PORTMORE RESIDENTS challenging the Portmore leg of Highway 2000 will know on Tuesday if they will be able to use the Portmore Causeway as an alternative route.
Miss Justice Gloria Smith, after hearing legal arguments yesterday, reserved her decision.
The Portmore Citizens Advisory Council and the Portmore Joint Citizens Association brought a motion in the Judicial Review Court contending that the Minister of Transport and Works breached the Toll Roads Act because the alternative route must be established within the vicinity of the toll road .
UNLAWFUL DESIGNATION
Lord Anthony Gifford, Q.C. argued on behalf of the associations that the Mandela Highway was designated as the alternative route and since it was not in the area where the toll road was, the designation was unlawful.
The claimants are seeking to quash the Toll Roads ( Designation of Highway 2000 Phase 1) Order 2002, and are seeking a declaration that the Mandela Highway, which is
designated as the alternative route, is not a lawful route.
Michael Hylton Q.C., the Solicitor General who is representing the government, asked the judge to dismiss the motion brought by the associations. He argued that there had been considerable delay in the commencement of the proceedings because the Order came into effect on April 8, 2002, and the claimants did not bring the motion until this year.
He said because of the delay, any relief granted by the court would cause prejudice to the rights of other parties and be detrimental to good administration. He has asked the court to find that the Minister of Transport and Works did not act perversely or illegally in exercising the discretion given to him by the statute.
Mr. Hylton said that the claimants were contending that it was only since July 2004 that they were aware that the Mandela Highway was going to be the alternative route but he asked the court to find that their evidence was not credible.
REPLACING THE ROAD
Mr. Hylton referred to numerous newspaper reports from 1995 to October 2002 in which it was clearly stated in the articles that the existing road would not remain but would be replaced by the new toll road. He said the toll road was being built six feet above the bridge and referred to environmental hazards why the bridge had to be demolished.
He said that for various reasons, the alternative route could not be built in close proximity to the toll road and emphasised that there was nothing in the statute that the alternative route must be adjacent to the toll road.
Evidence was produced by way of a satellite photograph and a laser pointer which was used to indicate why it was not feasible to build the alternative route adjacent the highway. The map also included travel time on both routes and in some instances showed less travel time on the proposed alternative route.
INFRASTRUCTURE WORK
He disclosed that between July 2002 and March 2005 Trans Jamaica Highway Ltd. (TJH) had spent US$62 million on infrastructure work on the Portmore leg of Highway 2000. He said another US$2.8 million was spent on the Dyke Road which was part of the alternative route.
Mr. Hylton argued that if the claimants were to get the orders they were seeking to quash the Minister's order and the government was prohibited from making any toll road for that area, it would have the effect of undermining the commercial arrangements between TJH and the National Road Operating and Construction Company Ltd (NROCC.) He said should TJH be unable to implement the toll then such a loss would have to be compensated for by the government.
