East African Crude Oil Pipeline Now Beyond 90% Completion

The East African Crude Oil Pipeline (EACOP) project, a 1,443-kilometer heated pipeline designed to transport crude oil from Uganda's Albertine Graben to Tanzania's Tanga port, is reportedly beyond 90% completion. This significant infrastructure development, while poised to unlock Uganda's oil wealth, remains embroiled in substantial legal and environmental controversy. Environmental and human rights organizations continue to raise serious concerns regarding its ecological impact, climate implications, and alleged human rights violations, particularly concerning land acquisition and compensation for project-affected persons. These criticisms have spurred multiple legal challenges across various jurisdictions, including Uganda, the East African Court of Justice, and most recently, the UK High Court, highlighting the complex legal landscape governing transnational energy projects in Africa.

The East African Crude Oil Pipeline (EACOP) project, a monumental undertaking set to become the world's longest electrically heated crude oil pipeline, is rapidly approaching operational status, with reports indicating it is now beyond 90% completion. This transboundary pipeline, stretching 1,443 kilometers from Uganda's oilfields in the Albertine Graben to the Tanzanian port of Tanga, is a cornerstone of Uganda's strategy to commercialize its petroleum resources.

Despite its advanced stage of construction and the significant economic prospects it holds for both Uganda and Tanzania, the EACOP project has become a focal point of intense criticism from environmental and human rights organizations. These groups consistently highlight profound concerns regarding the pipeline's potential ecological devastation, its contribution to climate change, and alleged human rights abuses, particularly those related to land acquisition and compensation processes. The ongoing legal battles across national and international forums underscore the complex interplay between national development imperatives, international investment, and the critical need for robust environmental protection and human rights compliance in large-scale infrastructure projects.

This article delves into the legal and regulatory framework surrounding the EACOP in Uganda, examining the statutory provisions, the role of regulatory bodies, and the various legal challenges that have emerged. It aims to provide practising attorneys and legal professionals with a comprehensive understanding of the legal complexities and practitioner implications arising from this high-profile project.

The EACOP is a joint venture primarily involving TotalEnergies (62%), the Uganda National Oil Company (UNOC – 15%), the Tanzania Petroleum Development Corporation (TPDC – 15%), and China National Offshore Oil Corporation (CNOOC – 8%). The project's legal foundation in Uganda is multifaceted, drawing upon several key pieces of legislation. The Petroleum (Exploration, Development and Production) Act, 2013, and the Petroleum (Refining, Conversion, Transmission and Midstream Storage) Act, 2013, establish the regulatory framework for petroleum activities, including pipeline development, and led to the establishment of the Petroleum Authority of Uganda (PAU) to oversee the sector.

Crucially, the East African Crude Oil Pipeline (EACOP) (Special Provisions) Act, 2021, was enacted to specifically facilitate the implementation of the EACOP project in Uganda, addressing obligations under the Intergovernmental Agreement (IGA) and Host Government Agreement (HGA) signed between Uganda and Tanzania. Environmental governance is primarily guided by the National Environment Act, 2019, which notably replaced the 1995 Act and became the first legislation in Africa to explicitly recognize the 'rights of nature.' This Act, along with the Environmental Impact Assessment Regulations, 1998, mandates comprehensive environmental and social impact assessments (ESIAs) for projects of this scale. The National Environment Management Authority (NEMA) is the key regulatory body responsible for approving ESIAs and monitoring environmental compliance.

Land acquisition and compensation are governed by the Land Act, Cap 227, which defines land tenure systems and the framework for land administration, management, and dispute resolution. The project's land acquisition process is also guided by a Resettlement Action Plan (RAP), which aims to ensure fair and adequate compensation, including adherence to international standards such as the International Finance Corporation (IFC) Performance Standards and the Equator Principles. These national laws and international guidelines form the complex legal and policy landscape within which the EACOP project is being executed.

The EACOP project's implementation has been marked by a persistent tension between the robust legal frameworks in place and the practical challenges of their enforcement. While the National Environment Management Authority (NEMA) issued a certificate of approval for the Ugandan section's Environmental and Social Impact Assessment (ESIA) in November 2020, independent reviews, such as those by the Netherlands Commission for Environmental Assessment (NCEA), have raised concerns about the sufficiency of information provided for sound decision-making. These concerns often center on the adequacy of proposed mitigation measures, particularly for sensitive ecosystems and water crossings.

A significant area of contention revolves around land acquisition and compensation. The project has reportedly affected over 100,000 people through land acquisition processes in both Uganda and Tanzania. While EACOP states its commitment to providing full replacement value and implementing livelihood restoration programs, numerous reports from civil society organizations and affected communities allege inadequate compensation, significant delays, and instances where individuals were pressured into signing agreements they did not fully understand. The Land Act, Cap 227, and the Guidelines for Compensation Assessment Under Land Acquisition (GCALA), 2017, provide for prompt and fair compensation, but the practical application has faced scrutiny.

The project has faced multiple legal challenges across different jurisdictions. In 2020, several civil society organizations (CSOs) filed a petition with the East African Court of Justice (EACJ), arguing that the EACOP project violated the East African Community Treaty, various environmental protocols, and human rights instruments. However, the EACJ dismissed the case on procedural grounds in 2023, ruling that it was filed outside the prescribed 60-day limit, a decision that highlighted the procedural hurdles in regional litigation. Separately, Ugandan and French CSOs have initiated a lawsuit against TotalEnergies in the Paris Court of Justice, alleging violations of French due diligence laws concerning human rights and environmental impacts.

Most recently, a groundbreaking lawsuit was filed in the UK High Court by Ugandan farmers against EACOP Ltd, the UK-registered company operating the pipeline. This case is particularly significant as it seeks to enforce Ugandan constitutional, environmental, and climate laws against a foreign-registered entity, representing a novel application of transnational legal strategies. The claimants argue that EACOP Ltd's operations breach Uganda's constitutional guarantees for a clean environment and national climate laws, including the National Climate Change Act 2021. This litigation underscores a growing trend where communities in the Global South seek accountability from multinational corporations in their home jurisdictions for alleged harms caused by overseas operations, especially when domestic legal avenues prove challenging or insufficient.

The East African Crude Oil Pipeline project stands at a critical juncture, nearing completion amidst a complex web of legal, environmental, and human rights challenges. While the Ugandan government and project developers emphasize compliance with national and international standards, the persistent criticisms and multi-jurisdictional legal actions highlight a significant gap between stated commitments and perceived on-the-ground realities. The project serves as a potent case study in the intricate balance required between national development aspirations and the global imperative for sustainable and rights-respecting resource extraction.

For legal practitioners, the EACOP project offers crucial insights into the evolving landscape of corporate accountability and transnational litigation. The ongoing UK High Court case, in particular, will be closely watched for its potential to set precedents regarding the extraterritorial application of national environmental and human rights laws against foreign-registered entities. This development, coupled with continuous scrutiny from regulatory bodies like NEMA and international human rights mechanisms, necessitates that legal professionals advising on large-scale infrastructure projects in Africa adopt a holistic approach, meticulously addressing not only national statutory compliance but also international best practices, human rights due diligence, and the increasing risk of climate litigation. The future of EACOP will undoubtedly continue to shape legal discourse on energy transition, environmental justice, and corporate responsibility across the continent.