SPECIAL REPORTS AND PROJECTS
Banks opt out of oil pipeline funding
Published
5 years agoon

A map showing the Hoima-Tanga oil pipeline route.
The $3.5b East Africa Crude Oil Pipeline (EACOP) project could run into trouble after some international commercial banks withdrew from funding the construction of the world’s longest heated crude oil pipeline proposed by French Oil Company Total and the China National Offshore Oil Corporation (CNOOC).
“The banks provided statements making it clear they will not support the East Africa Crude Oil Pipeline [EACOP]after an open letter endorsed by 263 organisations from around the world was sent to 25 banks considered most likely to be approached for financing,” a March 18 press release from Inclusive Development International, read in part.
“Barclays does not intend to participate in the financing of the East African Crude Oil Pipeline project,” it further read.
Credit Suisse is also said to share the same position with Barclays.
On this, an alliance of African and international environmental and human rights organisations have claimed another win in their campaign to stop the construction of the oil pipeline.
Bank Track, which is among these organisations, raised the red flag over alleged ignored social and environmental concerns along with the project.
“The EACOP is manifestly incompatible with global efforts to reduce our carbon emissions. Banks simply can’t have it both ways – you can’t claim to be serious about climate change and support climate-destroying projects like the EACOP,” Mr Ryan Brightwell, the Researcher and Editor at BankTrack, said.
When Daily Monitor asked Mr Brightwell about the authenticity of the quoted bank statements in their release, responded in an email, “the banks provided the statements to us, with permission for us to publish them on the stopeacop.net website: https://www.stopeacop.net/banks-checklist. If you wish to confirm these statements with the banks themselves or seek further comment from them, may I suggest you contact their press offices.”
Daily Monitor sought confirmation from Credit Suisse through the Media Relations, Credit Suisse Group in Zurich, Switzerland, both on email and phone calls. “Thanks for reaching out. I can confirm: Credit Suisse is not considering participating in the EACOP project. Kind regards,” Mr Yannick Orto, the Credit Suisse Services Ag Group External Communications in Zürich, responded.
Mr Orto said as a bank policy, they will not give the reason why they are not supporting the EACOP and advised everyone to only use their “public statement” .
Daily Monitor could not reach Barclays Bank through its corporate and investment contacts as provided on the bank’s website for press and media. Our calls could not be answered by the bank and the voice mail message left was not returned.
However, the bank is quoted on the #STOPEACOP campaign: “Barclays does not intend to participate in the financing of the East African Crude Oil Pipeline project” as its public statement.
“Besides climate and environmental risks, our field investigations reveal serious human rights violations already caused by EACOP, with tens of thousands of people deprived of their livelihoods before having received any compensation. We call on French banks to commit themselves quickly and publicly not to finance this project,” Juliette Renaud, the senior campaigner at Friends of the Earth France, said.
It is, however, not clear whether the banks’ refusal to finance the project is related to the environment. Mr Samuel Okulony, the chief executive officer of the Uganda-based Environment Governance Institute, said the next 10 years will be critical for efforts to mitigate the severity of climate change and that the pipeline will generate an additional 34 million tonnes of carbon emissions each year, which is disastrous.
Mr David Pred, the executive director of Inclusive Development International, said it would be a significant blow to the project if Standard Bank was to walk away, given the key role it has played as a financial advisor in arranging the $2.5 billion project loan that is required to finance construction.
“Any credible assessment would find that this project is too risky for the millions of people whose water resources it would jeopardise and for our rapidly warming climate, which simply cannot afford another massive oil project,” Mr Pred said.
Affected persons
The environmental and rights activists say the project stretching nearly 1,445 kms threatens to displace families and farmers and would pose risk to water resources and wetlands – including the Lake Victoria basin, which more than 40 million people rely on.
According to a report released by Oxfam International in September 2020 titled ‘‘empty promises down the line’’ a human rights impact assessment on the EACOP, approximately 200 households will be relocated.
The report adds that an estimated 3,200 to 3,500 households will be economically displaced, meaning they will lose land whereas in Tanzania, 391 households will lose land as part of the priority areas and 9,122 will lose land for the pipeline right of way.
Oil companies, govt respond
Both the oil companies and government have been slow to comment.
Ms Linda Nabirye, the external communications coordinator for Total E&P Uganda, referred us to their March 8 press release that responds to some issues raised by the banks and the NGOs.
The release titled: “Uganda and Tanzania: Total acts in transparency on social and environmental stakes of the Lake Albert resources development project,” said the projects Tilenga in Uganda and the EACOP in Uganda and Tanzania “are undertaken in a sensitive environmental context and require the implementation of land acquisition programmes with a specific attention to respecting the rights of the communities concerned.”
Total says environmental and social impact assessment (ESIA) studies have been conducted and approved by the Ugandan and Tanzanian authorities for both projects, which are carried out in compliance with the stringent performance standards of the International Finance Corporation (IFC).
Total also said it would work closely with Uganda Wildlife Authority and with IUCN experts to integrate the best practices for the protection of chimpanzees, particularly by promoting the conservation of forest habitats.
Ms Amina Bukenya, the spokesperson for CNOOC, asked us to send questions on her email which she had not responded to by press time.
On the government side, Ms Stella Amony, the communications lead for EACOP, replied: “The matter is sensitive and needs a collective response from the joint venture members.”
Ms Angella Karisa Ambaho, the communications Officer of Uganda National Oil Company (UNOC) said: “I am still waiting for approval of my response to your questions you raised on email, which I shared with my superiors”.
Established in 2013, UNOC is mandated to hold 15 per cent of Uganda’s petroleum licences on behalf of the government.
Local NGOs take on the issue
Africa Institute for Energy Governance (AFIEGO), a registered public policy research and advocacy organisation whose main objectives is to promote environmental conservation and community rights in the extractives sector, said the banks turning down requests to finance CNOOC and Total is a signal to other financiers to consider their .
“….Climate change, environmental and social risks of the project are immense and when banks see other financial institutions taking a step back and refusing to finance the project, they also re-assess their participation,” Ms Diana Nabiruma, the senior communications officer at AFIEGO, said.
Mr Brian Nahamya, a programmes associate at Global Rights Alert, an NGO involved in advocacy for the oil pipeline PAPs, said the land acquisition was done but no project affected person has received compensation since the end of the valuation process in 2018/2019.
‘‘…Every person affected by this project from Hoima to Rakai, no one has received compensation up to date,” he said.
Holes poked on EACOP Environmental remedies
Despite the National Environment Management Authority (Nema) issuing a certificate of approval to Total East Africa for an Environmental and Social Impact Assessment (ESIA) as required by law on such a project in 2019, other international environmentalists have poked holes in it.
Section 3.3 of the Netherlands Commission for Environmental Assessment (NCEA) report on water and wetlands crossings and water use contends that “The ESIA does not make clear why open trench river crossings are chosen as the way to go. This is critical as major rivers typically come together with wide wetlands.”
The oil pipeline route
In Uganda, the oil pipeline will traverse through Hoima, Kikuube, Kakumiro, Mubende, Kyankwanzi, Gomba, Rakai, Lwengo, Kyotera, and Sembabule districts.
According to the East Africa Crude Oil Pipeline Environment and Impact Assessment Report 2019, the pipeline will originate from Kabaale, Hoima District and snake through different communities for a distance of 296km before it approaches the Uganda-Tanzanian border.
About the project
The East African Crude Oil Pipeline (EACOP) is a proposed 1,445km-pipeline that will transport oil from Hoima in Uganda to Tanga port in Tanzania.
About 1.7 billion barrels of recoverable oil have been discovered in the Albertine Graben, the basin of Lake Albert, on the border between Uganda and DR Congo. The extraction will take place at two oil fields: the Kingfisher field, operated by China National Offshore Oil Corporation (CNOOC) and the Tilenga field, operated by Total S.A.
In September 2020 both Tanzania and Uganda agreed on the $3.5b oil pipeline project after years of discussing the relative merits of different routes out to the Indian Ocean.
Work was scheduled to start by the end of 2020 but the Covid-19 pandemic delayed the project. Tanzania says the project will create 10,000 jobs and that more than 90,000 people would be compensated to pave the way for the pipeline.
The oil will be partly refined in Uganda to supply the local market and partly exported to the international market via the EACOP. The project is being implemented by a joint venture of oil companies operating in the Albertine Graben including CNOOC and Total and Uganda government through the Uganda National Oil Company and Tanzania Petroleum Development Corporation.
Original Source: Daily monitor
Related posts:





You may like
-
‘We cannot drink oil’: campaigners condemn east African pipeline project.
-
Rights Groups Say Villagers Not Compensated for East Africa Oil Pipeline
-
Govt pushes for compulsory land acquisition in Buliisa
-
Families left in limbo as Uganda oil project earmarks land
-
Transparency: Uganda is the newest member of EITI
-
NGOs file suit against Total over Uganda oil project
SPECIAL REPORTS AND PROJECTS
Top 10 agribusiness giants: corporate concentration in food & farming in 2025
Published
2 months agoon
August 28, 2025


Ranking
|
Company (Headquarters)
|
Sales in 2023
(US$ millions)
|
% Global market share 19
|
1
|
Bayer (Germany)20
|
11,613
|
23
|
2
|
Corteva (US)21
|
9,472
|
19
|
3
|
Syngenta (China/Switzerland)22
|
4,751
|
10
|
4
|
BASF (Germany)23
|
2,122
|
4
|
Total top 4
|
27,958
|
56
|
|
5
|
Vilmorin & Cie (Groupe Limagrain) (France)24
|
1,984
|
4
|
6
|
KWS (Germany)25
|
1,815
|
4
|
7
|
DLF Seeds (Denmark)26
|
838
|
2
|
8
|
Sakata Seeds (Japan)27
|
649
|
1
|
9
|
Kaneko Seeds (Japan)28
|
451
|
0.9
|
Total top 9
|
33,695
|
67
|
|
Total world market29
|
50,000
|
100%
|
Ranking
|
Company (Headquarters)
|
Sales in 2023
(US$ millions)
|
% Global market share
|
1
|
Syngenta (China/Switzerland)43
|
20,066
|
25
|
2
|
Bayer (Germany)44
|
11,860
|
15
|
3
|
BASF (Germany)45
|
8,793
|
11
|
4
|
Corteva (US)46
|
7,754
|
10
|
Total top 4
|
48,472
|
61
|
|
5
|
UPL (India)47
|
5,925
|
8
|
6
|
FMC (Germany)48
|
4,487
|
6
|
7
|
Sumitomo (Japan)49
|
3,824
|
5
|
8
|
Nufarm (Australia)50
|
2,056
|
3
|
9
|
Rainbow Agro (China)51
|
1,623
|
2
|
10
|
Jiangsu Yangnong Chemical Co., Ltd. (China)52
|
1,595
|
2
|
Total top 10
|
67,982
|
86
|
|
Total world market53
|
79,000
|
100
|

Ranking
|
Company (Headquarters)
|
Sales in 2023
(US$ millions)
|
% Global market share
|
1
|
Nutrien (Canada)72
|
15,673
|
8
|
2
|
The Mosaic Company (US)73
|
12,782
|
7
|
3
|
Yara (Norway)74
|
11,688
|
6
|
4
|
CF Industries Holdings, Inc, (US)75
|
6,631
|
3
|
Total top 4
|
46,774
|
24
|
|
5
|
ICL Group Ltd. (Israel)76
|
6,294
|
3
|
6
|
OCP (Morocco)77
|
5,967
|
3
|
7
|
PhosAgro (Russia)78
|
4,989
|
3
|
8
|
MCC EuroChem Joint Stock Company (EuroChem) (Switzerland/Russia)79
|
4,298
|
2
|
9
|
OCI (Netherlands)80
|
4,188
|
2
|
10
|
Uralkali (Russia)81
|
3,497
|
2
|
Total top 10
|
76,007
|
39
|
|
Total world market82
|
196,000
|
100
|

Ranking
|
Company (Headquarters)
|
Sales in 2023
(US$ millions)
|
% Global market share
|
1
|
Deere and Co. (US)89
|
26,790
|
15
|
2
|
CNH Industrial (UK/Netherlands)90
|
18,148
|
10
|
4
|
AGCO (US)91
|
14,412
|
8
|
3
|
Kubota (Japan)92
|
14,233
|
8
|
Total top 4
|
73,583
|
43
|
|
5
|
CLAAS (Germany)93
|
6,561
|
4
|
6
|
Mahindra and Mahindra (India)94
|
3,156
|
2
|
7
|
SDF Group (Italy)95
|
2,197
|
1
|
8
|
Kuhn Group (Switzerland)96
|
1,583
|
0.9
|
9
|
YTO Group (China)97
|
1,493
|
0.9
|
10
|
Iseki Group (Japan)98
|
1,057
|
0.6
|
Total top 10
|
89,629
|
52
|
|
Total world market99
|
173,000
|
100
|

Ranking
|
Company (Headquarters)
|
Sales in 2023
(US$ millions)
|
% Global market share
|
1
|
Zoetis (US)115
|
8,544
|
18
|
2
|
Merck & Co (MSD) (US)116
|
5,625
|
12
|
3
|
Boehringer Ingelheim Animal Health (Germany)117
|
5,100
|
11
|
4
|
Elanco (US)118
|
4,417
|
9
|
Total top 4
|
23,686
|
49
|
|
5
|
Idexx Laboratories (US)119
|
3,474
|
7
|
6
|
Ceva Santé Animale (France)120
|
1,752
|
4
|
7
|
Virbac (France)121
|
1,348
|
3
|
8
|
Phibro Animal Health Corporation (US)122
|
978
|
2
|
9
|
Dechra (UK)123
|
917
|
2
|
10
|
Vetoquinol (France)124
|
572
|
1
|
Total top 10
|
32,727
|
68
|
|
Total world market125
|
48,000
|
100
|

Related posts:





SPECIAL REPORTS AND PROJECTS
Maasai demand Volkswagen pull out of carbon offset scheme on their lands
Published
3 months agoon
July 24, 2025
Maasai Indigenous people in Tanzania have called on Volkswagen (VW) to withdraw from a controversial carbon credits scheme which violates their rights and threatens to wreck their livelihoods.
In a statement, the Maasai International Solidarity Alliance (MISA) denounced the “loss of control or use” of vital Maasai grazing grounds, and accused VW of making “false and misleading claims” about Maasai participation in decision making about the project.
Many Maasai pastoralists have already been evicted from large parts of their grazing lands for national parks and game reserves, with highly lucrative tourist businesses operating in them. Now a major new carbon-credit generating project by Volkswagen ClimatePartner (VWCP) and US-based carbon offset company Soils for the Future Tanzania is taking control of large parts of their remaining lands, and threatening livelihoods by upending long-standing Maasai grazing practices.
The Maasai have not given their free, prior and informed consent for the project. They fear it will restrict their access to crucial refuge areas in times of drought, and threaten their food security.
Ngisha Sinyok, a Maasai community member from Eluai village, which is struggling to withdraw from the project, told Survival: “Our livestock is going to be depleted. We will end up not having a single cow.” Asked about VW’s involvement in the project, he replied, “It is not a solution to climate change. It is just a business for people to make money using our environment. It has nothing to do with climate change.”
Another Maasai man, who wished to remain anonymous for fear of reprisals, said: “They use their money to control us.” A third said: “Maasailand never had a price tag. In Maasailand, there is no privatization. Our land is communal.”
Survival International’s Director of Research and Advocacy, Fiona Watson, said today: “The carbon project that Volkswagen supports violates the Maasai’s rights and will be disastrous for their lives, all so the company can carry on polluting and greenwash its image. It takes away the Maasai’s control over their own lands and relies on the false and colonial assumption that they are destroying their lands — which is not supported by evidence.
“The Maasai have been grazing cattle on the plains of East Africa since time immemorial. They know the land and how to manage it better than carbon project developers seeking to make millions from their lands.”
VW’s investment in the project, whose official name is the “Longido and Monduli Rangelands Carbon Project”, is believed to run to several million dollars, and has contributed to corruption and tensions in northern Tanzania, according to MISA’s report on the project.
An adjacent project in southern Kenya, also run by Soils for the Future, is beset with similar problems, and has already sparked resistance from local communities.
Survival International’s Blood Carbon report revealed that the whole basis for these “soil carbon” projects is flawed, and unsupported by evidence. Survival documented similar problems with the highly controversial Northern Kenya Grasslands Carbon Project. That project suffered a blow in a Kenyan court and was suspended and put under review by Verra, the carbon credit verification agency, for an unprecedented second time.
Source: Survival International
Related posts:





SPECIAL REPORTS AND PROJECTS
Seizing the Jubilee moment: Cancel the debt to unlock Africa’s clean energy future
Published
3 months agoon
July 12, 2025
Africa has the resources and the vision for a just energy transition, but it is trapped in a financial system structured to take more than it gives. In this blog, we outline how debt burdens and climate impacts are holding the continent back, and looks at the role of institutions that shape the global financial order, like the World Bank, African Development Bank and IMF. As these institutions and governments meet in Seville for FfD4, we urge them to heed people’s calls for reform: cancel the debt, redistribute the wealth, and fund the just transition. — By Rajneesh Bhuee and Lola Allen
With 60% of the world’s best solar energy resources and 70% of the cobalt essential for electric vehicle batteries, the African continent has everything it needs to power its development and become a global reference point for sustainable energy production. That potential, however, remains largely untapped; Africa receives just 2% of global renewable energy investment. As the UNCTAD Secretary-General Rebeca Grynspan warns, too many countries are forced to “default on their development to avoid defaulting on their debt.”
The cost of servicing unsustainable debts, layered with new loan-based climate and development finance, leaves governments with little fiscal space to invest in clean energy, health or education. In 2022 alone, African countries spent more than $100 billion on debt servicing, over twice what they spent on health or education. Add to this the $90 billion lost annually to illicit financial flows, and the reality is stark: more money leaves the continent through financial leakages (also including unfair trade and extractive investment) than comes in through productive, equitable and development-oriented finance.
These are not isolated problems. They reflect a financial system that has been built to serve global markets rather than people. Between 2020 and 2025, four African countries defaulted on their external debts, that is, they failed to make scheduled repayments to creditors like the International Monetary Fund or bondholders, triggering fiscal crises and, in several cases, IMF interventions tied to austerity measures. Pope Francis’ Jubilee Report (2025) and hundreds of civil society groups argue that these defaults reflect the deeper crisis of unsustainable debt. Meanwhile, 24 more African countries are now in or near debt distress. None have successfully restructured their debts under the G20 Common Framework, a mechanism launched in 2020 to facilitate debt relief among public and private creditors. The Framework has been widely criticised for being slow, opaque and ineffective. According to Eurodad, without urgent systemic reforms, up to 47 Global South countries, home to over 1.1 billion people, face insolvency risks within five years if they attempt to meet climate and development goals.
How debt undermines the just energy transition
Debt has become both a driver and a symptom of climate injustice. Countries that did the least to cause the climate crisis now pay the highest price, twice over. First, they suffer the impacts. Second, they must borrow to rebuild.
This is happening just as concessional finance disappears. The US has withdrawn from the African Development Fund’s concessional window (worth $550m), yet maintains influence over private-sector lending. It has also opted out of the UN Financing for Development Conference (FfD4), a historic opportunity to confront the injustice of our financial system. Meanwhile, European governments, though now celebrating themselves as defenders of multilateralism, played a key role in weakening the outcome of FfD4, slashing aid budgets, redirecting funds toward militarisation, and systematically blocking proposals for a UN-led sovereign debt workout mechanism. With rising insecurity and geopolitical tensions, these actions send a troubling signal: at a moment when global cooperation is urgently needed, many Global North countries are stepping back from efforts to fix the very system that is preventing climate justice and clean energy for much of the Global South.
A role for the AfDB?
The African Development Bank (AfDB), under incoming president Sidi Ould Tah , has made progressive commitments of $10 billion to climate-resilient infrastructure and $4 billion to clean cooking. Between 2022 and 2024, one in five (20%) of its energy dollars were grants, far exceeding The World Bank ‘s 10% and the Asian Development Bank (ADB) ‘s 3.8%. The AfDB has also backed systemic reform: for example, calling for Special Drawing Rights (SDR) redistribution, launching an African Financial Stability Mechanism that could save up to $20 billion in debt servicing, and consistently advocating for fairer lending terms.

Yet, even progressive leadership struggles within a broken system. Recourse’s recent research shows that AfDB energy finance dropped 67% in 2024, from $992.7 million to just $329.6 million. Of this, a staggering 73% went to large-scale infrastructure like mega hydro dams and export-focused transmission lines, ‘false solutions’ that bypass the energy-poor and displace communities. Meanwhile, support for locally-appropriate, decentralised renewable energy systems such as mini-grids, solar appliances, and clean cookstoves plummeted by over 90%, from $694.5 million to just $61 million, with only five of 13 projects directly addressing energy access in 2024.
Africa received just 2.8% of global climate finance in 2021–22, and what is labelled as “climate finance” is often little more than a Trojan horse: resource-backed loans, debt-for-nature swaps, and blended finance instruments that shift risk to the public while offering little real benefit to local communities. These mechanisms, promoted as “innovative” or “green”, often entrench financial dependency and fail to deliver meaningful change for energy-poor or climate-vulnerable groups.
Meanwhile, initiatives that could build green industry and renewable capacity across Africa are falling short in both scale and speed. Flagship projects, such as the EU’s Global Gateway, have failed to drive green industrialisation in Africa, and carbon markets continue to delay real emissions reductions, subsidise fossil fuel interests, and entrench elite control over land and resources.
Mission 300: Ambition or another missed opportunity?
In this constrained context, the AfDB and World Bank launched Mission 300, an ambitious plan to connect 300 million Africans to electricity by 2030. Pragmatic goals like electrification are crucial, but the story beneath the surface of Mission 300 raises concern. Far from serving households, many projects under the initiative appear more aligned with export markets and large-scale energy users, echoing decades of infrastructure that bypasses those most in need.
Mission 300 can still be transformative, but only if it centres people, not profits. Energy access must begin with those who need it most: women and youth, especially in rural communities. Across Africa, many women cook over open fires, walk hours to gather fuel, and care for families in homes without light or clean air. This is not just an inconvenience, it is structural violence and policy failure.
Yet most energy finance still flows to centralised grids, mega-projects, and sometimes fossil gas (misleadingly called a “transition fuel”). These do little to address energy poverty. Locally appropriate decentralised renewable energy solutions, solar-powered appliances, clean cookstoves, and mini-grids can deliver faster, cheaper, and more equitable impact. Mission 300 must invest in such solutions, without adding to existing debt problems. It should support national policy design, for example, by ensuring that energy policy is responsive to women’s needs, making use of gender-disaggregated data and community consultation.
The Jubilee: A year for action
In a year already marked as a Jubilee moment, African leaders have demanded reform: including a sovereign debt workout mechanism and a UN Tax Convention to end illicit financial flows. Yet as AFRODAD has documented, these demands were blocked at the FfD4 negotiations by wealthy nations—notably the EU and UK—even as climate impacts grow and fiscal space shrinks.
This is not just about finance. It is about reclaiming sovereignty. The incoming AfDB president and all the multilateral development banks face a choice: continue financing extractive, large-scale projects that serve foreign interests, or invest in decentralised, gender-responsive, pro-people solutions that shift power and ownership.
Africa has the resources. What it needs is fiscal space, public-led finance, and global rules that prioritise people and planet over profit. The Jubilee call is clear: cancel the debt, redistribute the wealth, and fund the just transition.
Source: Recourse through LinkedIn Account Recourse.
Related posts:






‘They Stole Our Ancestors’: Ministry of Water, RDCs Accused of Land Grabbing and Grave Exhumation in Kanungu

Failed US-Brokered “Peace” Deal Was Never About Peace in DRC

Know Your Land rights and environmental protection laws: a case of a refreshed radio program transferring legal knowledge to local and indigenous communities to protect their land and the environment at Witness Radio.

Gov’t Seeks Land to Establish Palm Oil Mill and Nursery in Busoga

Uganda is on a mission to plant over 40 million trees by October 3, 2025, a crucial step in combating the alarming decline in its forest cover.

The 4th African Forum on Business and Human Rights: The rapidly escalating investment in Africa is urgently eroding environmental conservation and disregarding the dignity, the land, and human rights of the African people.

Oil palm tree growing in Uganda: The National Oil Palm Project is threatening to evict hundreds of smallholder farmers to expand its operations.

The 4th African Forum on Business and Human Rights: The African continent is lagging, with only a few member states having adopted the National Action Plan (NAP) on Business and Human Rights.

Innovative Finance from Canada projects positive impact on local communities.

Over 5000 Indigenous Communities evicted in Kiryandongo District

Petition To Land Inquiry Commission Over Human Rights In Kiryandongo District

Invisible victims of Uganda Land Grabs
Resource Center
- REPARATORY AND CLIMATE JUSTICE MUST BE AT THE CORE OF COP30, SAY GLOBAL LEADERS AND MOVEMENTS
- LAND GRABS AT GUNPOINT REPORT IN KIRYANDONGO DISTRICT
- THOSE OIL LIARS! THEY DESTROYED MY BUSINESS!
- RESEARCH BRIEF -TOURISM POTENTIAL OF GREATER MASAKA -MARCH 2025
- The Mouila Declaration of the Informal Alliance against the Expansion of Industrial Monocultures
- FORCED LAND EVICTIONS IN UGANDA TRENDS RIGHTS OF DEFENDERS IMPACT AND CALL FOR ACTION
- 12 KEY DEMANDS FROM CSOS TO WORLD LEADERS AT THE OPENING OF COP16 IN SAUDI ARABIA
- PRESENDIANTIAL DIRECTIVE BANNING ALL LAND EVICTIONS IN UGANDA
Legal Framework
READ BY CATEGORY
Newsletter
Trending
-
MEDIA FOR CHANGE NETWORK1 week ago
Oil palm tree growing in Uganda: The National Oil Palm Project is threatening to evict hundreds of smallholder farmers to expand its operations.
-
MEDIA FOR CHANGE NETWORK2 weeks ago
The 4th African Forum on Business and Human Rights: The African continent is lagging, with only a few member states having adopted the National Action Plan (NAP) on Business and Human Rights.
-
MEDIA FOR CHANGE NETWORK2 weeks ago
The EAC Seed and Plant Varieties Bill 2025 targets organic seeds, aiming to replace them with modified seeds, say smallholder farmers.
-
MEDIA FOR CHANGE NETWORK7 days ago
New! The Eyes on a Just Energy Transition in Africa Program is now live on Witness Radio.
-
MEDIA FOR CHANGE NETWORK3 days ago
Know Your Land rights and environmental protection laws: a case of a refreshed radio program transferring legal knowledge to local and indigenous communities to protect their land and the environment at Witness Radio.
-
NGO WORK2 weeks ago
Documenting killings and disappearances of land and environmental defenders
-
MEDIA FOR CHANGE NETWORK1 week ago
RDCs, Local Leaders Accused of Grabbing 70-Acre Ancestral Land
-
NGO WORK1 day ago
Failed US-Brokered “Peace” Deal Was Never About Peace in DRC