Contract, Administrative

The Plaintiffs challenged the legality of the Prime Minister and three relevant Committees’ approval of the Water Resources Management Master Plan, based on a lack of public consultation.

The Court, after examining the contents of the Plan, determined that although the Plan specified projects and activities to be implemented in the future, the Plan itself lacked concrete details sufficient to determine the impacts on the environment and communities. Therefore, while some projects or activities, once were provided with sufficient details, would be required to go through appropriate procedure according to the Constitution, the Plan at issue per se was not subject to public consultation requirements under the Constition.

The Court further determined that although the TOR assigned private contracting parties to conduct public consultation, such conduct would nevertheless be on the behalf of and under the supervison of the contracting public agencies and therefore it did not cause a reason to believe that the results and conduct of the consultation were unreliable.


The Court did not find that any process or exercise of power in approving the Plan was in contrary to other legislation raised by the Plaintiffs. The Court therefore dismissed the case.