The Court held that the applicants should have filed the case as early as 2017, rather than in 2020 and as a result, the court does not have jurisdiction to hear the matter. The ruling means that the applicants cannot proceed with the merits of the case.
![]()
Stop EACOP protestors in South Africa. The campaigners have used several fronts including courts of law in their effort to stop the construction of the pipeline from Kabaale to Port of Tanga in Tanzania
The East African Court of Justice (EACJ) on Wednesday handed down a judgment in the case filed by a number of civil society actors that
sought to challenge the construction of the East African Crude Oil Pipeline.
The actors including the Africa Institute for Energy
Governance (AFIEGO), Natural Justice, Centre for Strategic Litigation, the
Centre for Food and Adequate Living Rights (CEFROHT) Limited, in November 2020 filed
a case against the governments of Uganda and Tanzania, and the Secretary
General of the East African Community (EAC), challenging the construction of
the EACOP at the EACJ.
The applicants wanted a temporary injunction to stop
the construction of the EACOP until the questions of environmental, social
justice, and climate justice concerns raised in the case were heard and determined.
The Court sitting in Arusha on Wednesday ruled on
the preliminary objections raised by Tanzania's solicitor general. The court upheld
the objection by Tanzania's solicitor general, noting that the case was filed
out of time prescribed by the East African Community Treaty.
The
ruling was delivered by Justice Yohane B Masara (principal judge) Justice Dr.
Lawrence Gacuke, Justice Dr. Charles Nyawello, Justice Richard Muhumuza and
Justice Richard Wabwire Wejuli.
The judges held that the applicants should have
filed the case as early as 2017, rather than in 2020 and as a result, the court
does not have jurisdiction to hear the matter.
The governments of Uganda and Tanzania signed the
Host Governments Agreements for the East African Crude Oil Pipeline (EACOP) in
2017. The lawyers representing the government of Uganda argued that the matter should have been filed at that time.
The Attorney General of Uganda was represented by
Martin Mwambutsya, the Director Civil Litigation, Goerge Kalemera (Commissioner
For Civil Litigation) , Richard Adrole Assistant Commissioner for Civil
Litigation , Charity Nabaasa and Mugisha Twinomugisha.
The ruling means that the applicants
cannot proceed with the merits of the case.
AFIEGO issued a statement saying the ruling
will negatively impact the environmental rights of Ugandans, Kenyans and
Tanzanians.
It said the applicants will appeal the ruling. It
said they (applicants) believe that the judgment failed to take into consideration
pertinent facts that would have allowed the applicants to have the merits heard
before the Court.
Dickens Kamugisha, the Chief Executive Officer of AFIEGO
said It is a somber day for the millions of East Africans who had anticipated
that the court would allow the consideration of evidence concerning the
environmental, social, and economic risks of the EACOP project and make a
determination on our case based on its merits.
“Despite the setback we have suffered, we remain
determined and are prepared to appeal this unjust ruling, firmly believing that
the dangers posed by EACOP can and will
be stopped,” said Kamugisha
Lucien Limacher, Head of Defending Rights and
Litigation of Natural Justice said the Court of First Instance for the East
African Court of Justice failed to provide civil society with the chance to
argue their case.
“This judgment marks a continuation of how the
global north and various government institutions in Africa are blind to the
destruction of the environment and the impact oil and gas has on the climate.
Profit is valued above livelihoods and the environment. We will evaluate the
judgment in detail and make the necessary actions to ensure we continue to protect
the environment and the people who live in it."
Deus Valentine Rweyemamu, the Chief Executive
Officer of CSL said they respect the court's decision but feel that an
opportunity to hold the governments of Tanzania and Uganda accountable for
non-compliance with the EAC treaty provisions on the environment and other
environmental laws has been missed. “We shall engage our legal team and proceed
with an appeal," he said.
Dale Onyango of Natural Justice said while they are disappointed
by the court's decision, they respect the legal process and will carefully
review the ruling.
“Our commitment to environmental sustainability,
social justice, and climate resilience remains unwavering. We will explore all available
avenues to continue advocating for the well-being of our communities and the
protection of our environment.”
Background of the case
Natural Justice, CEFROHT, CSL and AFIEGO have been
at the forefront of the legal battle against the construction of the EACOP.
The
organisations took a pivotal step on 6 November 2020, when they filed a case at
the EACJ.
The case, which has come to be known as the
"EACOP Case," challenges the construction of the EACOP, a project
spearheaded by French oil giant TotalEnergies and China National Offshore Oil Corporation.
Natural Justice, CSL, CEFROHT, and AFIEGO contend that the project violates various
provisions of the Treaty of the East African Community (EAC), the Protocol for
the Sustainable Management of the Lake Victoria Basin, the African Charter on
Human and People’s Rights, the African Convention on Conservation of Natural
Resources, the post-2020 Convention on Biological Diversity, and the Paris
Climate Accords.
At the heart of the case are allegations that the project
proponents failed to conduct effective and meaningful public participation and
consultation.
Furthermore, the civil society organisations assert that neither
human rights assessments nor climate impact assessments were carried out before
commencing the EACOP project. This, according to the organizations, raises
significant concerns regarding environmental sustainability, social justice,
and climate justice.
