• Fossil Free South Africa and its partners have lodged a complaint with the Advertising Regulatory Board, challenging the bank’s environmental and climate related marketing.
• The complaint centres on Standard Bank’s involvement in financing the 1,443 kilometre East African Crude Oil Pipeline, which campaigners say conflicts with its sustainability commitments.
• The complainants are seeking a review of the bank’s environmental claims and want any statements found to be misleading or inadequately supported to be amended or withdrawn.

Standard Bank is facing a formal complaint to South Africa’s Advertising Regulatory Board (ARB) over environmental and climate claims in its corporate reporting and financial services advertising, with campaigners questioning whether its sustainability messaging accurately reflects its involvement in fossil fuel infrastructure.

The complaint was lodged by Fossil Free South Africa (FFSA), represented by Lawyers for Human Rights. They are joined by  StopEACOP Coalition, an international coalition of frontline community organisations and civil society groups. It challenges statements in Standard Bank’s 2025 Report to Society, its Climate Related Financial Disclosures and advertising for its energy, infrastructure and sustainable finance services.

According to the complainants, Standard Bank presents itself as a leading provider of sustainable finance and an enabler of Africa’s just energy transition while supporting financing for the East African Crude Oil Pipeline (EACOP). They argue that the bank’s environmental claims should be assessed against the wider impact of the projects it helps finance.

East African Crude Oil Pipeline map. Image credit: EACOP

The 1,443 kilometre pipeline is designed to transport crude oil from Uganda’s oilfields to the Tanzanian coast. The project has attracted international criticism over its potential climate impact, environmental risks and effects on communities along its route.

Peak production is projected to generate up to 34 million tonnes of carbon dioxide equivalent annually at peak production and approximately 379 million tonnes over the project’s lifecycle. Furthermore, the pipeline’s path breaches 158 wetlands in Uganda, eleven rivers and dozens of legally protected,  ecologically sensitive areas.

The complainants further raise concerns about reported land loss, economic displacement, compensation disputes and disruption to local livelihoods. They also point to reports of harassment, arrests and intimidation involving environmental and human rights defenders who oppose the project.

Standard Bank’s stated commitments to renewable energy, reduced fossil fuel exposure, water conservation, biodiversity protection and net zero financed emissions by 2050 are central to the complaint. The campaigners argue that these commitments require clear evidence of how the bank’s financing activities align with its public sustainability messaging.

Kholwani Simelane, campaign coordinator and team lead at Fossil Free South Africa, said the complaint seeks to establish whether the bank’s environmental image can withstand scrutiny of the projects it supports.

The complaint also questions Standard Bank’s assertion that EACOP meets the Equator Principles and the International Finance Corporation’s Performance Standards. It asks the bank to substantiate this position and explain how its financing decisions align with its commitments to water conservation and environmental protection, particularly given the pipeline’s proximity to freshwater systems, including the Lake Victoria basin.

The dispute comes amid wider scrutiny of financial institutions involved in fossil fuel infrastructure. According to the StopEACOP Coalition, more than 40 banks and 30 insurers internationally have distanced themselves from EACOP or introduced policies excluding the project or similar developments. South African financial institutions including Absa, FirstRand, Nedbank and Investec have also declined to participate, the coalition says.

Zaki Mamdoo, coordinator of the StopEACOP Coalition, said the concerns extend beyond corporate advertising to the consequences experienced by communities along the pipeline corridor, including pressure on livelihoods and local ecosystems.

The ARB Code requires environmental claims to be substantiated and not mislead consumers through omission, ambiguity, inaccuracy or exaggeration. The complaint asks the regulator to examine Standard Bank’s claims relating to climate alignment, fossil fuel reduction and sustainable finance, and to require amendments or withdrawal of any representations found to be misleading or inadequately supported.

Brighton Aryampa, a Ugandan human and environmental rights lawyer working with communities affected by EACOP, said the complaint was intended to establish whether the bank’s public sustainability messaging provides an accurate account of its financing activities. He noted that financing a fossil fuel project does not automatically negate every renewable energy investment made by a bank, but argued that its overall environmental claims must be assessed in context.

The outcome of the complaint could have implications for how financial institutions communicate their sustainability commitments and environmental performance to customers and the public. It also raises broader questions about the evidence banks should provide when marketing sustainable finance services while maintaining exposure to fossil fuel infrastructure.

The ARB has been asked to scrutinise the claims and determine whether corrective action is warranted.

Author: Bryan Groenendaal

Source: greenbuildingafrica.co.za

By the Witness Radio team.

Experts agree that when communities lead environmental initiatives, they can safeguard land, biodiversity, and local livelihoods. Yet for these efforts to truly shape decisions and create lasting change, communities need a real seat at the table when crafting the policies that govern their territories.

Across regions, communities are crafting unique approaches to agriculture, conservation, and resource management that mirror their own priorities and landscapes. But finding solutions is just the beginning. For these grassroots efforts to ripple out and shape broader environmental policy, the people driving them must have a voice in decision-making, gain recognition for their methods, and see that policy promises become reality.

Stories shared by environmental policy advocates during a recent webinar brought to life both the power of collective action and the hurdles communities encounter when trying to shape decisions beyond their own backyards.

A project in central Italy demonstrates how collaboration among communities, farmers, and local officials can win formal policy recognition. At the same time, Guillerme Eidt’s advocacy work underscores why local communities must move from passive recipients of environmental policies to active shapers.

In Italy’s Lazio region, the Bio-district of Via Amerina e delle Forre shows that collective action can lay the groundwork for environmental stewardship and shape the future of territorial development.

According to the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO), the bio-district brings together 13 municipalities and more than 300 organic farms in a territory with approximately 70,000 inhabitants. The initiative connects agriculture, local communities, environmental protection and economic development through a shared approach to managing the territory.

Instead of leaving environmental challenges for individual farmers to tackle alone, the bio-district champions teamwork among producers, residents, civil society groups, and local authorities.

Andrea Ferrante, an agronomist and agroecologist with experience in food and agriculture policy and rural development, says this territorial perspective is central to understanding how environmental protection can work in practice.

“So, we need communities; we need organizations and movements that are the ones stewarding also the soil, the biodiversity,” Ferrante said during the webinar.

He argued that tackling issues like land degradation requires more than focusing on single farms, since landscape health depends on the web of relationships among those who live and work there.

“It’s not the single farm, it’s a territory,” he added.

The bio-district supports organic farming, boosts direct sales from farmers to consumers, promotes environmental education, and champions sustainable local growth. Reports also highlight how the community has come together to address concerns about intensive hazelnut farming, including pesticide use, water pollution, and threats to biodiversity.

Ferrante pushed back against the idea that innovation always means new gadgets or technology. He argued that true innovation often lies in collaboration, especially when communities tap into their shared wisdom and work hand in hand with nature.

“Innovation is all about how we work together, how we build on our local community, how the capacity to manage and live in collaboration, in great collaboration with nature,” he said.

Ferrante described how civil society and local government joined forces to create a framework that would bring their shared vision for agriculture and territorial development to life.

“So, both civil society and the municipality, we built together a structure because if we are recognized, we have the capacity to protect our territory, to build our socioeconomic models. And from the regional law, we arrived at the national legislation,” he further added.

In October 2019, the Lazio regional government officially recognized the initiative, marking a key step in building a legal framework for bio-districts.

While the Italian bio-district shows how collective action can earn official recognition, Guillerme Eidt’s presentation spotlighted a different challenge: ensuring communities have a real voice in shaping the policies that govern their lands.

Eidt believes that true participation means honoring the identities and governance systems that communities use to organize themselves.

“We understand that local communities have the right to self-identify themselves and not be labeled for the state,” he said.

He explained that local communities comprise a rich tapestry of groups, from pastoralists and Afro-descendant peoples to community foresters, nomads, and farmers. Despite their varied histories and cultures, many rely on collective systems to steward land and resources.

Eidt pointed out that local communities often have little say in international environmental negotiations, even though decisions on climate, biodiversity, and land use can reshape how resources are managed at every level.

“It’s not fully open. It’s not fully inclusive. If you invite parties to do something, it means something different. We need to pay attention to these documents and understand how they are written. We need to participate in these processes to ensure local communities have a more visible voice. Indigenous people are so well organized.” He added

Eidt emphasized that for local communities to have real influence in international environmental governance, they need ongoing coordination and strong, organized advocacy.

In his presentation, he described how the Global Forum of Local Communities brings organizations together, helping them align their priorities and take part in international environmental discussions.

He outlined several ways communities and their allies can influence policy, including contributing proposed wording to negotiation texts, preparing policy briefs and technical submissions, participating in mandated workshops, holding bilateral meetings with decision-makers, and organizing events that bring communities together. The stories Ferrante and Eidt share reveal how vital it is to bridge the gap between local environmental action and the institutions that craft, enforce, and implement policy.

Ferrante’s story of the Italian bio-district shows how communities, farmers, and local authorities can work together to manage land and win official recognition.

Eidt’s presentation, on the other hand, highlights the challenge of ensuring communities can shape decisions that reach far beyond their borders, even in international environmental negotiations.

Hania Morani, a legal expert and former vice-chair of the United Nations Permanent Forum on Indigenous Issues, reinforced this relationship in her closing reflections during the webinar.

“International ideas inspire local action, and communities give those ideas meaning, and their experiences return to reshape policy,” she said.

By the Witness Radio Team

On Thursday, 29th October 2026, faith leaders representing more than 20 African nations will release an open letter to the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation. In it, they urge the Foundation to acknowledge and address the harm they say two decades of industrial agricultural funding in Africa has caused—their call for reparations centers on redirecting resources toward agroecology and food systems led by Africans themselves.

Signed by 625 faith leaders, the letter directly challenges the Foundation’s backing of the Alliance for a Green Revolution in Africa (AGRA), an organization established in 2006 by the Gates and Rockefeller Foundations. Their demands gain urgency from research published in August 2026 by Tufts University’s Timothy Wise and the Alliance for Food Sovereignty in Africa (AFSA), which found a 58% surge in undernourished people across AGRA’s 13 focus countries between 2004–2006 and 2022–2024.

AGRA says its mission is to transform African agriculture by helping smallholder farmers increase production, improve their livelihoods and access growing agricultural markets.

On its website, the organization states: “AGRA, headquartered in Nairobi, is a proudly African-led institution focused on scaling agricultural innovations that help smallholder farmers towards increased incomes, better livelihoods, and improved food security. We understand that African farmers need uniquely African solutions to the environmental and agricultural challenges they face, enabling them to sustainably boost production and gain access to rapidly growing agricultural markets.”

Marking its 20th anniversary, AGRA frames this milestone as a moment for reflection and a renewed pledge to transform Africa’s food systems.

“In 2026, AGRA celebrates 20 years since Kofi Annan ignited a bold vision: a continent where agriculture fuels prosperity, opportunity, and resilience for millions of smallholder farmers. Over two decades, we have partnered with governments, farmers, research institutions, the private sector, and development partners to strengthen the foundations of Africa’s food systems. AGRA@20 is a milestone of reflection and renewal. It honors two decades of advancing Africa’s food systems, while charting a bolder path for the future of food systems transformation across the continent.”

Yet, civil society groups, agricultural experts, and independent researchers have sharply criticized AGRA’s approach, questioning whether its focus on commercial seeds, synthetic fertilizers, and industrial inputs has truly delivered on its promises of improved food security.

The August 2026 research by Wise and AFSA found that the number of undernourished people across AGRA’s 13 focus countries rose from 94.6 million in 2004–2006 to 149.6 million in 2022–2024. It also found that annual staple-crop yield growth averaged 1.2% after AGRA’s introduction, slightly below the 1.3% recorded annually during the preceding 12 years.

According to the report, fertilizer use more than doubled, while the share of cultivated land planted with millet and sorghum, both drought-tolerant crops, declined from 26% to 16%.

The researchers also cited Senegal, not one of AGRA’s 13 focus countries, as a contrast. The country halved its number of undernourished people while using approximately half as much fertilizer per hectare as the AGRA countries.

These findings have only deepened the worries of faith leaders and food-sovereignty advocates, who insist that agricultural development funding must put ecological sustainability, farmers’ rights, and locally driven solutions at the forefront.

The delegation delivering the letter will feature voices from South Africa, Liberia, Kenya, and Botswana. These leaders plan to urge the Gates Foundation to meet with them before its 2026 funding decisions and to respond directly to independent research scrutinizing the impact of its agricultural investments.

The faith leaders have raised similar concerns with the Foundation in previous years. In 2020, they called on it to stop funding Green Revolution programs. In November 2025, they sent another letter through the Southern African Faith Communities’ Environment Institute (SAFCEI), urging the Foundation to acknowledge what they described as the failure of its interventions in African food and farming systems.

In the 2025 letter, the leaders questioned the Foundation’s continued support for AGRA, arguing that its agricultural development approach raised concerns about environmental sustainability, community rights and the well-being of vulnerable populations.

“As faith leaders, we have a responsibility as custodians of the Earth and of our faith communities to call out injustice and ensure the equitable sharing of resources for all, particularly the most vulnerable. While we note that the Gates Foundation has committed itself to ending food insecurity and poverty in Africa, we are gravely concerned about the approach it continues to take, through its support of AGRA (until recently known as the Alliance for a Green Revolution in Africa).”

The leaders urge the Foundation to halt funding for AGRA and similar initiatives and redirect investment toward agroecology and food systems shaped by Africans. Their demands encompass support for farmer-led research, community seed banks, and local knowledge, along with policies that safeguard African communities’ rights and empower them to control their own food production.

The virtual press conference on 29 October will bring together Francesca de Gasparis, Executive Director of SAFCEI; Rev. Dr Tolbert Thomas Jallah Jr., Board Chair of AFSA; Ulfat Hussein Masibo from the Africa Muslims Women’s Action Network; Gorata Ramokgothwane of the Botswana Council of Churches; Dr Hassan Omari Kinyua from the Africa Faith Actors Network for Climate Justice and the Muslim Council in Kenya; and Gabriel Manyangadze, Food and Climate Justice Manager at SAFCEI, who will deliver the letter and issue the call to action.

At the heart of their appeal is a call for international funders to pivot their support toward agroecology and food production strategies defined by local communities.

“It’s time for international funders to transition towards agroecology through respecting and supporting locally defined holistic approaches in Africa, by Africa. As faith leaders, we must advocate for the restoration of our relationship with the Earth and the community of life on which we all depend,” the faith leaders stated.

AGRA, however, rejects claims that its agricultural model has failed, arguing that any progress over the past twenty years should be weighed against the broader challenges facing African food systems.

In its August 2026 Impact, Learning and Foresight Report, the organization says agricultural output across Africa has roughly doubled in real terms since 2005, while cereal yields have increased by about 40%. It also points to the growth of local seed companies, agricultural input distribution networks, and community extension services as evidence of progress.