Connect with us

MEDIA FOR CHANGE NETWORK

AG okays disclosure of oil agreements amidst international pressure

Published

on

The Attorney General, Kiryowa Kiwanuka, has given the Ugandan government a green light to disclose the international oil contracts to the public.

This comes after the oil companies said they have no objections to publicising the oil contracts. Kiwanuka’s advice is likely to be welcomed by civil society and Ugandan citizens who have long called for transparency in the oil and mining sectors. Kiwanuka, in a letter dated July 2, 2024, advised the minister of Finance, Matia Kasaija that he was at liberty to disclose the production sharing agreements (PSAs) if he deemed it appropriate.

In a letter dated July 2, 2024, Kiwanuka advised Finance minister Matia Kasaija that he may disclose the production sharing agreements (PSAs) if he deems it appropriate. This guidance was in response to a letter from Kasaija dated June 1, 2024. However, Kiwanuka’s advice specifically pertains only to contracts with TotalEnergies Uganda and CNOOC Uganda Limited. He cited letters from these companies, dated July 18, 2021, and November 29, 2021, respectively, which confirmed their consent to the disclosure of their PSAs to fulfil the requirements of the Extractive Industries Transparency Initiative (EITI) standard 2.4.

“Therefore, we advise that should you deem it appropriate you are at liberty to disclose the PSAs as prescribed by the EITI standard requirement,” reads the letter copied to the minister of Energy and Mineral Development, state minister for Minerals, deputy attorney general.

The letter was also copied to the permanent secretary/secretary to the treasury, ministry of Finance, permanent secretary ministry of Energy, solicitor general and deputy solicitor general. A member of the civil society who had seen the letter however said it was silent concerning the contracts signed with other companies involved in oil exploration in the Albertine area.

Some of those include DGR Energy Turaco Uganda SMC Limited which is a unit of Australia’s DGR Global and state-owned Uganda National Oil Company (UNOC) and Nigeria’s Oranto. From Kiwanuka’s advice, it appears that the contracts signed with UNOC and mining contracts will remain a secret.

Uganda has been a member of the EITI since August 2020, committing to contract transparency by publicly disclosing the full text of agreements governing the exploitation of oil, gas, and mineral resources. By joining the EITI, Uganda aimed to enhance transparency, strengthen tax collection, promote public debate, improve the investment climate, and create lasting value from its petroleum and mineral resources.

This week, EITI executive director Mark Robinson visited Uganda to assess the country’s progress in ensuring transparency in the oil, gas, and minerals sectors. Robinson was accompanied by Suneeta Kaimal, president and CEO of the Natural Resource Governance Institute (NRGI), which has been instrumental in building the capacity of Ugandan civil society, media, parliamentarians, and government ministries on natural resource governance.

EITI executive director Nark Robinson
EITI executive director Nark Robinson

NRGI has supported capacity building of Ugandan civil society, media, parliamentarians, and ministries on natural resources governance, especially in accountability and governance. Robinson and Kaimal on Thursday met the minister of Finance, Matia Kasaijja, and his officers and discussed the progress in ensuring public disclosure of contracts under the extractive sector.

He also met officers from the Attorney General’s office and the key industry players like TotalEnergies and members of the civil society under multi-stakeholder groups (MSGs) hosted at the Uganda EITI secretariat under the ministry of Finance.  Robinson told journalists that his team found it so striking that all the stakeholders in Uganda were committed to the EITI process.

”The EITI seemed to have curved out open space in Uganda for genuine, free, and open debate on these complex issues around the extractive industry,” he said.

RObison’s visit to Uganda follows the validation report on Uganda whose results were released in May 2024. The EITI board said Uganda had achieved a moderate score in implementing the 2019 EITI Standard at 78.5 points. The overall score reflects an average of the three component scores on stakeholder engagement, transparency, and outcomes and impact. On the transparency component, Uganda achieved a fairly low score of 67.5 points. Robinson while meeting the minister raised some of these issues.

“We identified some of the improvements that could be made. He was very receptive. For example, how can contracts further be made open to the public? So there is a process to move towards that goal,” he said.

He confirmed that they discussed making public the audited accounts of Uganda National Oil Company (UNOC).

“He was very receptive to that idea. So I was very struck by their receptivity and recognition from the government to respond positively to some of the recommendations,” added Robinson.

Sources who attended the meeting with the minister said he asked his visitors about what Uganda would gain from its participation with EITI. Robinson said the minister’s question was good because it reconfirmed why Uganda signed up to the EITI. The EITI board had reported that there had been little progress on full disclosures of contracts in the oil sector despite Uganda EITI’s (UGEITI) efforts.

The EITI board also noted that beneficial ownership data was not available though there had been reforms put to create a national beneficial ownership registry. Robinson seemed to have had information to the effect that TotalEnergies and CNOOC Uganda had written no objection letters to the disclosure of the PSAs signed with the government of Uganda.

“Uganda has to demonstrate real progress on making the contracts public. That needs to happen not just those two but across the sector,” he said.

Robinson emphasized the need for Uganda to demonstrate real progress in making contracts public across the entire sector, not just with TotalEnergies and CNOOC. He also called for the creation of a public registry of beneficial owners in the oil, gas, and mining sectors and the reconciliation of discrepancies in gold production data.

“The fourth one is to reconcile some of the discrepancies in the mining data, especially gold production,” added Robison.

Asked why they were insistent on gold data, he said, “It is so important in many countries. And it is one of your major minerals in Uganda that has significant and considerable revenue. That is why gold matters so much than other sectors of the mining,” he said.

Gold, one of Uganda’s major minerals, has been a focal point due to its significant revenue potential. A recent UN report highlighted Uganda, Rwanda, and Burundi as key transit routes for gold smuggled from the eastern Democratic Republic of Congo to Dubai. In Uganda, discrepancies have been noted between gold production figures reported by the Bank of Uganda and those declared by Uganda Revenue Authority (URA) customs.

David Sserwadda, a senior mining inspector, and a member of the Uganda EITI Multisector Group said there is an effort to ensure that different agencies of the government don’t regulate gold exports. He revealed that there had been a meeting with the customs department on how to align gold export in the sense that when it is not cleared, the customs should not allow the export. Uganda has to close some of those before the next EITI board validation commencing on July 1, 2026.

Source: The Observer

Continue Reading

MEDIA FOR CHANGE NETWORK

Why are secure land rights key to Africa’s climate resilience and the protection of its natural treasures?

Published

on

By the Witness Radio Team.

Protecting forests, breathing new life into exhausted land, and confronting climate change hinge not only on policies but on whether those who live on the land truly hold secure rights to it.

The challenge is significant. Between 2015 and 2019, at least 100 million hectares of healthy, productive land were degraded worldwide each year, affecting about 1.3 billion people, according to the United Nations Convention to Combat Desertification (UNCCD). A 2026 global assessment by the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO), the International Land Coalition (ILC), and the French agricultural research organization CIRAD found that only 35 percent of the world’s land has formally documented ownership, tenure, or use rights. These figures highlight the scale of land degradation and the gaps in recognizing and documenting people’s land rights.

Across Africa, communities depend on farmland, forests, and grazing lands not just for food, but to keep their traditions and livelihoods alive. When climate and environmental policies ignore their rights to these resources, their power to protect the land and shape its destiny fades.

This is why land rights advocates across Africa are calling for land governance to be more deeply woven into climate action and conservation, insisting that securing people’s land rights is the foundation for protecting the environment.

The issue was discussed during an online webinar organized by ILC Africa in partnership with the West African Economic and Monetary Union (UEMOA), the Economic Community of West African States (ECOWAS) and the German development agency GIZ. Practitioners and policy actors shared experiences from several African countries on integrating land governance into climate and environmental policies.

Ms. Johanna von Braun, People, Climate and Nature Lead at the International Land Coalition, explained that land rights are fundamental to achieving the objectives of the three major global environmental conventions addressing climate change, biodiversity loss and desertification.

She said secure land rights can support emissions reduction, help communities adapt to climate change and strengthen biodiversity conservation. In the Amazon, she noted, research shows that recognizing Indigenous peoples’ territories helps protect tropical forests and preserve carbon sinks.

“For mitigation, we know now that with land rights, we can ensure the protection of critical carbon sinks,” Ms. von Braun said.

Land rights are equally important for communities whose livelihoods depend on adapting to changing environmental conditions. Ms. von Braun explained that pastoralist communities with secure rights to move their livestock are better positioned to respond to climate change and manage grazing areas sustainably.

Evidence on rangeland loss reinforces this connection. Research has found that 92 percent of rangeland loss through land-use conversion between 2016 and 2024 occurred in areas where Indigenous peoples’ and local communities’ land rights were not secure, were unknown, or the land fell outside mapped community territories, facts which highlight the importance of recognizing community land rights in efforts to protect rangelands and strengthen climate resilience.

Ms. von Braun also pointed to Namibia, where communal conservancies cover about 20 percent of the country and support biodiversity conservation. She said community-based conservation initiatives can help countries advance global biodiversity commitments, including the 30×30 target to conserve at least 30 percent of the world’s land and sea by 2030.

Despite the clear connection between land rights and environmental protection, bringing land governance into national climate policies remains a persistent and difficult challenge.

Moise Mbimbe, a regional program analyst with ILC Africa, described efforts to address this gap in Burkina Faso, Liberia, Togo and Senegal.

With catalytic funding, the coalition ignited efforts to weave land governance into countries’ Nationally Determined Contributions (NDCs), which serve as blueprints for their climate commitments under the Paris Agreement. This meant reviewing policies, amplifying community voices, and bringing together a wide range of actors to shape recommendations that place land issues at the core of national climate plans.

Mr. Mbimbe said the process had helped participating countries consider land governance.

“Whether it’s in Togo, Burkina Faso or Liberia, we have made considerable progress when it comes to taking or considering land when it comes to NDCs,” he said.

In Burkina Faso, an assessment of the country’s previous climate commitments revealed that land governance had received limited attention.

Mr. Blaise Bama, coordinator of the Multi-Stakeholder Platform on Land (PMAF) in Burkina Faso, said the assessment reviewed policy documents and gathered perspectives from institutional, community, and regional stakeholders.

The findings pointed to significant gaps in how the country’s previous NDC addressed land issues.

“This assessment identified a very weak level where land was not considered in the previous NDC,” Mr. Bama said. assessment recommended recognizing the central role of land rights in climate action and securing community land rights. Mr. Bama added that local consultations allowed community-level actors to share their views and contribute to the policy process.

“It was a moment of close analysis, and these local consultations allow us to consider the opinions of local actors, especially at the community level,” he said.

In Senegal, practitioners are forging new links between land governance, environmental restoration, and active local community participation.

Ms. Nicole Chaby Hary, facilitator of the National Land Governance Platform (PNGF), said consultations revealed that land security and environmental restoration are top priorities. Yet, motivating communities to invest in restoration has proven difficult, highlighting the need for practical tools, clear responsibilities, and authentic participation.

She emphasized that women, youth, local leaders, government bodies, and all stakeholders must have a seat at the table when managing and restoring land.

“We have to put in place tools, like pastoral units, to help with consultations and community responsibilities, especially for women and youth,” Ms. Hary said.

In Madagascar, efforts are underway to ensure that community rights are reflected in biodiversity policies and implementation.

Ms. Stefana Raharijaona, a senior program officer at Natural Justice Madagascar, said the organization has worked to incorporate local communities’ concerns into national biodiversity priorities and translate them into monitorable actions.

This work has meant championing the recognition of community rights and land tenure, supporting community-led management, and striving to formalize and protect these hard-earned rights.

Ms. Raharijaona also described efforts to support implementation of Madagascar’s National Biodiversity Strategy and Action Plan, including work related to Target 22 and the establishment of a national biodiversity platform to improve coordination among the different actors involved.

Across these countries, practitioners confront a common challenge: climate and biodiversity goals will stay out of reach unless the rights of those who depend on and nurture the land are genuinely recognized.

As African nations strengthen their environmental policies, securing community land rights and ensuring meaningful participation in decision-making will be essential to protect ecosystems, heal damaged land, and build resilience to climate change.

Continue Reading

MEDIA FOR CHANGE NETWORK

Biodiversity Goals: The world has no time to meet its 2030 goals.

Published

on

By the Witness Radio Team

With fewer than four years left to meet global biodiversity targets, a new United Nations assessment urges country to accelerate efforts to protect and restore nature, warning that current efforts fall short of promises.

The State of Biodiversity Action report, released just before the 17th Conference of the Parties to the Convention on Biological Diversity (COP17) in Armenia, reveals that while almost 90 percent of countries have set national biodiversity targets, less than half are making progress toward achieving them.

COP17 starts today in Yerevan, Armenia, and runs until October 30, 2026.

As the conference opens, the findings cast doubt on whether countries can fulfill the Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework, adopted in 2022 to stop and reverse biodiversity loss by 2030.

The Framework addresses the principal drivers of biodiversity loss, including land- and sea-use change, unsustainable exploitation of species, climate change, pollution and invasive alien species, as well as economic and financial activities contributing to biodiversity loss.

A key ambition of the framework is to safeguard at least 30 percent of the world’s land and sea by 2030. The assessment reveals that current pledges fall short. Even if all commitments are met, just 26 percent of land and 12 percent of marine ecosystems would be protected by the deadline.

The gap between promises and progress was highlighted by Astrid Schomaker, Executive Secretary of the Convention on Biological Diversity, who called on governments to use the global review to identify shortcomings and accelerate implementation.

“We know where we stand. We know where the gaps are. Now we must work together to close them,” Ms. Schomaker said.

Her words highlight the conference’s core challenge. Countries know what must be done, but meaningful action is still lagging.

The assessment points to gaps in funding, coordination among government bodies, and the data needed to measure progress. It also shows that targets requiring action beyond environment ministries, such as business practices, sustainable consumption, harmful incentives, and finance, are falling furthest behind.

To meet the 2030 targets, governments must integrate biodiversity concerns into broader economic and development choices.

At the opening of COP17 on 19 October, the outgoing Colombian presidency also stressed the need to turn international agreements into practical results.

David Olarte Amaya, who represented Colombia’s COP16 presidency, described the gathering in Yerevan as a decisive moment for the planet, noting that the international community had an urgent responsibility to turn the framework’s commitments into “concrete, measurable, and lasting results.”

He also stressed that biodiversity is deeply connected to daily life, underpinning water and food security, resilient communities, thriving economies, and the well-being of society.

“Biodiversity is not merely an environmental concern but also the foundation of our water and food security, the resilience of our territories, the productivity of our economies, and the well-being of our societies,” he stressed.

He noted that the true measure of the conference’s success will not be the number of decisions made, but whether they spark real change in countries and communities.

“Today, as we hand over the COP16 presidency, Colombia reaffirms its commitment to solution-oriented multilateralism, grounded in dialogue, mutual respect among parties, and shared responsibilities. We express our confidence in Armenia’s leadership and our readiness to contribute constructively to the work of this conference,” he added.

Armenia’s Minister of Environment and incoming COP17 president, Mr. Hambardzum Matevosyan, recognized that countries must now focus on what works, where progress is lacking, and what must change to accelerate results.

“COP 15 gave us the framework. COP 16 advanced important mechanisms for its implementation. COP 17 must now help us determine where we stand, what is working, where progress is falling short, and what must change to accelerate implementation,” Mr. Matevosyan said.

He praised Colombia’s COP16 presidency and described the handover as a seamless continuation of the global push for biodiversity.

Mr. Matevosyan also highlighted the Leaders for Nature Summit in Yerevan, which concluded with the Yerevan Declaration—a call to action for nature and a reminder to turn promises into tangible outcomes.

Staying true to the promise of an inclusive COP, Matevosyan pledged that Armenia’s presidency would listen to Indigenous Peoples, local communities, women, youth, civil society, academia, local leaders, businesses, and the finance sector, recognizing that governments cannot tackle biodiversity loss on their own.

“The challenges we face are too big to be addressed by governments alone. The story, the parallel forums, thematic days, and numerous side events will inform and support negotiation outcomes,” he concluded.

As the 2030 deadline looms, the real test is whether countries can move from promises to action and deliver the transformation needed to stop and reverse biodiversity loss. The Yerevan review gives governments a chance to face the gaps, build stronger partnerships, and turn words into measurable progress for nature and all who rely on it.

Continue Reading

MEDIA FOR CHANGE NETWORK

Lands Ministry tightens rules for replacing lost titles, gives landowners 30 days to object

Published

on

KAMPALA — The Ministry of Lands, Housing and Urban Development has introduced stricter procedures for replacing lost, destroyed or damaged land titles, requiring public notices, physical inspections and stronger verification to curb fraud and protect legitimate landowners.

Under new guidelines presented by Lands Minister Judith Nabakooba on Tuesday, applications for Special Certificates of Title will be subjected to a mandatory notice period of at least 30 days, during which people claiming an interest in the land can raise objections before a replacement title is issued.

The measures seek to close loopholes that have enabled fraudulent land transactions, impersonation, double sales and disputes over ownership by strengthening checks before the government issues replacement documents.

The guidelines require the ministry to publish notices in the Uganda Gazette for at least 30 days, display them on the relevant land and at sub-county and Local Council I notice boards, and publish monthly lists of applications in a newspaper of wide circulation.

The ministry will also publish details of the affected land parcels and applicants on its website for the same period, allowing potential claimants and other interested parties to scrutinise applications.

Any person alleging fraud, competing ownership claims, double sale, impersonation, unlawful retention or another material irregularity will be allowed to lodge a formal objection with the Registrar of Titles within the applicable notice period.

Where an objection is received, the registrar must summon the parties for a hearing and make a ruling, giving those who may be affected an opportunity to be heard before a decision is made.

The guidelines are anchored in the Registration of Titles Act and other applicable laws, including the Constitution and the Land Act. They provide for the issuance of Special Certificates where duplicate certificates have been lost, destroyed or become so damaged that they are unusable, as well as cases where a court orders their issuance.

Beyond paperwork and public notices, the ministry will require physical inspections and, where necessary, boundary-opening exercises to establish the status of land before approving applications.

The exercises must be conducted by a government surveyor together with a registrar of titles or land officer, in the presence of the Local Council I committee, which must have a quorum of five members.

Inspection reports will document the proceedings, people present, developments on the land, occupancy and current use. The requirement is intended to provide additional evidence about the property and help identify competing claims that may not be apparent from the documents submitted.

Applicants seeking replacement titles for lost documents must submit a statutory declaration, proof of payment of the required fees, a national identity document, passport-size photographs, a police form reporting the loss, an LC I committee report and an inspection or boundary-opening report.

They must also provide evidence of publication through a Gazette notice and newspaper advertisement, alongside a local notice.

For titles that have been obliterated, applicants must surrender the damaged duplicate certificate and provide supporting documents, including a statutory declaration, identification and inspection reports.

The guidelines also introduce specific requirements for administrators and executors seeking Special Certificates of Title on behalf of deceased persons’ estates.

In addition to the general application documents, they must provide an inventory, letters of probate or administration, and a copy of the petition for probate or letters of administration.

The additional requirements are intended to establish that applicants have the legal authority to act for the deceased person’s estate before a replacement title is issued.

For court-directed applications, the person seeking implementation of the order must submit a formal letter and a certified copy of the court order. The Registrar of Titles must independently verify the order with the court that issued it before proceeding.

Under the new framework, a replacement title cannot be approved merely because an applicant reports that the original document is missing.

The registrar must establish that the original certificate was genuine, the applicant has been properly identified and is legally authorised to apply, and the loss, destruction or damage has been sufficiently demonstrated.

The registrar must also confirm that the transaction is genuine, relevant dealings and encumbrances have been identified, recognised pending transactions have been completed, and no unresolved legal matter prevents issuance.

The proposed Special Certificate must accurately reflect the particulars contained in the Register Book, which serves as the official record of registered land interests.

Every decision to approve, defer, reject or suspend an application must be documented with reasons. The ministry will also require material steps in the process to be recorded and stored in both physical and electronic formats to improve accountability and traceability.

Once issued, the Special Certificate must contain the relevant register particulars, endorsements and the reason for its issuance. The Register Book must also be updated with the issuance date, application number, reference to the previous certificate and relevant Gazette notice or court order, where applicable.

The guidelines are intended to strengthen the integrity of Uganda’s land registration system while providing an avenue for people with legitimate interests to challenge questionable applications before replacement titles are issued.

They also reinforce the principle that land registration procedures must be conducted in accordance with the law and with due regard to the rights of lawful and bona fide occupants protected under Article 237 of the Constitution.

Source: pmldaily.com

Continue Reading

Resource Center

Legal Framework

READ BY CATEGORY

Facebook

Newsletter

Subscribe to Witness Radio's news and report updates



Trending

Subscribe to Witness Radio's news and report updates