Connect with us

MEDIA FOR CHANGE NETWORK

Uganda: StopEACOP Campaign Condemns Standard Bank’s Decision to Fund EACOP

Published

on

Kampala — The StopEACOP Campaign is appalled by Standard Bank’s decision to help finance the East African Crude Oil Pipeline (EACOP) project and condemns this decision in the strongest possible terms. This decision follows a years-long review process, during which environmental and social concerns raised by numerous stakeholders were evidently ignored.

The $5 billion EACOP project, spearheaded by TotalEnergies, aims to transport crude oil from Uganda’s oil fields to a terminal in Tanga, Tanzania. Despite significant opposition from affected communities and environmental and human rights groups, Standard Bank, Africa’s largest lender, has decided to support this disastrous project.

Standard Bank chair Nonkululeko Nyembezi stated in a recent interview that they had conducted comprehensive environmental and social due diligence. However, the claim contradicts the project’s grave climate, environmental and human rights risks. The decision of Standard Bank is also at odds with the assessment of its peers, who have ruled out support for the EACOP for climate, environmental, and social concerns.

Standard Bank’s decision ignores local opposition and human rights abuses 

In the last month alone, 11 pipeline critics have been arrested in Uganda and Tanzania after expressing their concerns about the project. In addition, one of the community leaders from the Kingfisher region in Uganda was abducted by the Uganda Peoples’ Defense Forces, bringing condemnation from the UN Special Rapporteur on Human Rights Defenders. Standard Bank’s untimely announcement of their decision to finance EACOP, in the midst of a brutal crackdown on human rights, environmental and land defenders in Uganda and Tanzania, illustrates their level of detachment from the realities and experiences of communities on the ground and calls into question their claim to have done thorough due diligence.

Environmental and human rights groups have persistently highlighted the potential hazards of the controversial EACOP, including severe impacts on wildlife habitats, the displacement of communities, and the exacerbation of climate change through increased greenhouse gas emissions. Many field investigation reports, including a recent Human Rights Watch report, have also documented and denounced the inadequate compensation and significant disruption experienced by residents displaced by the pipeline’s construction. Against this backdrop, Standard Bank’s decision to finance EACOP shows blatant disregard for the voices and rights of the communities in Uganda and Tanzania who will bear the brunt of the environmental and social devastation caused by this project.

Standard Bank cannot feign ignorance in relation to the concerns surrounding EACOP. It has faced consistent pressure from communities and climate and social justice organisations and groups in South Africa who have demonstrated outside the bank’s offices in Rosebank, Johannesburg on numerous occasions. These demonstrations, including a large protest with hundreds of participants on the day of the bank’s AGM in 2023, a 3-day-long occupation of the bank’s entrance in September of the same year, and weekly pickets held outside the bank’s parking lot by Extinction Rebellion, sought to bring the demands and experiences of EACOP-affected communities to their attention.

Standard Bank has refused to engage in meaningful and constructive dialogue and instead, its response has been characterized by repression and increased militarisation. The South African Police Service has also intervened to protect the interests of the bank and has arrested peaceful demonstrators on two occasions. It is a stark demonstration of Standard Bank’s prioritization of profit over people and the planet and its lip-service commitment to constructive dialogue and meaningful engagement with frontline communities and other key stakeholders.

Standard Bank is also ignoring clear business risk

The decision to bankroll the project also casts doubt on Standard Bank’s assessment of the business and reputational risks stemming from the risks to local communities, environment and climate posed by the project.

Standard Bank’s decision comes after major financiers and insurers from North America, Europe, and Japan have publicly ruled out support for EACOP due to global outcry over the harmful project. The expected finance from China has also been delayed, while the Chinese state-owned insurers and banks have taken prolonged time to assess the outstanding risks. As a result, the EACOP project is facing significant challenges and  project sponsors are reportedly in a cash crisis to fill the funding gap, which threatens to stall the construction.

These delays come as a result of the immense pressure that potential financiers have come under from communities, civil society, the international community and even shareholders and investor groups who express grave concern over the catastrophic socio-economic, biodiversity and climate change risks of the project.

Standard Bank’s decision to finance the EACOP project starkly contradicts industry trends, as leading banks and insurers have distanced themselves from this controversial initiative. This decision exposes Standard Bank to significant risks, including the potential for stranded assets, especially as the global economy transitions towards clean energy solutions. Furthermore, with Uganda already facing a severe debt crisis, worsened by the country’s oil induced borrowing spree, the environmental and social costs associated with EACOP could precipitate an economic disaster for the people of Uganda as well as financiers and their shareholders who opt to engage with this project.

It is clear that investing in EACOP threatens the stability of vulnerable communities and jeopardizes the financial health and reputational integrity of those who support it. A 2022 report assessing the EACOP and associated oil fields against internationally recognized environmental and human rights standards for financial institutions found numerous violations, putting banks at risk if they sign on to support the project. The assessment, undertaken by the Africa Institute for Energy Governance (AFIEGO), Inclusive Development International (IDI) and BankTrack, suggests that the project is not in compliance with many of the criteria set forth in the Equator Principles and the Environmental and Social Performance Standards of the International Finance Corporation (IFC), two internationally recognized standards for responsible finance.

We demand that Standard Bank review and rescind its decision to finance the EACOP project immediately. While it may be too late for Standard Bank to redeem its supposed commitment to people and the planet, there is still time for other potential lenders, particularly Chinese state-owned banks, to demonstrate their dedication to human rights and sustainability by refusing to support EACOP. We call upon the global community to continue its unwavering support for the StopEACOP campaign and the communities on the frontlines. It is not too late to halt this disastrous project and prevent the extensive environmental, social, and economic damage it promises to inflict.

Quotes

“For years, we have campaigned tirelessly against Standard Bank, bringing the grievances and aspirations of impacted communities directly to their doorstep time and time again. Each time, we are met either with deafening silence or with outright violence from an institution that has shown itself to be truly heartless and utterly indifferent to the well-being of ordinary people. Let it be known that this announcement will not deter us. We will continue to stand in solidarity with the communities affected by EACOP and will escalate our actions against Standard Bank in the coming months.”  – Zaki Mamdoo, StopEACOP Campaign Coordinator

“Standard Bank prides itself on financing Africa’s development. However, the bank’s decision to finance the EACOP, not to mention its financing of other fossil fuel projects across Africa, earns the institution the title of an anti-people and an anti-development bank. Fossil fuel projects like EACOP that cause livelihood losses, enslave Ugandans by worsening indebtedness and drive all of us deeper into the climate crisis should not be financed by any bank.”  – Diana Nabiruma, Senior Communications Officer, AFIEGO

“Standard Bank is contributing to the devastation of our communities including through the immense loss of land and livelihood. They have chosen to ignore the plight of our people and to support our exploitation and suffering at the hands of greedy multinational corporations. This is a decision that places them squarely on the wrong side of history and which marks them as an institution with no regard for human rights and justice.” –  Richard Senkondo, Executive Director at the Organization for Community Engagement, Tanzania.

Original Source:350Africa.org  Via allafrica.com

Continue Reading

MEDIA FOR CHANGE NETWORK

The economic promise of climate action: How governments, businesses, and communities can join forces for a sustainable future.

Published

on

By the Witness Radio team.

Climate action is no longer just an environmental concern; it has become an economic imperative as governments and businesses face mounting costs from climate disasters, energy insecurity, and environmental harm.

Investing in renewables, land restoration, and climate resilience not only safeguards economic growth and livelihoods but also helps prevent future losses. But capital alone is not enough; lasting progress demands steady government policies, private-sector commitment, and true community engagement.

These urgent topics took center stage at a high-level discussion hosted by the Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) ahead of COP31, where leaders from international institutions, business, and the environmental sector explored how partnerships can speed up climate action.

Presenting the OECD’s economic analysis, Mr. Jaime de Bourbon de Parme, the OECD Environment Director, argued that despite uncertainty in international climate negotiations, the real economy continued to move toward cleaner energy and climate-related investment.

“What hasn’t been stalling is the real economy,” he said, arguing that the focus was increasingly shifting from setting climate ambitions towards implementing them.

He said clean energy is becoming important not only for reducing emissions but also for strengthening energy security and reducing dependence on volatile fossil fuel markets.

“Fossil fuels were seen as a stable energy source and renewable energy was the new kid on the block. Now we see that fossil fuels are seen as a source of instability, and renewable energy is a source of stability going forward,” Jaime said.

Jaime also pointed to the growing investment in clean energy, noting that of approximately $3 trillion invested in energy systems, about $2 trillion went towards clean energy, compared with $1 trillion for fossil fuels. He adds that early investment in climate action is therefore not simply an environmental choice but an economic decision.

“The costs today are cheaper than in five years or in 10 years or in 15 years. So, acting early makes sense,” he said.

To turn climate investment pledges into real progress, businesses need policies that inspire long-term confidence. Peter Bakker, President and CEO of the World Business Council for Sustainable Development (WBCSD), noted that sustainability is fast becoming a competitive edge for companies, not just a box to tick for corporate responsibility.

Drawing on the organization’s Business Breakthrough Barometer, which surveyed more than 500 executives across more than 50 countries, Bakker said 89 percent of companies expected to maintain or increase their sustainability investments compared with the previous year.

He also noted that 85 percent of respondents wanted more government policy, rather than less, to support the transition.

He also warned against focusing solely on the supply side of the energy transition, stressing that governments must spark demand for cleaner technologies while investing in their production.

“We shouldn’t only focus on the supply side; we must focus on the demand side,” he said.

Bakker highlighted the private sector’s growing opportunities, from electrification and energy-smart buildings to cleaner ways of making goods.

Beyond energy, restoring damaged land and boosting drought resilience open new doors to blend environmental protection with economic growth.

Dr.Yasmin Fouad, Executive Secretary of the United Nations Convention to Combat Desertification (UNCCD), said land degradation and drought were increasingly threatening economic stability, food security and human livelihoods.

She noted that half of global GDP depends on nature. At the same time, one-fifth of the world’s land is already degraded, affecting approximately 1.3 billion people, and restoring degraded land should be treated as an economic investment rather than an expense government can postpone.

“The studies show you that for every dollar that you are investing now as a cost to restore land, there is a revenue that comes to around $30,” Fouad said.

Yet, despite these promising economic returns, she admitted that scarce financing, budget strains in vulnerable countries, and too few projects ready to attract private capital still hold back land restoration investment.

She proposed a financing approach in which multilateral development banks help reduce investment risks, making it easier for private companies to participate in restoration projects.

“The financial architecture that was developed for renewable energy needs to be transferred and realized very quickly on land restoration,” she said, adding that under such arrangements, development banks could help reduce the risks associated with restoration projects, making them more attractive to private investors.

Fouad also emphasized the importance of aligning national policies so that investments in climate adaptation, agriculture, biodiversity and land restoration reinforce rather than compete with one another. She pointed to the UNCCD’s Business for Land initiative, which brings governments and businesses together to discuss investment opportunities in land restoration.

The initiative has attracted interest beyond agricultural companies, including businesses in the fashion, beverage. However, she emphasized that investment only works when paired with secure land rights and real community involvement full of community participation.

“If we don’t have clear land rights to allow the private sector to invest, and clarity on how many years I’m owning land, what is the legality of that, that would really prevent the private sector from pitching in,” she said.

While restoring land helps reduce environmental risks, climate resilience must also be woven into infrastructure planning and investments. Mark Fletcher, Head of Zurich Resilience Solutions for Asia-Pacific, urged businesses and governments to factor in climate risks before breaking ground, not after disaster strikes.

“The fundamental barrier today is that resilience is still treated as a recovery tool, not as a design input,” he said.

Fletcher cited research by Zurich on renewable energy assets across Southeast Asia, covering more than 1,000 wind, solar, geothermal and hydropower locations.

The assessment found that 75 percent of these sites, worth an estimated $165 billion, face high risk from climate hazards within five years. Investing in resilience from the start could slash future losses.

According to Fletcher, the study estimated that investing approximately $13 billion in resilience measures at the investment stage could prevent about $85 billion in future losses.

He suggested that insurers can nudge businesses toward resilience by rewarding reduced risks with better insurance terms, such as improved coverage and lower deductibles. protection, that property is a better risk,” he said,

Governments, financial institutions, and businesses all play vital roles in funding and driving climate action. Still, the conversation also underscored the importance of bringing communities into the heart of the transition.

Fouad cautioned that restoration projects risk causing new problems if local communities are left out of decisions about the land and resources they rely on.

“If you don’t do that, you may end up doing something that they did not participate in, and again that would cause conflict and cause migration,” she said.

Jaime also highlighted civil society’s crucial role in building trust and shaping climate investments for the long haul. He described these organizations as bridges, connecting governments and businesses with the communities their investments touch.

“Civil society has an important role in ensuring that the just transition is inclusive and sustainable. Beyond their traditional role of holding institutions accountable, civil society organizations can build relationships and act as agents of trust, helping ensure environmental initiatives are designed for long-term success. This requires a shift from criticism towards collaboration, with governments, businesses and communities working together to advance the transition,” he concluded.

Continue Reading

MEDIA FOR CHANGE NETWORK

Gov’t Land Grabbed by Gov’t Officials: Minister Exposes Fraud Inside Lands Ministry

Published

on

Government land across Uganda is increasingly being grabbed, encroached on and fraudulently titled, with some officials in the Ministry of Lands, Housing and Urban Development accused of facilitating illegal transactions, State Minister for Lands, Harriet Ntabazi, has said.

Ntabazi said some high-ranking government officials with access to information in the ministry had acquired titles on public land, while others had illegally occupied government property and were using it for activities not authorised by government. She also accused some ministry officials of deliberately issuing multiple titles on the same piece of land despite records showing the property belongs to government.

She said government is strengthening land information systems to prevent fraudulent transactions and improve integrity of land records. Ntabazi made the remarks on Tuesday during a regional stakeholders’ engagement on development of a comprehensive government land inventory organised by the Uganda Land Commission (ULC) at Hoima Resort Hotel in Hoima City.

She cautioned individuals illegally occupying government land to voluntarily vacate before enforcement measures are taken. She said government land, including property occupied by health facilities, police stations, district headquarters, markets, schools, road reserves, forests, game reserves, wetlands and other public institutions, must be protected from encroachment and fraud.

Ntabazi urged district technical officers, town clerks, land officers, physical planners, surveyors, natural resources officers and political leaders to ensure accurate information about public land is collected and submitted to relevant authorities. She said districts should take responsibility for establishing accurate inventories of government land instead of waiting for the Ministry or ULC.

The minister said government has embarked on identifying, verifying, profiling, registering and titling all its land to protect it from illegal occupation and land grabbing. She cited Section 3.7, Statement 27 of the National Land Policy 2013, which requires government to audit, survey, title and maintain an inventory of government and public land.

Ntabazi called on leaders and stakeholders in Bunyoro and across the country to take active role in identifying and documenting government land in their areas. She said the exercise would also enable government to establish a land bank for future expansion, industrialisation, infrastructure development and investment.

The minister however reassured lawful landowners that the exercise was not intended to dispossess people who had legally acquired land in good faith. She emphasised importance of protecting government land in Bunyoro, citing the region’s strategic importance due to ongoing oil and gas developments, construction of Kabalega International Airport and other major infrastructure projects.

ULC: Most Gov’t Land Untitled

Prof. Pen Mogi Nyeko, Chairperson of the Uganda Land Commission, said a significant portion of government land remained untitled, exposing it to encroachment and fraudulent acquisition. Nyeko said the Commission, the Ministry of Lands and local governments need to work together to protect public land.

He said a comprehensive government land inventory would help reduce land disputes arising from inadequate records while protecting environmentally fragile areas and public utility corridors. Nyeko added that reliable geospatial land data is essential for infrastructure development, service delivery and effective planning.

He called on religious institutions, civil society organisations and opinion leaders to mobilise communities to provide information about leases granted by or obtained from government.

Hoima LCV Chairperson Uthman Kadir Mugisa said the district had so far titled 60 percent of its government land, adding that local government allocates funds annually towards securing titles for public property.

However, Mugisa raised concern over allegedly fraudulent titles acquired by wealthy individuals and speculators, saying some were being used to threaten hundreds of residents with eviction. He asked the Ministry of Lands to investigate how the titles were obtained and cancel those found to have been fraudulently acquired.

Hoima City Mayor Edward Isingoma said increasing population was putting pressure on land in Bunyoro. He asked the Ministry to consider providing free land titles to residents, arguing that cost and bureaucracy made the process inaccessible to many.

Buliisa LCV Chairperson Twairi Atuhaure Wandera also reported increasing cases of land grabbing in the district, saying the situation had left many residents uncertain about security of their land.

He called on the ministry to extend free land titling services to residents through the Systematic Land Adjudication and Certification (SLAAC) programme.

Hoima Resident City Commissioner Badru Mugabi said about 70 percent of their work involved resolving land-related disputes, reflecting growing pressure on land in Bunyoro. He said some wealthy individuals had encroached on government land, adding that the proposed inventory would help safeguard public property.

The engagement attracted district surveyors, district land board committees, Resident District Commissioners, Chief Administrative Officers, LCV chairpersons and town clerks from across Bunyoro sub-region.

Source: -URN Via businessfocus.co.ug

Continue Reading

MEDIA FOR CHANGE NETWORK

Uganda’s drive to expand oil palm farming is stirring unease among rural communities, who worry about the far-reaching effects on their lives and land.

Published

on

By the Witness Radio Team

From Kalangala to Buvuma and Sango Bay, oil palm development has brought worries about land loss, delayed compensation, and dwindling access to natural resources. Now, as the government sets its sights on Busoga, community land defenders are questioning whether this expansion will truly uplift rural households or repeat the hardships seen elsewhere.

In Buvuma, community land defender Atanansi Musagala says some residents who surrendered land for oil palm development have waited years for compensation, some reportedly as long as a decade.

He says these delays have left families grappling to rebuild their lives after losing the land that once sustained them.

“Land is often the foundation of household survival. Families cultivate food crops, raise livestock and earn income from agricultural activities. It can also serve as a financial safety net, allowing households to sell produce or use their property to support other investments during difficult times,” Musagala told Witness Radio.

“When families lose this resource without timely compensation, rebuilding their livelihoods becomes more difficult. They may have to find alternative land, seek casual employment or depend on relatives to meet basic needs. Children’s education, household food consumption and other essential expenses may compete for whatever income remains available.”

“Even when compensation eventually arrives, the money may no longer be sufficient to purchase equivalent land or restore the economic activities that families previously depended on,” he added.

The worries about land loss and threatened livelihoods stretch beyond Buvuma. In Kalangala, the birthplace of Uganda’s oil palm program, women’s rights and land defender Prossy Gwobikira says the expansion has also strained communities’ access to natural resources and sparked environmental fears.

“You see, hundreds of people were evicted to give way for oil palm. They cut forests to plant these palm trees, and now they have gone on to destroy our lake by planting trees in the buffer zone,” she said.

In Sango Bay, Kyotera District, oil palm development has been shadowed by bitter disputes over land acquisition and compensation.

In 2022, as the government moved to clear land for the project, reports surfaced of evictions in the Sango Bay Estate. Bulldozers tore down structures belonging to those labeled as encroachers across roughly 247 square miles.

At the time, the government said it was prepared to compensate only 300 people considered bona fide occupants, out of an estimated 10,000 households living in the area.

Reports suggested that compensation had begun, yet uncertainty lingered for the many households still unsure how their claims to land and property would be resolved.

Anxiety is growing as the government eyes Busoga for oil palm expansion, touting the crop as a solution to boost rural incomes and reduce Uganda’s reliance on imported vegetable oil.

On October 21, Agriculture Minister Frank Tumwebaze told Parliament that Uganda consumes approximately 450,000 tonnes of vegetable oil annually but produces only 80,000 tonnes, leaving a deficit of 370,000 tonnes.

The country spends about US$300 million, equivalent to Shs1.25 trillion, on annual imports, he said.

To address the shortfall, the government plans to expand oil palm cultivation to approximately 100,000 hectares, with a longer-term ambition of reaching between 150,000 and 200,000 hectares within a decade.

Tumwebaze said oil palm produces between four and 10 times more oil per hectare than crops such as soybean and sunflower.

He also said farmers could earn about Shs500,000 per acre per month from the fourth year after planting, with production continuing for about 20 years.

But Musagala warns that farmers also shoulder costs that could eat into their earnings.

“Oil palm takes several years to mature, while farmers must meet the costs of seedlings, fertilizers, labor and other inputs before harvesting begins. Loan repayments can add to the pressure for those who borrow money to establish their plantations.” He added.

In Mayuge, Bugiri and Namayingo, 589.56 hectares are already under oil palm, out of the 2,817 hectares earmarked for cultivation.

As the project spreads into Busoga, community land defenders urge the government to address the challenges already reported in existing oil palm regions.

“People where this project has been, have suffered a lot. We pray that the government learns from the past mistakes and addresses the impacts that have come along with the project so that elsewhere people benefit,” Gwobikira said.

Busoga has already felt the impact of sugarcane cultivation, sparking worries over food security, land use and rural livelihoods. Now, as oil palm production expands, community land defenders are pressing the government to ensure this new investment does not deepen existing problems but instead offers farmers a steady income and safeguards their access to land and food.

 

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