By Witness Radio, AFIEGO and Cefroht under the Hotpots program
June15, 2023
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE Kampala, Uganda
EACJ TO GIVE A RULING ON THE PRELIMINARY OBJECTIONS RAISED IN THE EACOP CASE
On April 5, 2023, the East African Court of Justice (EACJ) First Instance Division at Arusha-Tanzania closed the hearing on the preliminary objections. The preliminary objection had been raised by the governments of Uganda, and Tanzania and the secretary general of the East African Community (EAC) in response to the East African Crude Oil Pipeline (EACOP) case filed by civil society groups from Uganda, Tanzania, and Kenya who are challenging the construction of the EACOP.
The preliminary objection raised by the respondent sought to dismiss the case before the main hearing, claiming that the court does not have the power to hear the case because it lacks the jurisdiction to entertain the human rights violations.
The respondents also claim that the EACJ does not have the power to entertain the case since it was brought outside of two months contrary to the East African Community Treaty (EAC).
Lastly, the respondents also argued that the pleadings in the main case were not verified.
At the hearing, both parties were given chance to make summary oral submission. In response to the objections, the applicants (Natural Justice, Africa Institute for Energy Governance (AFIEGO), Centre for Strategic Litigation and the Centre for Food and Adequate Living Rights (CEFROHT), CEFROHT, Natural Justice Kenya (NJ) and Center for strategic Litigation limited (CSL) presented evidence to show that the EACJ had jurisdiction to hear the case. They submitted that the case was filed in time and the question of limitation could not be entertained.
The applicants further asserted that the pleadings were verified and, in any case, there was no formality for verification of pleadings.
After the submissions by the parties, the court indicated that the ruling would be delivered on notice and at a later date.
“We are hopeful that the objections will be dismissed because the EACOP project is critical in terms of environmental, social, and economic survival for the people of East Africa and it would be unfortunate for a regional court to allow baseless objections to stop the main case from being heard on its merits.
Nearly three years since filing, the case has not advanced beyond the preliminary stages. The affected community’s situation and the emerging science from the Inter-governmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) on worsening climate impacts on vulnerable countries, we hope the court will make a swift determination and consider this important case on its merits.” Dickens Kamugisha CEO at AFIEGO states.
In the main case which was filed in November 2020 by the applicants, there is sufficient evidence indicating that the EACOP project violates several provisions of the EAC Treaty and other national, regional, and international laws, treaties, and conventions. The project impacts critical ecosystems including forests, wetlands, national parks and game reserves, lakes and rivers, communities where families deliver their sustenance, and others.
The project is also a danger to climate change and its negative impacts far outweigh its project economic benefits.
Specifically, the main case seeks the following remedies:
- A declaration that the sighing of the HGA and IGA by Uganda and Tanzania violates both national and international laws.
- A declaration that the execution of the EACOP project in legally protected areas contravenes the EAC Treaty.
- A permanent injunction against the respondents from constructing the pipeline in protected areas in Uganda and Tanzania.
- An order that the respondents compensate all the project-affected persons (PAPs) for the loss already incurred due to the restrictions issued on their property by the EACOP project developers.
“Often, the push by CSOs to challenge their governments to refuse global north companies keen to invest in harmful projects is a David vs Goliath affair that can only find justice in courts. We, therefore, trust the litigation process to give the vulnerable communities an opportunity to be heard – give facts about why they’re opposed to this project, the potential harm to their biodiversity, and why it would be in everyone’s best interest to divest to renewable energy projects.” David Kabanda CEO at CERFROTH says.
*****************************ENDS******************************
For more information, contact:
Ms Diana Nabiruma
Senior Communications Officer, AFIEGO
dnabiruma@afiego.org
Mr. Lubega Jonathan
Programme Manager, CEFROHT
lubega@cefroht.og
Mr. Tonny Katende,
Research and Media, Witness Radio.
news@witnessradio.org
