NGO WORK

Godfathers, politics eating up wetland

Published

6 years ago

June 24, 2020

| MUBATSI ASINJA HABATI | The sprawling Kehong Farm in Lubenge in Luweero district produces rice, bananas, eggs, and chicken meat. It is the pride of the area with its Chinese machines and scientific methods and a promise of over 30,000 jobs when fully operational.

But the success has a sting in its tail that President Yoweri Museveni appears unable to escape from. The 1,000 hectares on which Kehong Farm sits is partly what is technically called a `wetland’; an area of land that is permanently or seasonally water-logged. That means it is a protected area under the law and no development is allowed on it under the National Environment Management Authority (NEMA) guidelines.

But somehow, the Chinese Kehong Group acquired the land in 2016 as the China-Uganda Agricultural Cooperation Industrial Park and the farm was officially opened by President Museveni amidst protests from environmental activists.

Meanwhile, almost in panic mode, the Minister of State for Environment; Beatrice Anywar, is daily seen threatening to evict ordinary Ugandans who occupy wetlands. She recently embarked on a tour in Kalungu district, under heavy police escort, ordering peasants on tiny half acre patches to vacate wetlands or else they will be forcefully evicted.

Minister Anywar’s threats to peasants in wetlands and President Museveni’s embrace of big Chinese farms in the same wetlands appear to be a contradiction but they may not be. It appears that if you have the right sums of money or the right Godfather, you are above the Uganda wetland laws.

“The people who build factories in wetlands have godfathers in the central government,” says the Luweero district Chairman Ronald Ndawula.

Ndawula was attempting to explain to The Independent why, in his view, presidential directives on wetlands are never implemented.

He was commenting on a June 04 speech in which President Museveni condemned investors who build factories in wetlands.

While giving his annual State of the Nation Address, Museveni mentioned several areas where factories have been built in wetlands and called that “a mistake”.

“We want more and more factories, but build on dry land, not the wetlands,” the President said.

Then he added: “Those already built or being built should be allowed to continue. Demolishing an already built factory is not common-sense. They are very expensive and very useful.”

Perhaps unknown to the President, his comments reinforced an already entrenched practice which has seen some investors constructing at breakneck speed in wetlands, including at night. The goal is to ensure that their development is up and, therefore, unbreakable.

Arthur Bainomugisha, executive director of Advocates Coalition for Development and Environment (ACODE), a non-government organisation, says what appears to be defiance is actually a reflection of how politics has killed institutions.

“I think the institutions charged with managing the environment have been weakened. And they have been weakened by politics. The legal regime is in place but politics always interferes with NEMA’s activities,” Bainomugisha says.

As a result, factories of varying beautiful designs, size, and function have been built in wetlands all over the country. Driving along major highways leading out of Kampala and other towns and urban centres, one sees rows upon rows of steel framed factory buildings and sprawling farms in former wetlands.

On the Kampala Jinja highway, for example, one can count hundreds of such factories. Such factories include Abacus Parenteral Drugs Ltd (APDL), Tian Tang Group, Global Paper, Landy and others. Uganda’s main industrial park, in Namanve outside Kampala lies on 1000s of hectares of what were once wetlands.

The factories produce goods previously imported into the country, making them cheaper and available. Some of the products are being exported, bringing in the much needed foreign currency.

Tian Tang Group produces metal products such as iron bars and steel sheets, APDL produces infusion products like IV fluids, eye, ear and nasal drops. Such economic gains appear to dwarf any environmental benefits from wetlands that conservations speak of. No wetland is safe.

Environmentalists argue that construction in wetlands deprives the marshland of its water storage and filtration roles, kills plants and animals whose only habitats may be a wetland. But these benefits are indirect, almost invisible while the money from salaries of factory workers, taxes, and sale of products areas are as visible as the clouds of dark smoke fuming from the factory chimneys.

Effects of encroachment on wetlands

There was a time when almost 16% of Uganda’s surface area was wetland. Since building factories in wetlands became normal, it is not clear how much of the remains.

The latest Biomass study indicates that in the last 15 years, the country has lost 569,021 hectares of wetlands in various parts of the country.

The 2019 water and environment sector review report shows that the wetland cover has reduced from 15.6% in 1994 to 8.4% in 2019.

A 2015 study by researchers at Makerere University states that 56% of the original Nakivubo wetland in Kampala had been modified, mainly due to industrial development and small-scale farming.

Another study by World Bank study found that the eight major wetlands in Kampala district declined from 18 percent to 9 percent of the area between 2002 and 2010.

Across the country, urbanisation, industrial development and agriculture have spurred swamp losses, influencing the rise of severe flash floods; particularly in eastern Uganda. They destroy infrastructure, homes and crops. People drown.

There are 25 major wetlands systems in the country that treat wastewater and serve as a source of safe water for local communities, according to the Wetlands Management Department. But data from Uganda’s Ministry of Water and Environment indicates that up to 30% of Uganda’s wetlands were lost between 1994 and 2008. In this period, Uganda’s wetlands reduced from 37,575.4 sq. km in 1996 to 26,307.7 sq. km in 2008.

NGO WORK

Two dead as Siaya protests against gold mining firm turn tragic

Published

1 week ago

April 7, 2026

witnessradio.org

Ikolomani residents protesting against eviction plan to pave space for British mining company Shanta Gold on November 12, 2025. Two people died in similar protests in Gem, Siaya County. Isaac Wale | Nation Media Group

Two people were shot dead on Monday in Gem–Ramula, Siaya County, after villagers staged a protest over an alleged eviction they linked to Shanta Gold Kenya Limited.

Area police boss Charles Wafula confirmed the incident, stating that the victims were among a group alleged to have attacked a police post after the officers moved in to disperse the demonstrators.

According to Mr Wafula, the demonstrators, angered by what they described as an illegal resettlement by the company, stormed the station during the protest, prompting officers to intervene.

“The individuals had organised a demonstration but they did not notify the police. Our officers moved in to contain the situation, but the group began attacking both officers and Ramula Police Post, damaging several items, including vehicles,” Mr Wafula said.

However, a local rights organisation has sharply contested the police account, portraying the killings as unlawful and unprovoked.

In a statement, the Community Initiative Action Group Kenya said the two victims identified as Henry Otieno and Jack Omenda were part of a peaceful protest against what they termed a forced eviction from their ancestral land.

“The community had gathered peacefully to demonstrate against Shanta Gold Limited’s attempt to relocate them without their consent,” said the lobby’s Executive Director Chris Owalla.

The group further alleged that police officers opened fire without warning following a confrontation with residents at Ramula Market.

“Witnesses state there was an exchange between the community and police after which officers opened fire, killing Henry and Jack on the spot,” Mr Owalla said.

The rights group also accused senior police officers including Mr Wafula and Charles Emodo of Directorate of Criminal Investigation, of disregarding a court order that had halted evictions and mining operations in the area.

According to Mr Owalla, the Environment and Land Court in Siaya had, on February 5, 2026, issued conservatory orders barring any involuntary resettlement of residents in Ramula and its environs, pending the hearing of a petition.

The organisation is now calling for investigations by the Independent Policing Oversight Authority and the the Director of Public Prosecutions, alongside an independent autopsy on the victims.

Fear of evictions

The unrest is rooted in long-standing tensions over planned gold mining operations by Shanta Gold in the region. The company is seeking to establish a large-scale extraction project – one that residents fear could uproot communities and erode livelihoods carefully built over generations.

Similar scenes of unrest were reported in November 2025 in Ikolomani, where locals protested against possible relocations linked to the same company.

Shanta Gold has previously signalled its intention to invest in a multi-billion-shilling project in western Kenya, targeting high-grade gold deposits expected to yield significant output over several years.

Source: nation.africa

NGO WORK

Tanzania: Commissions call for mass eviction of Indigenous Maasai from world-famous tourist destinations.

Published

4 weeks ago

March 19, 2026

witnessradio.org

Two presidential commissions have recommended the mass eviction of Maasai people from some of East Africa’s most iconic conservation areas and tourist destinations.

The commissions were established by Tanzania’s President Samia Suluhu Hassan following previous evictions of Maasai pastoralists from parts of the world-famous Serengeti ecosystem, and large-scale protests in the Ngorongoro Conservation Area in 2024.

Now, despite a global outcry at the earlier evictions, the two Commissions have:

Backed the previous evictions and called for them to continue, including in the UNESCO World Heritage Sites of Ngorongoro and neighboring Lake Natron.
Described the long-standing Maasai presence in the area as an “environmental pressure” that needs to be reduced.
Threatened local NGOs that support the Maasai, accusing them of “spreading misinformation or propaganda” because they “conflict with government interests.”
Called for the “relocation” of all “non-conservation activities” [in other words, Maasai occupancy of the land] outside the conservation areas.
Called for existing recognition of the Maasai people’s right to live in the Ngorongoro area to be removed.

An anonymous Maasai spokesperson said today: “We are blamed for environmental degradation while the unchecked expansion of tourism is ignored. Forced relocation, disguised as policy, has deprived our people of basic rights and dignity. We reject any continuation of these measures and condemn the Commission’s failure to reflect the voices, realities, and rights of our people.”

Still from a video showing the Maasai protesting the violent evictions from their ancestral lands, 2022.

The authorities maintain that these are “voluntary relocations.” However, the Maasai have overwhelmingly rejected being moved.

The Ngorongoro Conservation Area is a UNESCO World Heritage Site. When it was established, the ancestral right of the Maasai to live there with their cattle was explicitly acknowledged. But UNESCO’s World Heritage Committee has backed the so-called “voluntary relocations”, and UNESCO endorses the “fortress conservation” model that underpins Tanzania’s approach.

Survival International Director Caroline Pearce said today, “These commissions were a sham, a gimmick designed to give Tanzania’s violent persecution of the Maasai a veneer of respectability. It was widely predicted that they’d back further evictions: the whole saga just confirms that colonial-style fortress conservation is alive and well in Tanzania today, and enthusiastically endorsed by UNESCO.

“These recommendations give the green light to more evictions, in Ngorongoro and beyond. And while the Maasai are robbed of their lands and livelihood, the government, tour operators and so-called conservationists will enrich themselves from a landscape emptied of its original owners.”

Source: survivalinternational.org

NGO WORK

Sham Presidential Commissions Rubber Stamp Tanzanian Government’s Efforts to Evict Indigenous Maasai from Ngorongoro Conservation Area

Published

4 weeks ago

March 18, 2026

witnessradio.org

March 12, 2026, Presidential commissions’ reports recommend dismantling longstanding Maasai rights in the Ngorongoro Conservation Area (NCA) – rubber-stamping the Tanzanian government’s plans for widespread evictions to expand tourism.
President Hassan pursues a so-called “voluntary” relocation program, despite extensive evidence that communities are being forced to leave through the withdrawal of essential services and livelihood restrictions.
The government announced a crackdown on civil society groups critical of its plans, raising concerns of further repression of land defenders and NGOs speaking out against forced displacement.
Maasai communities remain steadfast in the defense of their land, livelihoods, and way of life, vowing to continue resistance against attempts to force them from their ancestral territories.

Oakland, CA – In reports submitted on March 12, 2026 to Tanzanian President Samia Suluhu Hassan, commissions tasked to assess land disputes in the Ngorongoro Conservation Area (NCA) and review resettlement plans, dismissed rights of the Indigenous Maasai to their ancestral lands. They instead advance recommendations that further marginalize their rights in order to expand safari tourism.

“The commissions’ recommendations are based on outright lies about the environmental impacts of the Maasai, while completely ignoring the real damage caused by rapid tourism expansion,” said a Maasai elder. ¹ “If these extremely biased and reckless recommendations are implemented, it will be the end of our people in Ngorongoro.”

Immediately after the reports were submitted, park rangers started harassment of residents in the grazing areas of Ndutu with the intent to force them to leave for tourism expansion. Three community members were reportedly beaten and arrested while others received notices to vacate.

Recommendations are a crafty attempt at changing 1959 legislation that created the NCA as a multiple land use area – explicitly enshrining the right of the Maasai to live and graze cattle in the area. The Maasai were promised that “should there be any conflict between the interests of the game [animals] and the human inhabitants, those of the latter must take precedence.”

The President has accepted the recommendations and stated she “will act on them” – a decision that will have a catastrophic impact on Maasai communities. The government has signaled its intention to drastically reduce Maasai presence in the NCA and relocate what it calls “non-conservation activities” outside the area. Towards this goal, the President has indicated an expansion of the “voluntary” relocation program.

For years, the Oakland Institute has shattered government myths about “voluntary” resettlement –exposing serious flaws with relocation plans that are being forced upon communities. To pressure residents to leave, the government has stopped basic medical, education, and water services while restricting access to grazing land for pastoralists. Massive mobilizations by the Maasai against this forced resettlement expose the government’s lie that people are leaving willingly.

Beyond the NCA, the commissions also recommend further restrictions on livelihoods, threatening the future eviction of Maasai communities living near Lake Natron and Loliondo. “These sham findings are the latest attempt by the government to rapidly expand its brutal fortress conservation model across the country, threatening hundreds of thousands of Indigenous lives in blind pursuit of tourism dollars that have failed to trickle down to improve the lives of the poor Tanzanians and the local communities,” said Anuradha Mittal, Executive Director of the Oakland Institute.

In another alarming development, the government is attempting to silence local NGOs by reviewing their registration status and monitoring their activities to force them to operate “in alignment with national conservation objectives.” The move reflects the regime’s ongoing persecution of civil society and broader crackdown on dissent, carried out through state violence and arbitrary detention. Major opposition parties remain outlawed in Tanzania, while government critics have routinely disappeared. Following the rigged October 2025 national elections, the government violently suppressed pro-democracy protests and state security forces killed thousands of civilians.

As previously warned by the Oakland Institute, both commissions lacked independence given they were dominated by government personnel and had very limited Maasai representation. The commissions’ reports – which have not been made public – were orally presented to the government nearly one year after they were due to provide findings.

“These commissions have no credibility. From the start, they were tasked with rubber stamping the government’s plans to evict the Indigenous Maasai so their land can be a safari and hunting playground for the rich foreign tourists. One cannot be fooled by their “findings” and international solidarity must be mobilized to uphold Maasai’s rights to their ancestral land,” warned Mittal.

Source: oaklandinstitute.org