MEDIA FOR CHANGE NETWORK

Decades of land loss and chronic poverty: Salala Rubber Plantation prioritizes profit over the well-being of local Liberian communities.

Published

5 months ago

February 6, 2026

What began in 1959 as a promise of jobs and development has, according to affected communities and civil society advocates supporting these communities, evolved into a prolonged struggle marked by land loss, environmental destruction, and unfulfilled commitments.

In 1959, the Liberian government granted the Salala Rubber Plantation (SRC) a 70-year lease on a 40,500-hectare land concession in District 5, Margibi County, and in District 6, Bong County, respectively, and developed a rubber plantation on 8,500 hectares.

According to the company’s objectives, it aimed to develop the community by creating job opportunities and providing fair compensation to landowners.

“When the company came to Liberia, it presented itself as supporting the government by creating jobs for Liberians. That message appealed both to the government and to the local communities.” John Brownell revealed in an interview with Witness Radio.

But the expected joy never materialized. The arrival of the rubber company brought consequences whose effects are still inherited to this day. For more than six decades, communities in central Liberia have endured hardship, misery, and persistent poverty passed from one generation to the next.

Some people, especially in Lango, Tartee Towns & Deedeta 1 & 2 areas, were evicted from their land to make way for a large-scale Rubber plantation. In contrast, others who have endured violence are still placed in the middle of the company plantations. According to reports, many others whose homesteads border the company plantations are still facing land grabbing as the company extends its expansions.

Salala Rubber Plantation was established in 1959, during a period when Liberia’s land governance system recognized only public land and private land tenures, excluding customary land tenure. Although the land was officially classified as public, community members in the area, including indigenous groups, had already been cultivating it for farming, burial grounds, water sources, and cultural practices.

“Whereas the land was given to the Company for a Rubber project, it was never an abandoned land. Liberians already occupied it from the Kpelle and Bassa, and other ethnic groups. The company didn’t honor their existence; instead, it forced them off their land,” John added.

At least 22 affected communities across Bong and Margibi Counties continue to demand justice, accountability for the damages caused, and redress, highlighting the need to advocate for change.

Although the SRC concession required that land be selected exclusively from unencumbered public lands and prohibited the evacuation of villages within the concession or development area, the land ultimately selected was heavily encumbered, resulting in the eviction of several villages.

According to the concession agreement, the Concessionaire had to pay rental for public lands to be used for the project, “If the Concessionaire cannot reach a satisfactory agreement with any private owner for any land which may be mentioned as aforementioned, the Concessionaire may bring the matter to the attention of the government which agrees to use its for good offices in obtaining for the Concessionaire the use of the land in a manner equitable to the Concessionaire and the respective private owner for just and reasonable compensation.” Part of the agreement, Witness Radio obtained a copy of it, mentioned.

This meant that the company had to compensate the communities whose land was to be used for the project; instead, the company forcefully took over the community lands.

Following Liberia’s civil war, which disrupted and damaged the plantations’ investments, the Socfin Group acquired the Salala Rubber Corporation (SRC) and invested to optimize the plantation and improve social infrastructure. SRC applied for a US$10 million loan from the International Finance Corporation (IFC), an arm of the World Bank, in 2007 to rehabilitate and expand project operations. According to the documents seen by Witness Radio, the 12-year loan investment from IFC was approved in 2008.

Community representatives say that despite the earlier injustices brought to the communities after the government allocated land that was occupied by people to the company, shortly after receiving the IFC loan, the company expanded beyond its concession boundaries, encroaching on the community’s land and deliberately causing other human rights violations.

“During the operations and expansions between 2007 and 2012, they destroyed community sacred sites, polluted water sources, and destroyed their crops without adequate compensation,” Paul added.

Some villages were forced to relocate again. Between 2012 and 2013, affected communities filed complaints with civil society organizations, triggering investigations that found the company liable for multiple allegations.

“And so, by 2012 and 2013, the community then decided to file a complaint with our office. Our office had to work with them to get the government and the company to restore the economic, cultural, and social benefits that the company had destroyed for them. An investigation was conducted and found the company liable for the allegations,” Paul added.

Despite supporting the communities, advocates found engaging with the company challenging. “The communities fought for dialogue with the company, but it failed. We tried to write several letters, but the company refused to honor the dialogue with the community,” he adds.

According to the Alliance for Rural Democracy, when their engagements with the company failed, they filed a complaint with the IFC against the company’s operation.

“When dialogue attempts failed, communities escalated the matter internationally. In May 2019, Green Advocates International, Natural Resource Women Platform, and the Alliance for Rural Democracy supported them in filing a formal complaint with the IFC’s Compliance Advisor Ombudsman (CAO). The complaint involved allegations of: Physical Displacement, Economic Displacement, and Loss of Livelihood; Historical Land Claims by extension, Land Grab; Grievance Handling; and Threats and Reprisals against Complainants—gender-based violence and Harassment, among others —violations that the communities believed infringed on their human rights.

In September 2020, following a compliance appraisal, CAO initiated an investigation into IFC’s environmental and social (E&S) performance concerning the issues raised in the complaint. However, the investigation stalled until June 2023, when the communities staged a peaceful mass action at the World Bank office in Monrovia, demanding redress to their complaint.

Under pressure from communities, CAO finalized its Investigation Report in December 2023 and submitted it to the World Bank’s Board. The CAO report found harm and indications of damage to the affected communities in relation to compensation, consultation, gender-based violence and harassment (GBVH), security threats, land acquisition, Indigenous Peoples, cultural heritage, water quality, and labor practices.

In addition, Socfinaf S.A, owner of SRC, commissioned its own independent investigation led by Earthworm Foundation. The final Earthworm report corroborated the communities’ allegations against the Salala Rubber Corporation.

In response to CAO’s investigations, on March 13, 2025, the World Bank Board approved and issued the Management Action Plan (MAP). The MAP commits IFC to implement a Community Development Program to support livelihood restoration, GBVH prevention, and support to survivors. IFC management was supposed to supervise SRC’s implementation of the MAP actions.

While grievances remain unresolved, Socfinaf S.A. put the plantation up for sale and, in 2024, officially announced the sale of its subsidiary, Salala Rubber Corporation (SRC), to Jetty Rubber LLC. And community advocates also report that IFC’s Management Action Plan (MAP) has never been implemented.

“Before the sale of SRC, the affected communities and supporting Civil Society and Human Rights organizations wrote an open letter to Socfin Management, the Government of Liberia, and Jetty Rubber regarding the liabilities and the active IFC complaint. However, these institutions ignored the content of the letter, thereby allowing Socfin to divest, and Jetty took over the plantation.” Said Windor B.K. Smith of the Alliance for Rural Democracy.

The new owner, Jetty Rubber LLC, has not committed to implementing the IFC’s Management Action Plan. The 22 affected communities are in limbo because they do not know where to turn for justice and redress to their plight.

MEDIA FOR CHANGE NETWORK

Ugandan farmers take TotalEnergies’ pipeline to UK court

Published

6 hours ago

July 9, 2026

witnessradio.org

Police apprehend a Ugandan activist during a protest against the East African Crude Oil Pipeline (EACOP) plans in Kampala, Uganda, on 15 September, 2023. © Reuters

Four Ugandan farmers filed a case against the East African Crude Oil Pipeline (EACOP) at the UK’s High Court on Tuesday, seeking to have Ugandan constitutional, environmental and climate law applied to EACOP Ltd, the UK-registered company financing the project

Rights NGO Avaaz, which is supporting the case, has called it “first-of-its-kind” litigation against the $5.6 billion project, led by French energy giant TotalEnergies, which holds the majority stake.

Due to begin operating in 2027, EACOP would become the world’s longest heated pipeline, running 1,443km (897 miles) from Uganda’s oilfields near Lake Albert to the Tanzanian coastal port of Tanga.

The claim was filed before the pipeline starts operating and asks the court to enforce Uganda’s legal protections against a company incorporated in England and Wales.

EACOP has already faced several lawsuits in France, where a Paris court ruled last week that TotalEnergies was liable for emissions generated by its clients, a decision hailed as a landmark for climate law.

A ‘global test case’

The claimants argue the project would affect more than 100,000 people through land acquisition, and that it crosses critical freshwater systems and protected habitats.

“The case seeks remedies that could go to the heart of the project’s commercial viability, including an injunction to stop oil being transported through the pipeline,” Avaaz said in a statement earlier this year.

The NGO said it believes this is the first time Ugandan environmental law has been brought before a foreign court, describing EACOP as a “global test case for whether new fossil fuel megaprojects can still be forced through despite mounting legal, financial, climate and community opposition.”

Claimants say a successful ruling could ultimately prevent the pipeline from becoming operational.

Company denies harm

TotalEnergies maintains that “strict measures have been taken to avoid, mitigate and offset” the project’s environmental impact, pointing to efforts to restore forest and wetland areas and boost biodiversity nearby.

Ugandan opponents of the pipeline, meanwhile, have told local media they have faced intimidation and arrest by police in the area, where the project is seen as a political priority.

The UK claim alleges that the pipeline violates Uganda’s constitution and breaches the country’s environmental and climate legislation.

(with newswires)

Source: rfi.fr

MEDIA FOR CHANGE NETWORK

Lawyers Move to Court to Stop New Luxury Tourism Projects in Maasai Mara

Published

1 day ago

July 8, 2026

witnessradio.org

A coalition of regional legal and environmental organisations has moved to court seeking to halt the approval and development of new luxury tourism facilities in the Maasai Mara National Reserve, arguing that the projects threaten one of the world’s most important wildlife ecosystems.

The petition, filed before the Environment and Land Court, seeks orders stopping further construction of high-end tourist accommodation within the reserve pending the determination of the case.

Those behind the petition include East Africa Law Society, Natural Justice, JustAct and Africa Centre for Peace and Human Rights, who have sued several government agencies and private investors involved in the developments.

Among the respondents are Marriott International, The Ritz-Carlton Hotel Company, Minor Hotels, National Environment Management Authority (NEMA), Kenya Wildlife Service (KWS) and the Narok County Government.

Narok Governor Patrick Ole Ntutu and the Maasai Mara National Reserve date in Narok County.

Photo| County Government of Narok / Maasai Mara National Reserve.

The petitioners contend that approvals granted for the tourism developments violated constitutional and environmental safeguards, arguing that the projects were allowed within ecologically sensitive areas meant primarily for wildlife conservation.

Court documents further claim that the developments sit close to critical wildlife habitats and migration routes linking the Maasai Mara ecosystem with Serengeti National Park.

This, according to them, potentially disrupts the annual wildebeest migration that attracts thousands of tourists every year.

They have asked the court to certify the matter as one raising substantial constitutional questions and refer it to the Chief Justice for the appointment of a five-judge bench to hear the case.

The latest legal challenge comes months after the planned opening of the luxury Ritz-Carlton safari camp sparked public debate, with conservationists raising concerns that the facility could interfere with wildlife movement near the Sand River.

At the time, the Kenya Wildlife Service dismissed claims circulating online that the camp had blocked the wildebeest migration, describing videos shared on social media as misleading.

“The Ritz-Carlton safari camp is situated within a designated tourism investment low-use zone, as provided for in the Maasai Mara National Reserve Management Plan, 2023-2032,” KWS said at the time.

The agency also maintained that camps established along the Mara, Sand and Talek rivers have historically coexisted with wildlife movements without obstructing migration.

Source: kenyans.co.ke

MEDIA FOR CHANGE NETWORK

More than 17,000 people in the Philippines face eviction from their ancestral land for a multimillion-dollar energy project.

Published

4 days ago

July 6, 2026

witnessradio.org

By Witness Radio Team,

In the Visayas and Mindanao regions, in the Iloilo municipality on Panay Island in the central Philippines, thousands of Indigenous Tumandok people face forced displacement as a major energy project advances through their ancestral territories.

The Jalaur River Multi-Purpose Project, a state-backed dam and hydropower initiative, has triggered fears of forced evictions affecting more than 17,000 people and has already submerged ancestral land belonging to Indigenous communities.

The Tumandok have relied on the river basin as burial grounds, fishing sites supporting their livelihoods, and sacred landscapes preserved through oral history and cultural tradition for decades.

In 2012, the Korean Export-Import Bank provided a USD 260 million loan to the Philippine government for a multi-purpose project on the Jalaur River. Authorities present the project as a long-term solution for irrigation, flood control, and hydropower generation, designed to benefit agricultural production across thousands of hectares of farmland. However, host communities say the development has come at a high human cost.

The dam project, which began in the 1960s, entered a new construction phase in 2012, triggering new waves of human rights violations, from attacks and killings to arrests, and is expected to reach full completion in 2027.

As construction progresses, Indigenous ancestral domains within the project-affected watershed—covering approximately 16,780 hectares in the Calinog component—are being impacted by the Jalaur River Multi-Purpose Project Stage II. Community leaders say this is displacing Indigenous families from their homes amid concerns over inadequate consultation and potential violations of Indigenous land rights and free, prior, and informed consent standards.

Article 19 of the Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples requires states to consult and cooperate in good faith with the Indigenous peoples concerned, through their own representative institutions, to obtain their free, prior, and informed consent before adopting and implementing legislative or administrative measures that may affect them.

Article 32(b) of the same declaration urges states to make consent the objective of consultation before any projects that affect Indigenous peoples’ rights to land, territory, and resources, including mining and other uses or exploitations of resources.

John Ian Alecianga, coordinator of the Jalaur River People’s Movement, says opposition to the project has drawn allegations of intimidation, killings, arrests, and a heavy security presence in affected communities.

“Mobilizing these indigenous communities to fight for their rights has come at a cost. Indigenous leaders and activists have been subjected to surveillance, harassment, and red-tagging due to their resistance to the dam,” John said in an exclusive interview with our team.

According to John, tensions escalated in December 2020 when a police attack in Tumandok communities killed at least nine Indigenous leaders and elders and led to the arrest of 16 others.

“The military was deployed, human rights were violated, many elders were killed, and others were arrested, escalating into what we call a massacre. A fake search warrant was used in a staged operation to enter the houses of the Tumandok leaders. This is how much the government has ignored the rights of the indigenous peoples from the project conception until the project implementation,” he said. “The event remains one of the most traumatic moments in the ongoing conflict around the project,” John added.

Despite pressure, Indigenous communities continue to resist eviction through local and international advocacy networks, calling for justice for those killed in 2020, recognition of their land rights, and immediate protection from further displacement.

“The people are resisting because land is their life. Without it, there will be no community. There will be no identity,” he said.

The Jalaur River People’s Movement also seeks accountability through international mechanisms, including engagement with South Korean institutions linked to project financing.

NGO WORK5 days ago

‘Oil is a curse’: villages in Uganda face land ownership uncertainty

MEDIA FOR CHANGE NETWORK1 week ago

NEMA says it is restoring wetlands, but poor urban families say it is using the exercise to grab their land for new infrastructure projects – now they demand compensation and resettlement.