Reports from environmental activists and denials from the government and Oil companies puzzle Ugandans and the international community on who to believe.
An
environment and energy activists group insists that the East Africa Crude Oil
Pipeline will affect 158 wetlands along its route from Hoima to Mutukula.
The
African Institute for Energy Governance (AFIGO) released the findings of a
study it commissioned around the wetland system to be affected by the proposed
longest heated pipeline in the world.
Alongside
the report, it released a factsheet which outlines the likely social-economic
impacts of the pipeline that will transport Uganda’s oil through the port of Tanga.
According
to AFEIGO’s publicist, Diana Nabiruma, of
concern is the fact that the EACOP is set to affect the Kibale/Bukoora
wetland system, which begins in Western Uganda and connects to Kyotera as well
as Rakai district in south Uganda.
She
also says the Ramsar site is in the
Sango Bay
-Musamba Island-Kagera or generally the Samuka Wetland
System.
AFIEGO suggests that it is important to
conserve the EACOP-affected and other wetlands in Uganda because it would be
expensive or impossible to replace the roles they play if they
are destroyed. So AFIEGO urges EACOP to stop any oil sector infrastructural developments in
wetlands, mostly those linked to Ramsar sites.
The report by AFEIGO
comes a few weeks after TotalEnergies the lead shareholder in the $3.5 billion, 1,443-kilometre
pipeline issued a statement about the ten misconceptions about the project whose
construction is about to begin.
TotalEnergies
clarified that EACOP will not cut across Lake Victoria or Lake Albert which are vital
water sources for the region. It said water pollution risks caused by the EACOP
pipeline were therefore taken into account.
About
concerns that the pipeline will damage wetlands, TotalEnergies said thepipeline route was designed to minimize its
impact on the landscape and biodiversity and to avoid IUCN-protected
areas.
The Petroleum Authority (PAU) which regulates the
oil and gas sector insists that opposition against EACOP has been based on
untruths, spin, and deliberate disinformation or misinformation.
PAU Legal
and Corporate Affairs Director, Ali Ssekatawa has in the past insisted that the
EACOP project underwent rigorous Environmental Social Impact Assessments
(ESIAs) based on international best practices.
The
ESIA was conducted by UK-based RSK Group together with ECO and Partner from Uganda.
It was approved by the National Environment Authority in December 2020.
Then
NEMA Executive Director, Tom Okurut, pledged that the government’s environment
agency will in collaboration with other lead agencies monitor the project to
ensure that to
ensure compliance with the Certificate’s conditions of approval.
“Monitoring
is a continuous process and will be undertaken during the construction,
operation, and decommissioning phases, this we shall do to ensure the health,
safety, and security of the environment, communities, and workers,” said Okurut.
Despite
the assurances, reports alleging that EACOP will destroy the
environment and it will force thousands of people to move off their land, continued.
This month,
a Human Rights Watch 47-page report, “
‘Our Trust is Broken’: Loss of Land and
Livelihoods for Oil Development in Uganda,” said although 90 percent of
people who will lose land to the project have received compensation from
TotalEnergies EP Uganda, the project has suffered from multiyear delays in
paying compensation and inadequate compensation.
Felix Horne, senior
environment researcher at Human Rights Watch, said EACOP is also a disaster for the
planet and the project should not be completed.
Uganda
National Oil Company’s Legal and Corporate Affairs Officer, Peter Muliisa said in an
interview with URN that they did speak
to Human Rights Watch, and gave it all the information but they published none
of that.
“So when Human Rights Watch says that the project has
left people worse off, it is the highest level of presumption and bias,” said Muliisa whose company
handles the Government of Uganda's commercial interests in the petroleum
sector.
// Cue In “We have seen....//
Cue Out.... their research.“//
He said in reality what has been done on the ground is to ensure that the project leaves people in the community in a better state.
//Cue In " And for those.....//
Cue Out.... and we are just starting."//
The Katikkiro of Buganda, Charles Peter Mayiga recently
dispelled fears that
the EACOP will lead to the death of wildlife.
Mayiga
however told URN that while it is important that environmental safeguards are
adhered to when constructing projects like EACOP, he is of the view that
campaigns against it are not based on facts on the ground.
“I don’t
think any of our animal populations are going to be affected by the parks that
are being set up to extract or explore oil," said Mayiga. "So those reports about the environment
are not necessarily correct. And I don’t think that the East African Crude Oil
is going to destroy the environment because a big portion of the pipelines goes
through the kingdom of Buganda, which
I’m familiar with, and there are no animal populations that are going to be destroyed
by the pipeline.”
//Cue In” I An don’t think that the oil Pipeline
.......//
Cue Out... flora and fuana.”//
Reports by environmental activists and denials from the
government and Oil companies puzzle Ugandans and the international
community over whom to believe.