IN THE ENVIRONMENT AND LAND USE APPEAL TRIBUNAL {Application under Section 4 of the Environmental and Land Use Appeal Tribunal Act 2012) In the matter of: 1. David SAUVAGE 2. Stephan GUA 8. Kugan PARAPEN, APPLICANTS, ws New Mauritius Hotels Limited. 2. Les Salines Golf & Resort Limited. RESPONDENTS In the presence of: 1. The Minister of Social Security, National Solidarity, and Environment and Sustainable Development (Environment and Sustainable Development Division), The Honourable Marie Joseph Noél Etienne Ghislain SINATAMBOU, of Ken Lee Tower, Cnr Barracks & St Georges Streets, Port-Louis. 2. Ministry of Social Security, National Solidarity, and Environment and Sustainable Development (Environment and Sustainable Development Division). 3. The istry of Agro-Industry and Food Security. CO-RESPONDENTS |, Jean-Marie David Sauvage, a Software Engineer, of Mother Courage Centre, Bois Cheri Road, Moka and holder of Mauritian Passport bearing No. 1406719, MAKE OATH AND SAY THAT: 4. lam the Applicant No.1 in the above matter and | have been duly authorised to swear the present affidavit on behalf of Applicants No.2 and 3. #2, Ihave taken due cognisance of the affidavit sworn by the Co-Respondents No. 1 and 2's representative on the 8 February 2019 (hereinafter referred to as ‘CRA1’), in reply to the Applicants’ first affidavit dated 24 January 2019 (hereinatter referred to as ‘AAM’), 3. The Applicants’ affidavit dated 14% February 2019 in reply to the first affidavit of the Respondents is referred to as “AA2" 4. Save as is hereinatter expressly admitied, each and every averment contained in CRA is denied by the Applicants as if here set out seriatim and traversed one by one. 5. The Applicants take note of paragraphs 1, 2, 3 and 4 of CRA1. 6. The Applicants record the admissions at paragraphs 5, 6 and 7 of CRA1. 7. The Applicants take note of paragraphs 9 and 10 of CRA1. 8. In reply to paragraphs 11 to 15 of CRAM, the Applicants maintain paragraphs 9 to 13 of AA and further aver that:- a. they have the necessary locus standi to enter the present proceedings inasmuch as they were involved in the consultative process with the Respondents and Co-Respondents and made representations to them to the effect that the EIA Licence should not be granted. Nevertheless, the Co- Respondents No. 1 and 2 granted the EIA Licence to the Respondents. b. that they have an interest and the required standing to bring the present application inasmuch as the very nature of environmental law and environment protection affords them the right to defend their rights and use their best endeavours to preserve and enhance the quality of life by caring responsibly for the natural environment in Mauritius, as per the terms of the Environment Protection Act 2002. c. they therefore have sufficient interest in the matter to challenge the decision of, the Co-Respondents No.1 and 2 as they are aggrieved by the decision to grant the EIA Licance. 9. The Applicants take note of paragraph 16 of CRA1. 10. The Applicants record the admissions at paragraph 17 of CRA1 11. The Applicants take note of paragraphs 18 and 19 of CRA1 12.The Applicants deny paragraph 20 of CRAt, in its form and tenor, put the Co- Respondents No.1 and 2 to proof thereof and maintain paragraph 19 of AAI. The Applicants further aver that:- a. the construction of proposed new wetland will adversely impact the ESA Wetland 76 both at proposed new wetland creation and ESA Wetland 76 relocation; fe Page 2 of 10i. The new wetland has not been designed and assessed to genuinely integrate it to the ESA Wetland 76, but rather to replace it. The most obvious fact is that the Respondents propose the new wetland name to be ESA 76, thus implying the deletion of existing ESA Wetland 76 ii, All the drainage/outlet systems, necassary for the proposed new wetland to be “fully functional” will modify the hydrological influences on ESA Wetland 76, thus adversely impact ESA Wetland 76 ili, All the landscape changes, necessary for the proposed new wetland to be “fully functional” in the vicinity on ESA 76 will modify the hydrological influences of ESA 76, thus adversely impacting the ESA Wetland 76 iv. The relocation and transplantation of native and endemic vegetation of the ESA Wetland 76, necessary for the proposed new wetland to be “fully functional” will adversely impact ESA Wetland 76 vy. The relocation and transplantation of ESA Wetland 76 attendant biodiversity, necessary for the proposed new weiland to be “fully functional” will impact it The Condition 35 of EIA Licence does not clearly mention that the Ramsar Committee will deliver a confirmation that the proposed new wetland is functional. . The Co-Respondent No. 2’s inaction concerning the ESAs restoration and preservation, and Co-Respondent No. 3's inaction towards the Ramsar Convention relating to “Wise use of wetlands and their fauna and flora” (Refer to Annex 17 of ‘AA2) are the cause of bad land identification from Ministry of Housing and Lands for tourism development, amongst other parcelling of State Lands in the vicinity of ESA Wetland 76. The district of Black River is saturated with hotels, real estates and villa projects, consisting of 3 IRS, 22 RES and 7 PDS (Refer to Annex 23, Annex 24 and Annex 25 of AA2) and at least ten Resort Hotels. If this kind of development was beneficial for local communities, existing social issues (education, housing, employment, health) would have already been solved. The Applicants are alive to the alarming gentrification process all along the coastline, specifically in the Black River district, due to the cascade of real estate development projects being undertaken in the sole interest of local property developers and these projects are threatening the very existence of longstanding coastal communities (Refer to Annex 19 of AA2). .. The proposed new wetland will not provide 6 equivalent ecological zones after the proposed project implementation equivatent of the ones provided by ESA Wetland 76; and No assessment has been done by Respondent No.1 with regards to tidal fluctuations by way of the open channel to the sea as well as its influence on the existing ecological zones. & Page 3 of 10