Fuller five-member senior bench in SC to hear cases against Adani wind power today

The Chief Justice has constituted a fuller bench in the Supreme Court to hear the on-going cases against the Indian giant Adani’s wind power projects in Sri Lanka.

This was following a request by the President Counsel Romes De Silva-led legal team representing Adani Power. 

In the motion they also requested that the bench be constituted by the most senior judges of the Supreme Court. 

One of the petitioners, Wildlife Nature Protection Society (WNPS) filed its objections to that application. However, the Chief Justice has constituted a full bench comprising judges are S. Thurairaja PC, A.H.M.D. Nawaz, A.L. Shiran Gooneratne, Achala Wengapulli and Mahinda Samayawardhena. 

Others such as Dr. Rohan Pethiyagoda and some scientists have filed several cases. These cases were taken up for support on 18 June and all respondents moved to file objections. The cases come for hearing today.

WNPS filed case No. SCFR 125/2024 in Supreme Court challenging the Cabinet decision announced on 6 May 2024 wherein it was announced that the Cabinet as far back as 7 March 2022 had granted approval to enter into a MOU with the Adani group to develop the Mannar wind farm. The Cabinet decision further announced that spinal had been granted to award the tender to Adani group and for GOSL to enter into a PPA to purchase wind power from Adani at $ cents 8.26 per KW unit for the next 20 years. 

WNPS challenged the decision on several bases including the following: The flawed procedure – the decision is based on an unsolicited proposal not post competitive process; ⁠The project, if allowed to proceed will lead to irreparable ecological devastation not only to Sri Lanka but to the entire global humanity as the project site lies directly in the path of the Central Asian Flyway, one of the key migratory bird passages in the world through which over 15 million birds fly every year, including critically endangered birds; 

Additionally, it was alleged that the Environmental Impact Assessment Report submitted to clear the project is not credible and full of contradictions and inaccuracies. ⁠The EIA itself identifies three other alternative locations which are far more suitable for a wind farm in terms of less ecological devastation. So, what is the rationale to select Mannar which is the least suitable. 

⁠The price that the cabinet has approved for power purchase $ cents 8.26 is almost double the cost offered by local companies for the recently tendered 50 MW wind farms. In fact, Saudi just entered into a contract with a Japanese consortium to buy wind power at $ cents 1 etc., hence the country will pay to Adani for the country’s own wind power generated in Sri Lanka is exorbitant.