Connect with us

MEDIA FOR CHANGE NETWORK

Opinion: Why is IFC contributing to poverty in Guinea?

Published

on

Market in Guinea

While most of the world was sheltering in place due to the COVID-19 pandemic in March, a hundred families were uprooted from their lush, centuries-old village in western Guinea and relocated to a barren hilltop to make way for a sprawling bauxite mine, backed by the International Finance Corporation.

Residents of the Hamdallaye village say the Compagnie des Bauxites de Guinée, or CBG, moved them to an unfinished resettlement site that lacks adequate housing, water, and arable land to replace the farmland that the company has taken from them over the past decade.

Three months later, World Bank President David Malpass responded to the Black Lives Matter movement by committing to tackle racial injustice and inequality, including within the World Bank Group. A banner reading “#EndRacism” was draped across the façade of the bank’s headquarters in Washington.

If these words are to be more than just a hashtag, the bank should take a hard look at how it is deepening inequality by contributing to the plunder of African resources, at the expense of African lives, to help some of the wealthiest corporations accumulate more wealth.

One of the world’s largest bauxite miners, CBG is a joint venture of the Guinean government and three multinational mining companies — Rio Tinto, Alcoa, and Dadco — and supplies the raw material for aluminum in an array of consumer products, from Ford trucks and BMW luxury cars to Campbell’s soup and Coca-Cola cans.

In 2016, the company received a package of loans estimated at $795 million from IFC, the U.S. Overseas Private Investment Corporation, and a syndicate of commercial banks to expand its bauxite production. The German government guaranteed a portion of the financing through its untied loan guarantees program.

Last year, the residents of Hamdallaye joined 12 other villages in filing a complaint with IFC’s independent watchdog, the Compliance Advisor Ombudsman, or CAO, saying CBG had grabbed their ancestral land, polluted their water sources, and caused long-term damage to their livelihoods with IFC’s acquiescence.

The company responded to the complaint, as well as others, by saying that it has adopted and adhered to IFC’s environmental and social performance standards over the past four years but that it “wishes to learn more about the concerns expressed in the complaint and initiate a process to resolve the disputes with the Complainants.”

The communities and the company were scheduled to begin mediations in April 2020 under the auspices of CAO. The people of Hamdallaye expected to have this opportunity to negotiate their resettlement terms on a fair footing. Mediations were postponed due to the coronavirus pandemic, yet CBG plowed ahead with the resettlement of the village regardless. The company has since issued a statement about this.

To help Hamdallaye and the other communities prepare for mediations, my organization, Inclusive Development International, supported them to conduct a participatory mapping exercise and to analyze Earth observation data from 1974 to 2019. This mapping documented and geolocated the impacts of CBG’s operations on 17 villages.

The results were staggering, suggesting that the residents of these villages — which make up only a small fraction of the roughly 230 villages affected by CBG’s expansion — collectively lost more than 100 water sources and more than 80 square kilometers of cropland to CBG’s mining activities. The company has yet to pay a cent in compensation for this land.

What’s worse, CBG is not rehabilitating most of the land it exploited. Bauxite mining strips vast areas of fertile topsoil to access the minerals underneath, creating “dead zones” that are useless for agriculture without proper rehabilitation. An analysis of satellite imagery indicates that over the lifetime of the mine, the company has rehabilitated only about 10% of the land that it has exploited, and large portions have been re-mined since the IFC-backed expansion began in 2016.

The land that CBG and other bauxite miners are destroying underpins the economic and food security of some 400,000 farmers in the Boké region. Far from bringing development to this corner of West Africa, this investment threatens to cause impoverishment on a massive scale.

So why is a member of the World Bank Group, along with the U.S. and German governments, fostering poverty in what is already one of the world’s poorest nations?

The project backers said that CBG’s expansion would benefit social development and stimulate economic growth in Boké. IFC acknowledged the investment’s significant risks but justified them on the basis of the environmental and social “additionality” that it would bring, pledging to “support the Company in areas such as biodiversity, resettlement and water management.” The loan package is predicated on CBG’s commitment to comply with its environmental and social performance standards.

CBG has not only failed to acknowledge and redress its 30-year legacy of harm, but it is still not complying with IFC’s standards as it expands its operations over vast new areas of land. That is not just our analysis but also the conclusion of the project’s independent environmental and social monitor.

CBG’s unwillingness to remediate and avoid further harm may have been tolerated by the lenders so far, but it is causing enormous frustration among the local population. In 2017, Boké saw large-scale riots by thousands of young people protesting bauxite mining in the region, resulting in multiple deaths of protestors at the hands of security forces. The protesters weren’t saying no to mining; they were simply demanding a fair share of the benefits.

CBG’s multinational owners do not actually need IFC’s advice on how to mine bauxite more responsibly. After a lengthy legal battle, Rio Tinto reached an agreement with Indigenous landowners to lease the site of its Gove mine in Australia’s Northern Territory. Rio agreed to pay the communities between $15 million and $18 million a year in rent over a 42-year period, along with a range of other development and employment benefits.

The people of Guinea deserve nothing less. And we expect no less from a “development” project that has benefited greatly from the largesse of our public tax dollars.

 Original Post: Devex

Continue Reading
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

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