that the oil operators’ liability is not just theoretical but financially secured.
The Vice President also pointed out that while the law governs Guyana’s territory, it has broader implications.
“We legislate for the state of Guyana. They have to provide financial assurances consistent with that new law or their liabilities under the new law… So, I suspect if you’re talking about like Trinidad and Tobago, I don’t think they’ll legislate for Guyana when they look at oil spills, etc. They can sue the company too. They can sue the company,” he explained.
The passage of the 2025 Oil Spill Bill has been hailed by government officials and civil society alike as a vital step toward ensuring Guyana’s burgeoning oil sector does not jeopardize the environment or economy through insufficient oversight.
Earlier in the month, Jagdeo reiterated that the bill offers broad and explicit legal protections to Guyanese citizens, especially fisherfolk and business owners, ensuring that they are fully compensated in the event of an oil spill, whether from a rig or a vessel transporting fuel.
“The liabilities for damages under section 17 includes damages resulting from the unauthorized discharge of oil from a vessel or facility, including a damage to real or personal property and economic losses resulting therefrom. So, that means if our fishermen, etc., suffer losses or any economic losses from any other parties, the company that’s responsible for the spill is liable for that.
“So, in the past, we could have only gone after the oil companies. Now, we have expanded the vessels transporting fuel through our territory. So if you have a spill caused by an oil rig, they’re liable now,” the Vice President explained.
Further, Jagdeo emphasized that companies responsible for such spills will now be legally liable for the full cost of clean-up and all resulting damages, ending the previous ambiguity which allowed companies to claim responsibility only for environmental clean-up, while avoiding payouts for broader economic losses.
Importantly, Clause 21 of the bill prevents companies from transferring liability to third parties.
“Clause 21 reads:  an indemnification of any like agreement shall be invalid for the purpose of transferring the liability of a responsible party under this Act…
“So, if you’re the party responsible for the spill, you can’t go and sign an agreement or say, I have an agreement with someone else and transfer that liability. You’re responsible for it. You can’t transfer the liability. It has absolutely nothing to do with the parent guarantee, that indemnification,” he said.
This financial assurance, detailed on page 19 of the Bill, must meet the requirements of both the Petroleum Activities Act and the Environmental Protection Act, and must cover full liability in the event of an incident. Where a company’s own assets are insufficient to cover potential damages, it must secure a guarantee from its parent company to meet these obligations.