Landmark Lawsuit Challenges East African Crude Oil Pipeline Over Threats to Livelihoods and Environment

CEFROHT and Partners File Case to Halt EACOP Construction, Citing Human Rights and Climate Risks

November 6, 2020

The Center for Food and Adequate Living Rights (CEFROHT), alongside civil society organizations including the Africa Institute for Energy Governance (AFIEGO), Natural Justice-Kenya, and the Center for Strategic Litigation in Tanzania, has filed a lawsuit in the East African Court of Justice to stop the construction of the East African Crude Oil Pipeline (EACOP). The controversial project, critics argue, poses severe threats to local livelihoods, food security, public health, biodiversity, and the global climate.

The lawsuit alleges that the governments of Uganda, Tanzania, and the East African Community Secretary General violated environmental laws, human rights obligations, and regional agreements by approving French oil giant Total’s plans to build the 1,500-kilometer pipeline from Hoima, Uganda, to Tanga, Tanzania.

Legal and Environmental Violations

The plaintiffs argue that authorities greenlit the pipeline without conducting complete and adequate Environmental and Social Impact Assessments (ESIAs), as mandated by national, regional, and international law. Notably, no transboundary impact assessment was submitted for prior approval, and existing studies failed to evaluate human rights or climate impacts.

Uganda signed a Host Government Agreement with Total E&P before the company secured a certificate of approval for its ESIA. However, on December 3, 2020, Uganda’s National Environment Management Authority (NEMA) issued Total the required certificate. NEMA claims a final ESIA report was submitted on August 7, 2020, but critics note the document remains inaccessible to the public, rendering the approval legally questionable.

Irreversible Environmental and Social Harm

The EACOP project, opponents warn, will cause irreversible damage to ecosystems and communities across East Africa. The pipeline route cuts through protected areas, including the Wambabya and Bugoma forest reserves, and endangers critical water sources such as Lake Victoria, the Singida lakes, and over 200 rivers and streams.

Biodiversity is also at risk, with vulnerable and endangered species—including elephants, lions, and giraffes—facing heightened threats. Additionally, the pipeline’s contribution to climate change is significant, as it will facilitate the release of vast carbon emissions annually. Yet, these climate impacts were disregarded in the project’s assessments.

Livelihoods and Food Security at Stake

Thousands of families along the pipeline’s path have been instructed not to plant long-term crops or erect permanent structures, despite not receiving compensation. Farmland destruction, displacement, and disrupted livelihoods are expected to worsen food insecurity and poverty in Uganda and Tanzania.

“We are not against development or the responsible use of natural resources,” CEFROHT stated. “However, exploitation must be sustainable to ensure long-term benefits for East Africa.”

The case represents a pivotal challenge to regional energy policies, testing the balance between economic development and environmental and human rights protections. As litigation proceeds, affected communities and environmental advocates await a ruling that could set a precedent for future projects in the region.