DHAKA, 12: The High Court of Bangladesh on Monday issued an injunction, restraining the government from making any payment to Niko Resources Limited, which inflicted heavy damage to the Tengratilla gas field in Chhatak.

The court directed the government to freeze all bank accounts maintained in Bangladesh by the Canadian gas exploration company. It also issued a rule on the government and Niko, asking them to explain within six weeks why the joint venture agreement, signed between Niko and Bangladesh Petroleum Exploration and Production Company on October 16, 2003, would not be declared illegal and void.

The agreement was signed for development and production of gas from ‘marginal/abandoned’ gas fields of Chhatak and Feni.

A well at the Tengratila gas field under Chhatak experienced two blow-outs on January 7 and June 24 this year and investigations had revealed that faulty drilling by Niko had resulted in the blow-outs.

A vacation bench of the High Court passed the order after a two-day hearing of a public interest writ filed by three rights bodies -— Bangladesh Environment Lawyers’ Association, Ain-O-Shalish Kendra and Odhikar.

The court asked the government and Niko to explain why the proceedings of the agreement should not be cancelled and proper legal action would not be taken against Niko as the agreement was signed in ‘illegal’ ways.

The government was asked to submit the investigation reports of Tengratila blow-outs to the court within 15 days and another report within 45 days, specifying the measures taken to recover compensation from Niko for the successive blow-outs.

The government will have to submit the names and particulars of individual and corporate shareholders of Niko Resources Ltd and Niko Resources (Bangladesh) Ltd.

The rule asked the government to explain why the secretaries of the energy, law and environment ministries and BAPEX would not be directed to take effective legal measures to protect public property requiring compliance by the respondent Niko.

The secretaries were also asked to explain why they would not be directed to discharge statutory duties to mitigate the damage and losses caused by Niko’s failure to discharge its obligations and to refrain from asserting any rights under the agreement or receive any payment hereunder.

It also required the government to explain why it should not be directed to take immediate effective measures to realize full compensation for destruction of the valuable natural gas resources and the damage to property and environment by the blow-outs resulting from Niko’s failure to discharge its legal obligations.