Connect with us

MEDIA FOR CHANGE NETWORK

NEMA suspend operations to evict the World Bank project-affected community and other residents accused of being located in wetlands.

Published

on

By Witness Radio team

The National Environment Management Authority (NEMA) has halted all evictions in the Kawaala Zone II and Nabweru villages until community petitions protesting against the evictions are heard. Witness Radio has learned.

This decision to halt the evictions followed several petitions by hundreds of residents affected by the Lubigi wetland restoration exercise. In June, the residents from the two villages petitioned NEMA, seeking a review of the eviction orders issued by evictors and compensation for those whose properties got demolished.

Some of the petitioners are waiting to receive compensation after signing a remedy agreement from a mediation process facilitated by the World Bank’s Dispute Resolution Services (DRS).

In one of their petitions, the World Bank project affected community accused NEMA of hiding behind the Lubigi restoration exercise to deny them compensation for their land which was earmarked for Lubigi drainage expansion, that they had been waiting for over a year.

Since June 2024, many residents in Kawaala Zone II, Nansana, Nabweru, and other villages have forcefully been evicted from their land, while others have faced eviction threats from NEMA claiming these residents encroached on Lubigi wetland.

However, victims have contested NEMA claims, asserting that they have not infringed on wetlands. Some residents claim to have land ownership titles issued by the government of Uganda, while others are tenants of the Buganda Land Board from whom they have been paying ground rent. It is on these grounds that they petitioned the NEMA.

Addressing the affected residents, their lawyers, and village leaders at NEMA offices in Kampala, Dr. Akankwasah Barirenga, the Executive Director of NEMA, confirmed that NEMA was in receipt of several partitions and stated that the authority will hear all communities’ petitions. He further emphasized that no one should be evicted or disturbed from their land until all petitions are heard.

According to NEMA, it has received 137 petitions, and a final decision on whether to evict or not will be made upon completion of hearings.

“No one is going to evict you from your homes before the completion of the hearing of your petitions. After hearing these petitions, you will be informed of the decisions. If it is established that the petitions have substance, the tribunal will decide based on what has been heard,” Dr. Akankwasah revealed

Continue Reading

MEDIA FOR CHANGE NETWORK

AGRA’s Silent Takeover: The Hidden Impact on Africa’s Agricultural Policies.

Published

on

By Witness Radio Team.

An investigative report commissioned by the Alliance for Food Sovereignty in Africa (AFSA) has revealed the concerning extent to which the Alliance for a Green Revolution in Africa (AGRA) is leveraging its significant influence to shape local, national, and continental agricultural policies across Africa raising serious questions about the future of the continent’s agriculture.

The briefing paper, “Pulling Back the Veil: AGRA’s Influence on Africa’s Agricultural Policies,” exposes how AGRA strategically uses its financial power to embed consultants within government institutions to entrench industrial agricultural models. Though marketed as advancements, these models often harm smallholder farmers and sustainable farming practices.

Initially aiming for its grassroots efforts to double farmer productivity and halve food insecurity, AGRA has recently shifted its focus. Following a donor-commissioned 2022 evaluation highlighting AGRA’s failure to meet its ambitious goals, the Gates Foundation-funded organization pivoted from direct interventions with farmers to influencing government policies.

According to the briefing paper, this new strategy involves placing external consultants within African government offices to steer policy development. AGRA’s efforts frequently promote the adoption of hybrid and genetically modified seeds, increased use of chemical fertilizers, and greater private sector involvement in agriculture.

While some African governments may welcome the support, there is growing concern that AGRA’s influence could undermine local policy initiatives, replacing homegrown solutions with external agendas.

AFSA’s investigation highlights AGRA’s policy interventions in countries like Kenya and Zambia, where its influence is pronounced. AGRA’s impact is evident at every level, local, national, and continental, shaping agricultural policies that often prioritize corporate interests over the needs of smallholder farmers.

The consequences of AGRA’s involvement are evident in its 13 focus countries, where its promotion of seeds and fertilizers still needs to deliver the promised productivity revolution, leading to increased deprivation. A recent report by the African Centre for Biodiversity (ACB) highlights the collapse of Zambia’s food system as a direct result of AGRA’s harmful interference.

At the continental level, AGRA’s involvement in critical African Union (AU) initiatives, such as the Fertilizer and Soil Health Summit, has significantly influenced African agricultural policy, particularly in shaping the direction of fertilizer policy for the next decade. However, AFSA, which also participated in the summit, advocated for funding and support for biofertilizers made from local materials, starkly contrasting AGRA’s approach.

AGRA’s role in the Post-Malabo process, which aims to define Africa’s agricultural policy for the next ten years, is particularly troubling. Critics argue that AGRA’s focus on synthetic fertilizers and corporate-led agendas threatens to marginalize indigenous knowledge and sustainable agricultural practices.

AFSA’s Million Belay aptly says, “They represent an attack on African food sovereignty.” Despite resistance from African farmers and civil society organizations, AGRA’s fingerprints are all over Africa’s agricultural policies. The inclusion of biotechnology in the draft Kampala Declaration, set for approval in January 2025, has sparked fears of increased dependence on multinational corporations for seeds and farming inputs. AGRA’s influence in regional policymaking, especially in harmonizing seed trade regulations, further illustrates its strategic positioning within African institutions.

AGRA’s involvement in developing Zambia’s National Agriculture Investment Plan (NAIP II) exemplifies its undue influence. Initially seen as a democratic and inclusive process involving a broad range of stakeholders, NAIP II was later reshaped by AGRA and the FAO. The introduction of the Comprehensive Agriculture Transformation Support Programme (CATSP) shifted the focus toward commercial value chains aligned with the Green Revolution model.

This new framework has faced significant opposition from farmer groups and NGOs, who argue that it promotes industrial agriculture at the expense of smallholder farmers, biodiversity, and sustainable practices. AGRA’s role in dismantling Zambia’s biosafety framework has also sparked fears of forced evictions, land grabbing, and the commercialization of water resources, further marginalizing local communities.

In Kenya, AGRA’s sudden involvement in a community-led effort to develop agroecological practices has raised alarms among locals. Stakeholders fear that AGRA’s entry into the process, which included funding and capacity-building initiatives, might derail their efforts to promote sustainable farming systems. AGRA’s use of terms like “climate-smart agriculture” to describe its support for chemical fertilizers and GMOs has led to skepticism about its true intentions.

Local farmers and agroecology supporters worry that AGRA’s involvement could dilute or undermine the original goals of the agroecology policy.

AFSA’s investigation calls for greater scrutiny of AGRA’s role in policymaking and re-evaluating external entities’ influence in shaping Africa’s agricultural future.

Continue Reading

MEDIA FOR CHANGE NETWORK

Failed Green Revolution: African Leaders Demand Reparations from Gates Foundation.

Published

on

By Witness Radio team.

The much-hyped but ultimately failed agricultural model, the Green Revolution initiatives heavily supported by the Gates Foundation through the Alliance for a Green Revolution in Africa (AGRA), must catch up to its promises to improve African food security. Instead, it has exacerbated food insecurity, deepened poverty, and contributed to environmental degradation across the continent.

As this flawed model is to take center stage at the ongoing African Food Systems Summit in Rwanda, which concludes on September 6th, there is growing discontent. African faith leaders are now calling on the Gates Foundation to offer reparations for the extensive damage inflicted on Africa’s food systems by AGRA’s aggressive promotion of industrialized agriculture. They urge the Foundation to redirect its funding towards locally tested, sustainable agricultural practices that benefit the continent and the world.

For those who missed the live press conference addressed by African faith leaders and presented an open letter to the Gates Foundation, and released the latest research results by the Alliance for Food Sovereignty in Africa on AGRA’s extensive, undue policy influence at local, national, and continental levels and the devastation caused by the Green Revolution agenda in Zambia.

Witness Radio is rebroadcasting a program detailing the critical highlights of the press conference.

Tune in to hear firsthand accounts of how AGRA has impacted farmers and communities on the African continent and learn more about the urgent demands to shift toward more sustainable and equitable agricultural practices.

 

Continue Reading

MEDIA FOR CHANGE NETWORK

Oil activities on the shores of Uganda’s Lake Albert have triggered widespread suffering among locals facing forced displacement and other violent abuses, a U.S…

Published

on

US rights watchdog cites “a climate of fear” in Uganda oil development project

KAMPALA, Uganda (AP) — Oil activities on the shores of Uganda’s Lake Albert have triggered widespread suffering among locals facing forced displacement and other violent abuses, a U.S. climate watchdog said Monday.

The report by Climate Rights International says banks and insurers should withhold further funding for an oil development project run by the China National Offshore Oil Corporation, or CNOOC.

The project, one of two linked to the planned construction of a heated pipeline that would link Uganda’s emerging oil fields to a port in Tanzania, involves the construction of a central processing facility in a vast zone of shoreline that many locals can no longer access.

The report is the first of its kind to detail serious allegations against CNOOC, one of a number of partners in the project. Based on dozens of interviews, it cites forced evictions, inadequate or nonexistent compensation for land and other assets, coercion and intimidation in land acquisition, loss of livelihood and sexual violence.

Dozens of interviewees accused Ugandan government troops of responsibility for forced evictions, destruction of fishing boats, violence, “and creating a climate of fear,” it said.

Brad Adams, executive director at Climate Rights International, said it was “appalling that a project that is touted as bringing prosperity to the people of Uganda is instead leaving them the victims of violence, intimidation and poverty.”

The CNOOC-run project, known as Kingfisher, “is not only a dangerous carbon bomb but also a human rights disaster,” he said in a statement.

Uganda is estimated to have recoverable oil reserves of at least 1.4 billion barrels. Ugandan officials say oil production could begin by 2026.

The total investment in Uganda’s oil fields will reach an estimated $15 billion. French oil company TotalEnergies is the majority shareholder in Uganda’s oil fields, with a 56.67% stake. CNOOC has 28.33% and the Uganda National Oil Company has 15%.

Although this East African country first discovered commercially viable quantities of oil nearly two decades ago, efforts to produce and achieve export capacity have stalled amid tax disputes with oil companies and accusations of corruption, as well as human rights concerns.

Most previous efforts by climate watchdogs seeking to stop Uganda’s oil projects have focused on TotalEnergies, which has been sued in France at least twice by groups and individuals alleging food and land rights violations.

Campaigners opposed to Uganda’s oil business have long opposed the 897-mile (1,443-kilometer) East Africa Crude Oil Pipeline, planned by TotalEnergies and CNOOC, that would run through ecologically fragile areas to the Indian Ocean port of Tanga. The pipeline would pass through seven forest reserves and two game parks, running alongside Lake Victoria, a source of fresh water for 40 million people.

TotalEnergies has repeatedly asserted that the pipeline’s state-of-the-art-design will ensure safety for decades. A spokeswoman for CNOOC in Uganda was not immediately available for comment.

Ugandan officials have reacted with indignation to opposition to the pipeline, saying the climate campaigns verge on interference in the internal affairs of an independent nation. They say oil wealth can lift millions out of poverty.

Ugandan President Yoweri Museveni has warned that his government will “find someone else to work with” if TotalEnergies and its partners pull out of Uganda.

Source: AP News

Continue Reading

Resource Center

Legal Framework

READ BY CATEGORY

Facebook

Newsletter

Subscribe to Witness Radio's newsletter



Trending

Subscribe to Witness Radio's newsletter