CRI UGANDA REPORT

“They Don’t Want People to Stay Here”

How CNOOC’s Kingfisher Oil Project in Uganda Is Causing Human Rights, Environmental, and Climate Harms

September 2024

Kingfisher and Tilenga oil development projects and planned pipeline.¹

Summary

“I was not happy and didn’t want to sign at the beginning. But [CNOOC] told me that if I didn’t sign, the land would be taken.” – Joseph Mugisha from the village of Nzunsu B²

“When you ask them [soldiers] who is in charge, they say CNOOC.” – Resident living near a Ugandan military camp in the Buhuka Flats³

“When I had my boat, life was okay. I could have some goats, ducks, chickens. But now I have nothing. I can’t afford the expenses for my children, including school fees. Before, I had two or three meals, but now I struggle to have one meal per day. Sometimes I don’t have any meals, like yesterday. In one month, I can spend ten days without food.” – Francis Okoth from the village of Kyabasambu, who had his boat confiscated by the Ugandan military⁴

“[That’s] my oil. I won’t allow anybody to play around with it.” – Uganda President Yoweri Museveni⁵

Location of the three government-designated oil license areas along Lake Albert and their

Location of the three government-designated oil license areas along Lake Albert.⁶

Location of villages in and adjacent to the Kingfisher project area, as well as the main Kingfisher infrastructure.⁷

The Kingfisher oil development project, operated by the Chinese National Offshore Oil Company Uganda Ltd. (hereafter referred to as CNOOC), is part of a massive, US$15 billion project to drill for and export significant oil reserves under Lake Albert.⁸

While the Ugandan government has claimed that Kingfisher and related projects will benefit the people of Uganda, those living in and around the planned development tell a different story. Many have been forcibly evicted without compensation, coerced into selling their land at inadequate prices, and deprived of their livelihoods, leaving them struggling to feed their children or pay for education. Many local residents report threats, intimidation, and violence, including sexual violence. Workers complain about safety problems and demands for bribes to obtain jobs from CNOOC and its subcontractors. Climate Rights International also received reports from whistleblowers of illegal dumping and spills of oil and chemicals that have killed fish and polluted Lake Albert.

Both the Kingfisher project and a second, larger oil development project, the Tilenga project, are jointly owned by TotalEnergies EP Uganda (hereafter referred to as TotalEnergies),⁹ with a 56.67 percent stake; CNOOC, with 28.33 percent; and the Uganda National Oil Company (UNOC), at 15 percent. The Tilenga project is opeated by TotalEnergies.

The overall project includes a massive oil pipeline (the East African Crude Oil Pipeline, or EACOP) to transport the oil from landlocked Uganda over 1,443 kilometers (897 miles) through Tanzania to the Port of Tanga. The route, 80 percent of which is in Tanzania, heads south 296 kilometers from Kabaale through Uganda to the Tanzanian border and tracks the western shore of Lake Victoria, before turning east and cutting through the heart of Tanzania’s northern savannahs and steppes toward the ocean. Due to the viscous and waxy nature of Uganda’s crude oil, the pipeline will need to be heated along the entire route, making the EACOP the longest heated crude oil pipeline in the world.¹⁰

Kingfisher is located in the Buhuka Flats on the southeastern shore of Lake Albert. It includes plans for 31 wells on four well pads; 19 kilometers of flowlines to manage the flow of oil, water, and gas; construction of a Central Processing Facility to separate and treat the oil, water, and gas; a 46-kilometer feeder pipeline to transport the oil to the pipeline and a planned refinery; and other infrastructure.

The wider project’s backers have promised that it will bring significant investment and benefits to both Uganda and Tanzania, including the development of new infrastructure, technology transfer, and improvement to the livelihoods of communities along the route. Nevertheless, it has been subject to significant delays, partially due to the Covid-19 pandemic and regulatory disputes, but also as a result of strong opposition from local communities in Uganda and Tanzania, as well as pressure from domestic and international climate and human rights activists and organizations.

Once fully operational, Kingfisher is expected to produce 40,000 barrels of oil per day.¹¹ An analysis by the Climate Accountability Institute concluded that, coupled with the output from the Tilenga field of 204,000 barrels per day, the entire oil and gas project would produce around 379 million tons of carbon dioxide emissions over 25 years.¹² Peak annual emissions would be more than double the current annual emissions of Uganda and Tanzania combined.¹³ Like all new oil and gas projects, its development is incompatible with the Paris Agreement’s 1.5C° warming target and a livable planet.¹⁴

In addition to the obvious climate harms, opponents argue that the project – one of the largest oil and gas projects in East African history – will entail numerous environmental and social risks, including physical and economic displacement, a mismanaged and delayed compensation process, threats to livelihoods, the loss or destruction of sites of spiritual value, and significant disturbance to one of the most ecologically diverse and wildlife-rich regions of the world.

Kingfisher is a major priority for the Ugandan government and its autocratic leader, Yoweri Museveni, in power since 1986 and one of the world’s longest serving leaders. Since the arrival of CNOOC in 2012-2013, his government has deployed large numbers of the Uganda Peoples’ Defence Forces (UPDF) in the Kingfisher area. General Wilson Mbadi, Chief of Defense Forces until March 2024, has made it clear that the UPDF has been deployed to ensure that no one disrupts CNOOC’s operations, saying that extra measures would be put in place: “First of all, currently we have about three layers of security. You must have seen some physically there. That is the first security point. They are there. And then working with our marine forces who patrol the lake. And then we have the fisheries protection unit. And we are putting in place other measures.”¹⁵ The oil and gas police, a special unit of the Ugandan police, also has a very significant presence in the Kingfisher area.¹⁶

In addition to other abuses by the UPDF documented in this report, this vast military presence has been used to intimidate the local community and chill opposition to the Kingfisher project. Those who do speak out have faced serious harassment, intimidation, and, in some cases, violence. In June 2024, Stephen Kwikiriza, who has documented the environmental devastation and human rights violations suffered by his community because of the Kingfisher project, was abducted by the UPDF in the capital, Kampala, and held for five days, during which he was interrogated and tortured before being dumped on the side of a road.¹⁷

A woman sits in the Kingfisher oil development area. © Mathieu Ajar

Kingfisher: A Catalogue of Abuses

While there has been significant reporting on the human rights and environmental violations associated with the Tilenga project (see Chapter I below), the Kingfisher project has not received much attention from Ugandan and international organizations or the media. This is partly due to significantly greater challenges in accessing and investigating the Kingfisher project, not least because of the heavy military presence and a militarized atmosphere that makes criticism and even fact-finding risky for local residents and organizations.

This report is the first in-depth investigation into the human rights consequences of the Kingfisher project. Local residents interviewed by Climate Rights International described:

forced evictions;
inadequate or non-existent compensation for their land and/or other assets;
coercion and intimidation in the land acquisition process;
loss of livelihoods, reduced standards of living, and impoverishment;
impacts on graves and cultural traditions;
labor rights violations;
gender-based violence, including sexual violence;
environmental degradation and pollution, including oil and chemical pollution; and
violence against and intimidation of environmental defenders.

Below are examples of abuses in the Kingfisher area, each of which is documented in greater detail in subsequent chapters of the report.

Forced Evictions

The Land Acquisition and Resettlement Framework, signed by CNOOC, TotalEnergies, and the Ugandan government in December 2016, includes commitments to adhere to best practices in land acquisition, ensuring fair and adequate compensation and resettlement for affected landowners and communities.¹⁸ The Framework said it would align with the International Finance Corporation (IFC) Standards, notably Performance Standard 5 (PS5) on Land Acquisition and Involuntary Resettlement. These standards require that displacement should be avoided where feasible, and minimized whenever it is unavoidable by exploring alternative project designs. Moreover, the standards require that displaced communities and persons be offered compensation for loss of assets “at full replacement cost and other assistance to help them improve or restore their standards of living or livelihoods.”¹⁹

The reality is that the “measures” to “secure” the oil resources cited by General Mbadi have included large numbers of forced evictions. Former residents of villages in the Kingfisher area described being forcibly evicted, often with little or no notice, by the UPDF. Interviewees described being ordered to leave and fleeing with what little they could carry. Those who returned to their villages afterward to try to collect belongings reported finding that their homes had been emptied and, in some cases, demolished. Other assets, such as goats and chickens, were missing. In some cases, entire villages have been emptied, with military buildings installed in their place. The UPDF also expelled the inhabitants of Kyabasambu, the village where the majority of the Kingfisher project’s oil installations are located.

Solomon Atuhaire, who had been living with his family in the village of Kiina on land passed down by his father, described what happened in his village in 2021:

By 6 a.m., the village was swarming with 30 to 40 military personnel. The soldiers declared: “We don’t want you here.” People protested that they had nowhere to go, prompting the UPDF to start shooting, some shots fired into the air, others aimed to scare. The villagers began to flee. I immediately entered my house, told my wife we are leaving, closed the house and the shop, and directly left.

When Atuhaire was finally allowed to go back to collect his belongings, almost everything was gone.

Only my bed without the mattress remained. My shop was completely empty. And I had just seven goats left.²⁰

Henry Lwanga explained to Climate Rights International that he lived on the shores of Lake Albert until 2020, when the Ugandan military forced him to leave:

I was in Kyabasambu village when the UPDF [Uganda Peoples’ Defense Force] came one night during the evening and said that by tomorrow at 7 a.m., I should have left the place. Around 10 soldiers were there with guns. The police were also there. […] The majority of the people that night ran and slept in the school. Me, I just left directly with some small things I could carry, thinking I could come back later to transport the other bigger things. But when I came back during the morning at 7 a.m., everything had already disappeared. So I also lost my 13 iron sheets, my solar battery, my 13 goats, chickens, clothes, bed, sofa. The house was totally empty. I lost my boat afterward.

Lwanga said he has received no compensation for his losses and has struggled to support himself and feed his children:

I have seven children, five of my own and two from my brother who died. […] We have one meal per day, the same for everyone in the family. Sometimes even that meal is missing, and we take only tea.²¹

Simon Namukasa, who lives in Nsunga, told Climate Rights International that soldiers told him that the UPDF intended to gradually drive out all the inhabitants of the area. He said that the presence of the Ugandan army remains extremely high in the area.

In 2018 or 2019, the UPDF told me that they don’t want anyone [living] on the lake… They created a lot of barracks on every shore.²²

2024 CRI Kingfisher area Kiina 2019 01 08 -46

2024 CRI Kingfisher area Kiina 2024 06 15 -47

Satellite images of the village of Kiina, taken on January 8, 2019 (before eviction), and June 15, 2024 (after eviction). The majority of the dwellings (the brown structures especially) have disappeared.²³

Coercion and Lack of or Inadequate Compensation

Villagers who were offered compensation for their land but did not accept, either because they felt the compensation was inadequate or because they did not want to leave their land, told Climate Rights International that they were threatened and intimidated into selling. CNOOC agents were sometimes accompanied by UPDF and police forces, which significantly increased the pressure on residents to accept the compensation.

Samuel Ochieng, who is affected by the CNOOC feeder pipeline in the village of Ndongo, explained:

At first for clearing the bush on my land, CNOOC used to move with UPDF. After signing [the compensation agreement], after clearing the land and putting the pillars, CNOOC brought their security guards.²⁴

Sam Opol also spoke to Climate Rights International about the close ties between the UPDF and CNOOC:

I’m neighbors with UPDF. They [soldiers] are sleeping on containers where is written CNOOC. […] They got water from a pipe which came from a CNOOC camp.²⁵

Joseph Mugisha from the village of Nzunsu B told Climate Rights International that CNOOC agents threatened him with losing everything if he persisted in his refusal to sign the “voluntary” compensation agreement:

I was not happy and didn’t want to sign at the beginning. But [CNOOC] told me that if I didn’t sign, the land would be taken freely.²⁶

Andrew Odongo, who lives in a village along the feeder pipeline, said that threats that he would lose everything without compensation prompted him to sign:

They used to tell us, if you refuse to sign, your land will be taken freely and you as an individual, you can’t let the government programs fail to move on. At first, I wanted to refuse to sign, because the money was too little. They told me that all the other people agreed, so if I refuse they will take my land freely. So I had to accept and sign.²⁷

Mercy Nalubwama, from the village of Nongo, along the feeder pipeline, told Climate Rights International:

They took a quarter of my land, they pushed me to sign for 1.5 million, and yet I had so many crops in this garden. So that money was too little to buy somewhere else. CNOOC said the price of compensation comes from the district. I used to dig on that land, and could get some good money per season. Now I’m so much afraid, life is so hard. [Before] children could go to school, but now the remaining piece of land is not enough anymore.²⁸

Even some of those who were given replacement houses after losing their homes to the project reported that the replacement homes did not make up for what they had lost. As one affected person reported:

They built me a small, tiny house with three rooms, whereas before, my house had six rooms. And for the land, I haven’t received anything. I had two plots. Now it’s even less than a plot because they have built other houses right next to mine, in a row.²⁹

The problem appears to be much greater for people residing on communal land. None of those interviewed by Climate Rights International who were residing on communal land reported that they had received compensation for their homes, crops, or other assets. Those residing on communal land said that CNOOC did not contact them during the land acquisition process. Instead, to acquire communal land in the Buhuka Flats villages, CNOOC operated through a “Communal Land Association” named the Buhuka Communal Land Association, or Bucola, which was established almost exclusively for this purpose. It is unclear how much, if any, compensation CNOOC has paid to the association to acquire land.

Individuals residing in villages in Buhuka Flats have described harassment and evictions by Bucola, and being required by Bucola to pay to resettle on and use communal land. Those expelled said that they never received any compensation for their livestock, houses, or other assets. Ballack Watcho, who lived in Nsunzu village explained that:

When CNOOC wants land, now Bucola just tells you to leave, even if you have a house, and you don’t receive any compensation.³⁰

Many of those evicted from their homes and lands are struggling to feed their families and educate their children. Edward Nsereko, formerly of Kyabasambu, describes his experience:

After being chased from Kyabasambu, we thought that Bucola would give us somewhere to live and use the money from the association with the support of CNOOC to construct something, which was in vain. They didn’t do anything. From Kyabasambu, I moved to Nsonga. I bought another plot in Nsonga from another person. I bought one plot. Then I constructed a house of plastic sheets. Even eating is very difficult.³¹

While the Resettlement Action Plan for the Kingfisher project has never been made public, one possible reason for the failure to provide compensation is that those involved with the project have only treated those with individual land titles as “project affected persons” entitled to compensation and/or resettlement.³² However, many of the families who have been displaced lived on communal land to which Bucola, according to CNOOC’s own studies, has obtained a land title.³³

Victims told Climate Rights International that efforts to complain to CNOOC and the police have been unsuccessful. Some of the people who resisted relocation or complained were told by CNOOC officials that the only way to challenge the compensation offered was to go to court, something they could not afford to do. Samuel Ochieng from the village of Ndongo, which was affected by the feeder pipeline, explained:

We continued to complain, but we were told that if that is not favorable to you, you can go to court. But for us, we couldn’t afford to go to court. So finally we had to sign. We didn’t have enough capacity to go and report to court, to sue the government in court.³⁴

Some affected individuals told Climate Rights International that they lacked knowledge and understanding of the content of the documents they were signing. Emmanuel Kizza said:

I signed because after they told me that the land would be taken, I thought it was just to confirm I understood the pipeline was going to pass there. But later, after signing, they told me that I was going to receive this amount.³⁵

The Ugandan government has not provided legal aid or other legal assistance to people who allege they have received no or inadequate compensation.

Goats wandering in front of an abandoned house in the Kingfisher area. © Mathieu Ajar

Loss of Livelihoods

While many residents farm the land, the primary economic activity in the Buhuka Flats is fishing. However, since the arrival of CNOOC and the Ugandan military, both fisherfolk and fish sellers report that the UPDF fishery and marine units regularly seize and burn boats that don’t comply with new regulations banning smaller boats, arrest fisherfolk and demand bribes for their release, and seize fish from fish sellers. Many allege that this is part of a campaign to drive people out of the Kingfisher area, claiming that the restrictions on boat, net, and fish sizes are much more aggressively enforced at the Kingfisher area than on other parts of Lake Albert.

Vincent Yeno, from Kyehoro, explained that in August 2022 UPDF soldiers burned boats that were smaller than the size mandated by new regulations. He said that the soldiers refused to let fisherfolk modify their boats, which would have been much cheaper than building new ones:

It was an abrupt issue, so I can’t tell how many boats were burned, but so many. People used to hide some of them, but now all of them are burned. There was no time to ask them to enlarge the boat, the UPDF directly started to burn the boats.³⁶

Boats and fishing nets burned by UPDF soldiers in the Kingfisher area. © Environmental Governance Institute

Sarah Namazzi, a member of the fisherman’s association from the same village, said that the UPDF burned more than 300 small boats that day. She said the UPDF commander told the community:

If you can’t afford these new boats, you should go away from that landing site.³⁷

The UPDF regularly arrests those fishing in boats or with nets that don’t meet the new regulations, demanding bribes for their release. Benjamin Mutebi, from Nsunzu B, explained what happened when he was arrested:

From the water they bring us to Buhuka police station. Then the next day, we were transferred to Kikuube district to the prison. I spent one week there and never faced a judge. The negotiation was between the Officer Commander from Kikuube prison and the family. The family had to pay 200,000 shillings per person.³⁸

Many local residents told Climate Rights International that the harassment and extortion by the UPDF have made it difficult for fisherfolk in the Kingfisher area to make a living, leading many to give up the profession or try to move to another area of the lake. Victor Luganda, a 37-year-old fisherman who just spent several months in prison, unable to bribe the army for his release, told Climate Rights International:

I want to go to Kaiso. Even in Kaiso, there are soldiers. But they don’t disturb the fishermen like here, because they allow them to fish.³⁹

Livestock farming is the second most prevalent business activity in the Kingfisher area. Many have lost all or part of their livestock during forced evictions by the UPDF. Those who managed to flee with some of their cattle often had to leave behind their pigs, chickens, and goats.

Solomon Atuhaire, who was evicted from Kiina, said that he had approximately fifty goats, but after the eviction, “I had just seven goats remaining there.”⁴⁰

Farmers who have remained in the area have seen a significant reduction in grazing areas due to land confiscated by the oil project. CNOOC has not provided alternative resources for those who have lost access to grazing land. This has resulted in animals having insufficient grass for nourishment, drastically reducing milk production.

Charles Kwesiga, a farmer who lived in the village of Kina, shared his experience:

Yes, I have been affected by the oil project. […] The grazing area was initially very large, it was adequate. But when the oil companies arrived, the grazing area became very small. I was grazing on the communal land in Kiina village. Almost half of the land has been taken. Because the land became too small, the milk yield per animal has significantly decreased. People have to sell their cows, and many are leaving [the area] because of that.⁴¹

Farmers also face increasing challenges due to land acquisitions by CNOOC and its subcontractors. Godfrey Lubwama explains that his family lost part of their land:

Our land, a part of it, was taken by the oil companies for the road.⁴²

Reduced Standards of Living and Impoverishment

The forced evictions, lack of or inadequate compensation, and loss of livelihoods have had a devastating impact on the standard of living of much of the local community. Many have struggled to feed themselves and their families and to pay for education. Some of those displaced have been unable to afford replacement housing and are living in homes constructed of plastic sheets.

Stephen Katenda, who was evicted from Kyabasambu, explained:

I have a temporary house, plastic sheet. Like the one they give for the refugees. Because renting was too expensive. A lot of people have this type of plastic sheet house.⁴³

A tent used by people evicted from their homes as a result of the Kingfisher project. The drilling rig can be seen in the background. © Mathieu Ajar

Solomon Atuhaire, who was driven from Kiina by the UPDF, can no longer afford to educate his children:

Life was okay, we could eat, I could pay school fees for my children, even good schools. Some of my children were studying in a school in West Nile (in a boarding school), some others at Starlight School. Now I don’t have a real job or income. My children are not in school anymore.⁴⁴

Lawrence Ssemwogerere, from the village of Nsunzu A, explained his plight:

I’m now 41 years old. I was born by the lakeside. I don’t know any other work. UPDF arrived and blocked us from fishing. We know everything about fish when fish is good and bad, which months we can fish and what. But since these units came, we don’t know what to do. Before we had a lot of cash, but now life is difficult.⁴⁵

Impoverishment also appears to have led to some husbands and fathers abandoning their families, causing even greater poverty for the women and children left behind. Rose Belieda recounted how she and her ten children lost all contact with her husband on the day of their eviction from Kyabasambu in 2020:

It was in the morning when soldiers came and ordered us to leave immediately. We had very little time to evacuate. Consequently, properties were left behind, including animals. We left Kyabasambu and relocated. My husband ran away and abandoned me with our ten children without any support. We live under a plastic sheet. All ten children stay with me, and securing food is very challenging. Sometimes, neighbors and friends, feeling pity for us, support us with food. After leaving Kyabasambu, I first stayed in a school for six months, then built a house with plastic sheets. My husband went in another direction and never contacted us again.⁴⁶

Impacts on Graves and Cultural Traditions

Forced evictions and the accelerated development of the oil project by CNOOC has had a significant impact on the evictees’ relationship with their deceased family members, ancestors, and cultural traditions.

Many graves are located in areas from which communities have been expelled. In some cases, the expelled families have managed to excavate the graves, performing some of their traditional rituals. But in many cases, this has not been possible. Michael Omondi explains that companies working in the Kingfisher area have excavated many graves without any of the traditions being respected:

In Kyabasambu, many graves were excavated. Those who complained have received compensation to perform the rituals. But for some other graves where nobody complained, they have not performed any rituals.⁴⁷

David Kato told Climate Rights International that the former residents of expelled villages can no longer visit the sites to continue performing the rituals that they believe are necessary to conduct regularly to respect their ancestors and culture:

People can’t visit their graves due to some restrictions. Some people have complained, but there is no way forward to help them with this.⁴⁸

Violations of Labor Rights

Much of the oil-related activity within Kingfisher, from building roads, camps, and houses to installing oil rigs and conducting drilling operations, is carried out by CNOOC’s subcontractors. These subcontractors include foreign companies, Ugandan companies, and joint ventures between foreign and Ugandan companies. Community members who have sought jobs with these companies reported poor treatment including excessive hours, low wages, hazardous working conditions, failure to pay promised wages, failure to provide employment contracts, and demands for bribes to obtain jobs.

Many of those interviewed complained of very low wages and failure to pay promised wages. Workdays are often longer than 10 hours, the legal limit under Ugandan law, and frequently seven days a week, also in violation of the law.⁵⁰ Isaac Mubiru, who worked for various companies in the sector, said:

The conditions were too tough. We had to work from 8 a.m. to 7 p.m., with a break of 30 minutes. Seven days per week. Vacation requests were denied, with responses such as, “Not possible, because their contract is for a short period, so they don’t need to have a break.”⁵¹

Climate Rights International has collected numerous testimonies from workers and ex-workers who say they never signed a contract with their company. For example, Benjamin Okello explained:

I never signed a contract. They said the company got a contract, but not me with them. They told you if you work well, you can continue even after three months, but I never signed a contract.⁵²

Kenneth Kiwanuka, who worked for a subcontractor for six months in 2023, told Climate Rights International:

I was paid only half for the last four months. I complained and continued to complain. [They] replied that the money they are getting doesn’t allow them to pay everything, but directly when they will receive the money they will be paid. But that has never changed.⁵³

Some residents told Climate Rights International that they had to pay bribes in order to be hired. They explained that they often must first pay the chairman of their village to obtain a recommendation letter, which is mandatory to show they are a resident of the affected area. They then also have to pay the company recruitment officers to secure a job.

Workers in the Kingfisher industrial zone. © Environment Governance Institute

Several accidents were reported to Climate Rights International, some allegedly due to the lack of or poor quality of protective equipment on the sites. Moreover, medical care for injured workers appears to vary greatly depending on the subcontractor. According to John Palot:

I saw safety was not highly maintained. Care about someone victim or injured was not good. Safety gears are old and weak. Helmets are not enough for everyone.⁵⁴

Gender Based Violence, including Sexual Violence

Numerous women told Climate Rights International about sexual violence resulting from threats, intimidation, or coercion by soldiers in the Kingfisher project area. Many reported that soldiers threatened them with arrest or confiscation of their fish merchandise unless they agreed to have sex with them.⁵⁵ We also received reports of sexual violence by managers and superiors within oil companies operating at Kingfisher, including one involving a CNOOC employee.

Jennifer Akello explained:

CLOs are the ones to support communities to get jobs, but they request for bribes. They may ask like 50 000. If you don’t have money, it’s common they ask favor of sex to get a job. And in some cases, after using them [the women], they end up without even getting a job.⁵⁶

Solicitations for sex reportedly also occur in the workplace. Two women reported solicitations and demands for sex from company superiors involved in the Kingfisher project. Christine Nanyanzi told Climate Rights International:

At the job, if you refuse to sleep with your boss, you can be chased away very fast.⁵⁷

Several women reported that UPDF soldiers threatened them with arrest or confiscation of their property unless they agreed to have sex with them. Women explained that, to avoid harassment by soldiers and to be allowed to continue their trading activities, they sometimes had sex with soldiers to be able conduct business.

As Justine Baguma told Climate Rights International:

Another problem is the UPDF disturbing the women when they trade fish. They arrest them and sometimes even force them to sleep with them.⁵⁸

Lack of Access and Failure of the Legal System to Protect Rights

All of these abuses are exacerbated by a lack of access to the legal system to obtain justice. According to a 2020 report by Fédération internationale pour les droits humains (FIDH, or the International Federation for Human Rights), “[n]ational authorities themselves acknowledged that, save for a handful of individuals who had the time and money to go to court, district tribunals had not been effective in dispute resolution… [I]n the instances where legal actions were identified, irregularities in the procedures as well as circumstances affecting the independence of judicial authorities often appear… judicial remedies appear more as a threat than as a tool for communities to defend their rights. Residents across a swath of villages narrated situations in which legal actions were used to coerce them into signing compensation agreements.”⁵⁹

The 2023 World Justice Project Rule of Law Index ranked Uganda as being one of the worst countries in the world for the rule of law and access to justice.⁶⁰ Also in 2023, Transparency International ranked Uganda 141 out of 180 countries globally for corruption.⁶¹

It is against this backdrop that, in addition to threatening affected individuals that their land would be taken without compensation if they refused to sign, CNOOC agents explained that people who were unsatisfied had the option of suing the Ugandan government. For many this wasn’t an option, as Patrick Kyeyune explained to Climate Rights International:

The CNOOC official told us they got the amount from the district, so if you are not okay with the amount, go to hire a lawyer and go to court. As I couldn’t afford to hire a lawyer, I just agreed and signed.⁶²

Environmental Harms, Including Oil and Chemical Pollution

The development of the Kingfisher project has led to the degradation of the physical environment, including land, water, and air pollution. Fisherfolk report seeing oil slicks and dead fish in the lake, and a drastic reduction in fish in the Kingfisher area. Oil and chemicals have been discharged directly into the lake, as well as on land, where they subsequently flow into the lake.

The impact is significant. Duncan Kisitu explained that he had seen a pipe from the oil well pad at Kyabasambu spilling oil into the lake:

They pour oil in the water in the lake, and that oil kills fish. We see some pipes that cross a stream of water, and pour oil into the stream of water, in the lake.⁶³

Emma Prelo, a cattle keeper, explained that oil pollution from the drilling rig has also been detected on the grass fields where the animals graze:

Sometimes some oil just pours it into the community and on the grass. And with the rain, that takes this even to the lake.⁶⁴

Climate Rights International interviewed two people who worked for several months with China Oilfields Services Limited (COSL), the drilling service contractor for CNOOC.⁶⁵ They explained that their former supervisor, a Chinese national, instructed them to empty the contaminated water basins from the drilling rig directly into the lake or onto vacant land around the oil well pad using a pipe and a water pump. These basins contain a mix of water, oil, and chemicals used in drilling activities. Quinton Kizza, one of the two ex-workers, reported that:

The main issue was dumping. […] There were some pits to collect water. […] The boss said we should pour that water into the lake. We used a water pump to take that water to the lake. From the mud tanks, we put that water in the pits. There was also some oil in this pit. So, you put the water pump in the pits to pour that directly into the lake.⁶⁶

Philip Musoke, another former COSL worker, explained about the basins:

They are designed to collect all the water, drill water, chemicals, muddy water to not go directly to the lake. It’s where they were supposed to be collected by a waste company. All of them when they are full, they just put it in the lake. They asked me to pump that water. […] Or we could pump it to the hill, but it’s the same. It goes to the lake afterward. [They] pump only at night.⁶⁷

Quinton Kizza confirmed this:

We dumped that water around 8 p.m. to 6 a.m. during the night. We did that several times.

Residents from Nsunzu B village, in front of the drilling rig of the Kingfisher project. © Mathieu Ajar

In addition to polluting the environment and the lake through discharges of contaminated liquids, construction work, particularly of the feeder pipeline, is having an impact on different sources of water used by local residents.

Samuel Ochieng shared his experience since the beginning of construction activities at Kingfisher:

Before, I used a water body near my house. But now they have destroyed it when they dug the hole for the pipeline. The water is still there but very dirty now, so it’s not possible to use it anymore.⁶⁸

Peter Musoke, a local resident, described the impact of the construction work on the feeder pipeline over many months:

Their pipeline corridor passes through some water stream and contaminated our water. […] Some managed to find water very far, some others who couldn’t had to use the dirty water.⁶⁹

Feeder pipeline for the Kingfisher project passing through farmland in Kikuube district. © Mathieu Ajar

CNOOC’s Failure to Provide Required Remedies

If ongoing risks to or adverse impacts on project-affected communities are anticipated, IFC Performance Standards requires a project to “establish a grievance mechanism to receive and facilitate resolution of the affected communities’ concerns and grievances about the client’s environmental and social performance.”⁷⁰

The ESIA concluded that the CNOOC Grievance Mechanism, which was already in use when the ESIA was written, was not thought to be effective by many villagers. An August 2024 petition to CNOOC signed by 268 residents of the Kingfisher area makes it clear that the grievance process is still not working: “CNOOC should establish an independent, fair grievance mechanism within the community to facilitate open communication and allow the community members to voice their concerns regarding the project and access compensation. It is crucial for CNOOC to pay close attention to the issues raised and address them appropriately.”⁷¹

Violence Against and Intimidation of Environmental Defenders

Within the Kingfisher area, the presence of such a large and active military force has created an atmosphere of fear and intimidation in which many are fearful to speak out.

As a chairman of a village from Buhuka said to Climate Rights International:

I’m afraid that the government can punish us because we spoke to NGOs. We need to be anonymous.⁷²

Those who are vocal can face harsh repercussions. For example, on May 27, 2024, seven environmental human rights defenders were violently arrested by armed police when sitting outside the Chinese Embassy in Kampala in an attempt to present a letter of protest to the Chinese Ambassador.⁷³

On June 5-6, 2024, three local chairmen from villages in the Kikuube district who had been involved in attempts to present a petition to Daqing Oil Company, a Kingfisher subcontractor, were arrested by the officer in charge of the Kaseeta police and a team of Kikuube district police. Another human rights defender, Julius Tumwiine, faced threats and judicial harassment from the police in Kikuube, which were seen surrounding his house on June 5, 2024, at a time when he was not home.⁷⁴

In June 2024, Stephen Kwikiriza, an environmental observer with the Environmental Governance Institute, was abducted, interrogated, and tortured by the UPDF. Kwikiriza had documented the environmental devastation and human rights violations suffered by his community from the Kingfisher project.⁷⁵

According to FIDH, Kwikiriza was one of 11 campaigners against oil projects who were targeted by Ugandan police, military or government officials over a two-week period in early June.⁷⁶

Since his abduction, there has been a pervasive climate of fear among other activists in the Kingfisher region, some of whom have reported seeing what appear to be plainclothes military near their homes and offices.

In Kampala, 50 people were arrested on August 9 on their way to parliament to protest against the oil project, following the arrest a few days earlier of four environmental activists at the Chinese Embassy.⁷⁷

Key Recommendations

The allegations in this report related to the Kingfisher project raise serious concerns about the practices of CNOOC and its subcontractors, as well as their compliance with Ugandan and international law, IFC performance standards, and the commitments that CNOOC and its partners have made. They also raise serious concerns about the actions of the Ugandan military, and the impunity with which it continues to act.

The Ugandan government, Ugandan military, CNOOC, and its subcontractors, must immediately cease all human rights and environmental harms.

The ongoing impunity with which these violations are occurring must end. All allegations of human rights violations must be thoroughly and independently investigated by the Ugandan government, CNOOC, TotalEnergies, and UNOC. All perpetrators, including in the government, UPDF, and companies, must be held accountable through an independent and transparent legal and judicial process.

The government, CNOOC, and other owners of Kingfisher should ensure that all affected persons and communities receive full compensation for land and assets, and assistance to fully restore their livelihoods.

The Ugandan government, CNOOC, TotalEnergies, and UNOC must comply with their respective commitments to international human rights law and International Finance Corporation performance standards.

Financial institutions and insurance companies should follow the lead of major financiers and insurers from North America, Europe, and Japan that have already ruled out support for Kingfisher and other parts of the wider oil project.

The Kingfisher project and the entire oil project are fundamentally incompatible with the Paris Agreement. The entire project perpetuates climate, environmental, and human rights harms in violation of both national and international law, and should be discontinued.

The United States, China, Russia, United Kingdom, European Union countries, Japan, India, Saudi Arabia, other Gulf States, and other large historical greenhouse gas emitters, as well as States and companies continuing to profit from fossil fuels, must urgently acknowledge their responsibility for the global climate crisis. They should shift from “climate aid” to “climate justice” narratives, recognizing the disproportionate impact that climate change is having on developing states. It is imperative that they and other states that continue to profit from fossil fuels commit to comprehensively financing a fair and just renewable energy transition and ensure sustainable development in Uganda and other developing countries. This commitment must be robust, immediate, and encompass significant financial resources to support sustainable, rights-respecting, and equitable growth.

A full set of recommendations can be found at the end of this report in Chapter XVI.

Methodology

This report is based on information collected during field research between January and July 2024. Climate Rights International interviewed 98 people, including 83 people residing in the Kingfisher oil project area, and five who had relocated in recent years due to the effects of the project. Nine others resided in Kikuube district along the feeder pipeline, outside the lakeshore/landing site. Except for three individuals interviewed together during a preliminary survey, all interviews were conducted individually. One additional interview was conducted with a researcher who has performed multiple studies in the area.

The interviews were primarily conducted in the languages of Alur, Swahili, Kinyarwanda, Runyoro, or English, with those not initially in English translated. Interviewees included fisherfolk, traders, farmers, shepherds, village chairmen, boda boda riders (motorcycle taxi drivers), and current or former employees of CNOOC or its subcontractors. Due to the high level of repression in the area and fears of retaliation by the UPDF, private companies, private security forces, oil and gas police, or regular police, pseudonyms have been used for all interviewees.

Interviews were conducted on a voluntary basis, with all participants fully informed about the purpose of the research. Participants were free to discontinue the interview at any point or decline to answer specific questions. No financial incentives were offered. Meal expenses and transportation costs (depending on the distance between the place of residence and the interview location) were reimbursed.

We also reviewed press articles, NGO reports, the Environmental and Social Impact Assessment for the Kingfisher project, and other relevant documents related to the Kingfisher and the wider oil and gas activities.

The University of California, Berkeley, provided satellite imagery analysis to validate testimonies where feasible.

CHAPTER I - History of the East Africa Crude Oil Project

Discovery of Oil in the Albertine Graben

In October 2006 an Australia-based “wildcatter” petroleum company, Hardman Resources, made the first commercial oil discovery in Ugandan history on the eastern shores of Lake Albert between the small settlements of Kaiso and Tonya. Drilling deep into the Albertine Graben, a Mesozoic-Cenozoic rift basin into which thick sediments have accumulated over hundreds of millions of years, Hardman reported “good oil shows.”⁷⁸

To announce and celebrate the discovery, Ugandan President Yoweri Museveni convened a national prayer festival, during which he thanked God, “for having created for us a rift valley twenty-five million years ago,” and for providing “the wisdom and foresight to develop the capacity to discover this oil.”⁷⁹

Two other exploration oil companies were also present: Energy Africa and Heritage Oil, holding different permits in the area.⁸⁰ Hardman Resources was quickly acquired by Tullow Oil, a London-based multinational oil and gas exploration company, for $1.1 billion, giving it full control of one of three major permit blocks.⁸¹ Tullow Oil acquired the Energy Africa the same year.⁸²

Between 2006 and 2010, more discoveries substantially increased the size of Uganda’s oil-yielding concessions and attracted a slate of international investors. After further assessment and drilling, the Ugandan government estimated that there were around 6.5 billion barrels of oil under Lake Albert, of which 1.4 billion barrels were determined to be recoverable.⁸³

In 2010, Tullow Oil acquired the other two permits when it purchased Heritage Oil’s assets in Uganda for $1.45 billion. In 2012 Tullow sold two-thirds of its interests to TotalEnergies and CNOOC “to accelerate development” of oil exploitation. The new consortium gave each company a one-third stake in each of the blocks.

CNOOC purchased its interest from Tullow for approximately $1.467 billion in cash and took charge of operating the Kingfisher development project (block EA3A).⁸⁴ Tullow and TotalEnergies were respectively responsible for operating blocks EA2 and EA1. TotalEnergies acquired Tullow’s entire stake in April 2020.⁸⁵ UNOC entered into the Production Sharing Agreements and the Joint Venture Agreements for EA1, EA2, and EA3 (Tilenga and Kingfisher developments) in April 2021.⁸⁶ Both Tilenga and Kingfisher are now jointly owned by TotalEnergies (56.67 percent), CNOOC (28.33 percent) and the Uganda National Oil Company (UNOC 15 percent).⁸⁷

Drilling rig at the Kingfisher project © Mathieu Ajar

Once processed at the Tilenga and Kingfisher Central Processing Facilities (CPF), the oil produced at these projects will be transported by the feeder pipelines to Kabaale, a town in Hoima district. There, at the Kabaale Industrial Park (currently under construction), the oil will be metered and then combined into a single stream. The government is seeking private partners to construct an oil refinery, which could refine up to 60,000 barrels per day (bpd) to serve domestic and regional markets.⁸⁸ The majority of the oil, up to 246,000 bpd at peak production, will be exported to the international market with the EACOP.⁸⁹

The East African Crude Oil Pipeline

Given Uganda’s status as a landlocked country and the remote location of its reserves – more than 700 miles (1,126 km) inland from the nearest major port in Mombasa, Kenya – the oil from the Tilenga and Kingfisher Projects can only be fully commercialized for the international market through construction of a massive pipeline to the coast.

In 2017, after long negotiations and the abandonment of a proposed Uganda-Kenya pipeline,⁹⁰ the governments of Uganda and Tanzania agreed to develop the East African Crude Oil Pipeline (EACOP).⁹¹ In early 2022, the major stakeholders – TotalEnergies, CNOOC, UNOC, and the Tanzania Petroleum Development Corporation (TPDC) – reached a Final Investment Decision on the “Lake Albert Resources Development Project,” which encompasses both EACOP and the Tilenga and Kingfisher projects.⁹² The parties committed to invest over $10 billion in the project.⁹³

The pipeline is intended to carry the crude oil from the Tilenga and Kingfisher projects almost 1,443 km from the refinery in Kabaale to the Chongoleani Peninsula near Tanga Port in on the Tanzanian coast.⁹⁴ The route, 80 percent of which is in Tanzania, heads south 296 km from Kabaale through Uganda to the Tanzanian border. It tracks the western shore of Lake Victoria, before turning east and cutting through the heart of Tanzania’s northern savannahs and steppes toward the ocean.⁹⁵

MAP EACOP MAIN ECOSYSTEMS UNDER THREAT a nightmare called total

Main ecosystems under threat.⁹⁶

According to construction plans, EACOP will be a buried thermally insulated 24-inch pipeline. Due to the viscous and waxy nature of Uganda’s crude oil, the pipeline will need to be heated along the entire route, making the EACOP the longest heated crude oil pipeline in the world.⁹⁷

While the initial cost of the pipeline was estimated to be around $3.5 billion⁹⁸ and was still officially stated as such during the signing of the Final Investment Decision in 2022,⁹⁹ its cost has significantly increased and is now estimated by authorities to be around $5 billion.¹⁰⁰ The ownership of the pipeline is divided among four entities: TotalEnergies, which owns 62 percent; the Uganda National Oil Company (UNOC) at 15 percent; the Tanzania Petroleum Development Corporation (TPDC) at 15 percent; and CNOOC Uganda Limited at 8 percent.¹⁰¹ The pipeline’s operations are managed by EACOP Ltd., a company incorporated in the United Kingdom and which has the same shareholding structure as the pipeline.¹⁰²

The Tilenga Project

The Tilenga project is situated in the Buliisa and Nwoya districts along the northeast shore of Lake Albert and is managed by TotalEnergies EP Uganda, a wholly owned subsidiary of TotalEnergies.¹⁰³ It consists of six oil fields and will include over 400 wells from 31 drilling pads; 160 km of pipeline networks to manage the flow of oil, water, and gas; construction of a Central Processing Facility to separate and treat the oil, water, and gas produced by the wells; and a 95 km feeder pipeline from the Central Processing Facility to a proposed refinery in Kabaale.¹⁰⁴ It is expected to produce around 204,000 barrels per day (bpd).¹⁰⁵

Crucially, a significant part of the Tilenga project’s activities is located within Uganda’s oldest and most visited natural reserve, the Murchison Falls National Park. This park is home to several endangered species, including the Rothschild’s giraffe and the Uganda Kob. Other notable species include the African elephant, lion, leopard, hippo, and chimpanzee. Additionally, it hosts over 450 species of birds, some of which are in danger of extinction.¹⁰⁶ 132 oil wells will be drilled inside this park (and potentially 39 other oil wells at a later date, still in the park).¹⁰⁷

TotalEnergies construction work to prepare a drilling site in Murchison Falls National Park © Thomas Bart

A July 2023 Human Rights Watch report with interviews with 75 displaced families in five districts of Uganda concluded that the Tilenga project had led to “devastating impacts on livelihoods of Ugandan families from the land acquisition process.” In particular, Human Rights Watch found that, “The land acquisition process has been marred by delays, poor communication, and inadequate compensation. … Affected households are much worse off than before. Many interviewees expressed anger that they are still awaiting the adequate compensation promised by TotalEnergies and its subsidiaries in early meetings in which company representatives extolled the virtues of the oil development. Families described pressure and intimidation by officials from TotalEnergies EP Uganda and its subcontractors to agree to low levels of compensation that was inadequate to buy replacement land. Most of the farmers interviewed from the EACOP pipeline corridor, many of them illiterate, said that they were not aware of the terms of the agreements they signed. Those who have refused signing described facing constant pressure from company officials, threats of court action, and harassment from local government and security officials.”¹⁰⁸

A November 2023 follow-up report found that activists and opponents of EACOP in Uganda faced arbitrary arrests, threats, and harassment for protesting the Tilenga project.¹⁰⁹

Technical Details about the Kingfisher Project

The Kingfisher project consists of a single oil field, with plans for 31 wells, 19 kilometers of flowlines, a central processing facility, and other facilities. It is located on Block 3A (south of the Tilenga project) on the long southeastern shore of Lake Albert in Kikuube district.

Kingfisher is operated by CNOOC and is expected to produce 40,000 barrels per day.¹¹⁰ In January 2023, CNOOC Uganda officially began drilling for oil at Kingfisher, with production expected to commence in 2025.¹¹¹

The “Kingfisher Development Area” lies along the eastern shore of Lake Albert. CNOOC’s ESIA states that the project is located on a field “approximately 15.2 km long by 3.0 km wide.”¹¹² The project infrastructure is located in two areas. The primary area is along the shores of Lake Albert on a flat area of land between the escarpment and the lake in Buhuka Parish in an area called Buhuka Flats. The second area follows the 52 kilometer feeder pipeline and passes through six sub-counties, from the Buhuka CPF to Kabaale, where the EACOP pipeline begins its route to Tanzania.¹¹³

The majority of the Kingfisher project’s infrastructure is located along the Lake Albert shoreline, within or near seven villages: Kyabasambu, Kyakapere, Nsonga A, Nsonga B, Nsunzu A, Nsunzu B, and Kiina, all situated in the Buhuka Flats. Additionally, the ESIA indicates that six other villages, still on the lake’s shoreline, are also potentially affected by the project, namely: Busigi, Kyenyanja, Ususa, Kacunde, Senjojo, and Sangarao, all of which neighbor the Buhuka Flats to the north and south.
The main facilities of the Kingfisher project include:

Four onshore wellpads (Pad 1-KF, Pad 2-KF, Pad 3-KF, and Pad 4A-KF), which will allow drilling of thirty-one wells, the majority of which will extend under Lake Albert;
A Central Processing Facility to process crude oil from the Kingfisher field, making it ready for export or further refinement;
Various camps, including a drilling camp, a permanent camp, the Engineering, Procurement, and Construction contractor main camp, etc.;
Nineteen kilometers of flow lines to connect the fields to the Central Processing Facility;
An airstrip; and
Various support infrastructure, including in-field access roads, an upgraded jetty, a water abstraction station to pump water from Lake Albert to maintain a sufficiently high pressure inside the wells to extract the oil, a materials yard (supply base), and a laydown area, among others.

CNOOC ESIA November 2019: Layout of the project on the Buhuka Flats¹¹⁴

The feeder pipeline that will connect the Central Processing Facility (CPF) located at Buhuka to Kabaale, where the oil refinery project and the starting point of the pipeline are situated, will also impact residents of an additional 24 villages.¹¹⁵

Location of villages and estimated village size along the feeder pipeline route.¹¹⁶

CHAPTER II - Relevant Ugandan Law and International Standards

Laws Relating to Land Rights

Clan, communal land, and individual ownership under customary tenure is the dominant form of land tenure in Uganda, covering 75 percent of the nation’s total land. This typically involves land owned and managed by individual families or clans, with rights inherited and passed down through generations.

The Constitution of the Republic of Uganda and Ugandan law provide extensive protection for property rights. Article 237 of the Constitution provides that land belongs to the citizens in accordance with the legally mandated land tenure systems. It states that, “(1) Land in Uganda belongs to the citizens of Uganda and shall vest in them in accordance with the land tenure systems provided for in this Constitution. […] (3) Land in Uganda shall be owned in accordance with the following land tenure systems – (a) customary; (b) freehold; (c) mailo; and (d) leasehold.”

Article 26(1) of the Ugandan Constitution explicitly guarantees the right of individuals to own property either individually or in association with others.¹¹⁷ Article 26(2) of the Constitution provides that, “No person shall be compulsorily deprived of property or any interest in or right over property of any description except where the following conditions are satisfied – (a) the taking of possession or acquisition is necessary for public use or in the interest of defence, public safety, public order, public morality or public health; and (b) the compulsory taking of possession or acquisition of property is made under a law which makes provision for – (i) prompt payment of fair and adequate compensation, prior to the taking of possession or acquisition of the property; and (ii) a right of access to a court of law.”¹¹⁸

The 1998 Land Act also requires that any decisions regarding the compulsory acquisition of land include adequate compensation, and that such compensation is to be paid promptly before displacement.¹¹⁹ The requirement of prior compensation is consistent with and reinforced by decisions by the Ugandan Constitutional Court.¹²⁰

Mirroring the Constitution, the Land Act recognizes four major types of tenure: customary, freehold, leasehold and mailo.¹²¹ The Land Act acknowledges that parcels of land within customary land may be recognized as subdivisions belonging to a person, a family or a traditional institution.¹²²

The Ugandan National Land Policy (NLP), issued in 2013, noted that despite the efforts of the Constitution and the Land Act to formalize customary tenure, it “continues to be regarded and treated as inferior in practice to other forms of registered property rights.”¹²³The Land Policy called for the government to recognize customary land on a par with other forms of tenure and to establish a land registry system for registration of land rights under customary tenure.¹²⁴ Regrettably, the legal and policy framework safeguarding customary tenure has so far remained largely unimplemented.

The predominant norm within Buhuka Flats is communal land ownership, governed by customary tenure. This is characterized by the collective management and utilization of land, with community members sharing access to resources such as grazing areas and water sources.¹²⁵ This system is deeply embedded in the cultural practices of the communities.

However, claims of ownership often face challenges due to the lack of formal land titles, leading to vulnerabilities in land security. As noted in a policy brief by Avocats Sans Frontières, communal land is often regarded as “open access territory,” whereby “everybody, and thus nobody, owns the land. Indeed, it largely exposes it to land grabbers, especially in the context of the extractive industries boom, with the passive – and sometimes active – collusion of non-diligent [local government] officials.”¹²⁶

It should be noted that the provisions of IFC’s PS5 apply equally to communal lands and the communities living on them, as they do to individuals owning private lands.¹²⁷

Labor Laws

The Ugandan Employment Act of 2006 is the primary law governing conditions of employment. The law requires all employment relationships to be formalized with a written contract detailing the terms and conditions of employment. In addition, it stipulates that employees are entitled to 24 consecutive hours of rest each week. This day of rest can be on any day of the week.¹²⁸ The law also imposes a maximum work limit, not exceeding ten hours per day or fifty-six hours per week.¹²⁹

Section 7 of the Employment Act defines sexual harassment:

An employee shall be sexually harassed in that employee’s employment if that employee’s employer, or a representative of that employer – (a) directly or indirectly makes a request of that employee for sexual intercourse, sexual contact or any other form of sexual activity that contains – (i) an implied or express promise of preferential treatment in employment; (ii) an implied or express threat of detrimental treatment in employment; (iii) an implied or express threat about the present or future employment status of the employee.¹³⁰

Uganda’s Occupational Safety and Health Act, 2006, obliges employers to ensure the health, safety, and welfare of all persons at the workplace, and to have first aid available in the event of a work accident.¹³¹

The Workers Compensation Act requires employers to provide compensation to employees for work-related injuries that “(a) result in permanent incapacity; or (b) incapacitate the worker for at least three consecutive days from earning full wages at the work at which he or she was employed.”¹³² Under section 11 of that act, the employer is required to arrange to have the employee examined by a qualified medical practitioner “at no charge to the worker,” and to pay the cost of medical expenses during any period of temporary incapacity.¹³³

Handling of Petroleum Waste

The Ugandan government has established specific legislation for the management of oil waste in The Petroleum (Waste Management) Regulations.¹³⁴ Its objectives include “(a) to prevent harm to human health and ensure safety of human beings; (b) to prevent pollution, harm to biological diversity and contamination of the wider environment by petroleum waste; (c) to use the best available technologies and best environmental practices.”¹³⁵

The Kingfisher Environmental and Social Impact Assessment (ESIA) and International Finance Corporation (IFC) Performance Standards

An Environmental and Social Impact Assessment is a legal requirement in most, if not all, countries before major infrastructure projects are undertaken. An ESIA process must consider all stages of the development process, including the construction of the facility, site operations, the dismantling and decommissioning of the site, and site restoration. In certain situations, however, the proponent may also be required to, or choose to, comply with certain international standards. Typically, this is required where international funding is sought to support the development of the project. In some circumstances, however, proponents may choose to demonstrate compliance with international standards on their own volition.

In Uganda, the production of an ESIA is governed by the National Environment Act and Regulation 3 of the Environmental Impact Assessment Regulations, 1998.¹³⁶ The National Environmental Management Authority (NEMA) has the responsibility for reviewing the ESIA and, if satisfied, issuing a Certificate of Approval.

The ESIA for the Kingfisher Project was initially submitted in September 2018,¹³⁷ and approved by NEMA in March 2020.¹³⁸ The ESIA states that it was prepared in accordance with the Equator Principles, a financial industry benchmark for determining, assessing and managing environmental and social risk in projects,¹³⁹ and the International Finance Corporation (IFC) guidelines. IFC Performance Standards have become globally recognized good practice and are widely regarded as the gold standard guiding project development.¹⁴⁰

In the Land Acquisition and Resettlement Framework (LARF), agreed by TotalEnergies, CNOOC, UNOC, and the Ugandan government in December 2016, the parties agreed that all land acquisition and resettlement in connection with the project would comply with Ugandan law and IFC Performance Standards.¹⁴¹ Where there is a gap between what is required by Ugandan law and IFC Standards, the parties agreed that “the more stringent” measures will be applied.¹⁴²

Both the LARF and the IFC Performance Standards require preparation of a Resettlement Action Plan (RAP). While such a plan was reportedly prepared for the Kingfisher Project, it has never been made public.¹⁴³ However, the commitments in the LARF give some indication of the commitments that should have been part of the RAP, such as:

The joint venture (JV) partners will recognize the rights of all affected people including those with formal legal rights; those without formal legal rights; and those who have no recognizable legal right to land or assets used or occupied by them, as required by the IFC Performance Standards.¹⁴⁴

The JV Partners commit to identifying all persons who will be displaced as a result of their development activities. This will be done in the form of a census prior to resettlement to determine who will be eligible for compensation and assistance.¹⁴⁵

The JV Partners’ policy is to provide physically displaced persons the right to choose from a number of resettlement options. Resettlement sites must offer improved living conditions and suitable relocation assistance. No forced evictions (except those that are in accordance with the law) are to be carried out.¹⁴⁶

The JV Partners will commit to compensating economically displaced persons with replacement land of at least the same productive potential and location advantage, or for the loss of economic assets at full replacement cost.¹⁴⁷

Land Acquisition and Involuntary Resettlement: Performance Standard 5

As the LARF recognizes, IFC Performance Standard 5 “is the core standard related to land acquisition and resettlement. It refers to the management of physical displacement (i.e. relocation or loss of shelter) and economic displacement (i.e. loss of assets or access to assets that leads to loss of income sources or means of livelihood) as the result of project-related land acquisition and/or restrictions on land use.”¹⁴⁸

PS5 calls for the avoidance of involuntary resettlement whenever possible, noting that, “unless properly managed, involuntary resettlement may result in long-term hardship and impoverishment for the Affected Communities and persons, as well as environmental damage and adverse socio-economic impacts in areas to which they have been displaced.”¹⁴⁹

The stated objectives of the standard are:

1. To avoid, and when avoidance is not possible, to minimize displacement by exploring alternative project designs;

2. To avoid forced eviction;

3. To anticipate and avoid, and where avoidance is not possible, minimize adverse social and economic impacts from land acquisition or restrictions on land use by:

a. providing compensation for loss of assets at replacement cost; and

b. ensuring that resettlement activities are implemented with appropriate disclosure of information, consultation, and the informed participation of those affected;

4. To improve, or restore, the livelihoods and standards of living of displaced affected. persons; and

5. To improve living conditions among physically displaced persons through the provision of adequate housing with security of tenure at resettlement sites.¹⁵⁰

PS5 applies to physical and/or economic displacement resulting from the following types of land-related transactions:

Land rights or land use rights acquired through expropriation or other compulsory procedures in accordance with the legal system of the host country;

Land rights or land use rights acquired through negotiated settlements with property owners or those with legal rights to the land if failure to reach settlement would have resulted in expropriation or other compulsory procedures;

Project situations where involuntary restrictions on land use and access to natural resources cause a community or groups within a community to lose access to resource usage where they have traditional or recognizable usage rights;

Certain project situations requiring evictions of people occupying land without formal, traditional, or recognizable usage rights; or

Restriction on access to land or use of other resources including communal property and natural resources such as marine and aquatic resources, timber and non-timber forest products, freshwater, medicinal plants, hunting and gathering grounds and grazing and cropping areas.¹⁵¹

Compensation Standards

According to PS5, when displacement cannot be avoided, displaced communities and persons should be offered compensation for loss of assets “at full replacement cost and other assistance to help them improve or restore their standards of living or livelihoods.” Compensation standards should be transparent and applied consistently to all communities and persons affected by the displacement. Where livelihoods of displaced persons are land-based, or where land is collectively owned, the displaced should be offered, where feasible, land-based compensation. Those acquiring the land should take possession “only after compensation has been made available and, where applicable, resettlement sites and moving allowances have been provided to the displaced persons in addition to compensation.”¹⁵²

Even if people do not have rights over the land they occupy, PS5 “requires that non-land assets be retained, replaced, or compensated for; relocation take place with security of tenure; and lost livelihoods be restored.”¹⁵³

According to the ESIA, a particular issue applicable to Uganda is the payment of cash compensation for lost housing and infrastructure. Although international best practice recommends replacement of structures due to the fact that cash compensation can be misused or lost from corruption, impoverishing the affected households, Ugandan law requires that CNOOC provide each PAP with the option of cash compensation instead of replacement of assets. This may have an especially adverse effect on women and children where they are excluded from the impact of cash settlements.¹⁵⁴

The guidance note for PS5 indicates that cash compensation may be offered to those people who do not wish to continue their land-based livelihoods or who prefer to purchase land on their own, but notes that “because short-term consumption of cash compensation can result in hardship for subsistence-based economies or poorer households, payment of in-kind compensation (e.g., livestock or other moveable/transferable property) or vouchers earmarked for specific types of goods and services may be more appropriate.¹⁵⁵ According to PS5, “for persons whose livelihoods are land-based, replacement land that has a combination of productive potential, locational advantages, and other factors at least equivalent to that being lost should be offered as a matter of priority.”¹⁵⁶

Grievance Mechanism

Performance Standard 5 also requires creation of a grievance mechanism¹⁵⁷ consistent with that required under IFC’s Performance Standard 1.¹⁵⁸ According to Performance Standard 1, if ongoing risks to or adverse impacts on project- affected communities are anticipated, the Project Sponsor is required to “establish a grievance mechanism to receive and facilitate resolution of the affected communities’ concerns and grievances about the client’s environmental and social performance.”

The ESIA concluded that the CNOOC Grievance Mechanism, which was already in use when the ESIA was written, was not thought to be effective by many villagers. “The general perception is that CNOOC has not taken grievances sufficiently seriously and that villagers are powerless to have issues that they believe are important addressed, if CNOOC does not regard them to be important.[…] Grievances are received by CLOs at the Kingfisher Camp, the CNOOC office in Hoima and when they visit communities.”¹⁵⁹

For many living in villages impacted by the feeder pipeline, the distance from Hoima and the Kingfisher exploration area makes the mechanism “neither realistic nor fair given the costs of transport.”¹⁶⁰ Additionally, the ESIA stated that to address “this requirement, CNOOC needs to appoint a Witness NGO to provide oversight, to receive grievances and to oversee the process to address these concerns.”¹⁶¹ The report concluded that, “It is clear that community members still hold the opinion that they are not being heard. It is necessary to take grievance management closer to the people and to ensure that subsistence stakeholders are able to have their concerns addressed without having to spend any money is realistic and fair. This is a critical issue, and will need to be addressed by CNOOC. Failure to ensure that villagers believe that they are actually being ‘heard’ will negatively impact on the company’s Social Licence to Operate.¹⁶²

The presence of this independent third party is crucial for potential victims of violations by CNOOC personnel. Climate Rights International has been unable to find any evidence that this mechanism has ever been established by CNOOC.

Cultural Heritage: Performance Standard 8

Under IFC Performance Standard 8, the company should consult with the affected communities to identify cultural heritage of importance, and to incorporate into its decision-making process the views of the Affected Communities on such cultural heritage.¹⁶³ Where the project site contains cultural heritage or prevents access to previously accessible cultural heritage sites being used by, or that have been used by, Affected Communities within living memory for long-standing cultural purposes, the company should allow continued access to the cultural site or provide an alternative access route, subject to overriding health, safety, and security considerations.¹⁶⁴

The ESIA recommended, as the preferred form of mitigation, that the project avoid all affected cemetery sites. “Where avoidance is not possible, a full mitigation strategy should be developed in conjunction with affected communities and the guardians of those sites. If the cemetery sites are found to be adjacent (rather than within) the areas of proposed activity appropriate signage and demarcation is recommended to protect these sites. It will remain important, as the project progresses, to consult with local communities about potential further impacts to other cultural sites in the vicinity.”¹⁶⁵

The ESIA also recommended that the companies demarcate areas that should be avoided at certain times of the week/year by construction activities that cause nuisance, so as to minimize disturbance of nearby traditional ceremonial activities.¹⁶⁶

Pollution Control Standards

The ESIA recognized that, without mitigation, the risk of oil and chemical pollution of surface and groundwater was high. As the ESIA noted, “the absence of a buffer between the well pads and the lake, and the small buffer between the CPF and the lake, coupled with the large volumes of effluent and solid waste handled, makes it probable that hydrocarbon-contaminated drainage above the specified limits of 10 mg/l could occasionally be discharged into River 1 or the Kamansinig River and/or reach the near-shore habitats of the lake, unless there is a very high level of control of day-to-day effluent and waste management activities.”¹⁶⁷

The ESIA committed that, “All produced water will be disposed down reinjection wells and hazardous waste generated at the CPF and on the well pads will be collected and disposed of by hazardous waste contractors at a certified hazardous waste disposal site. Spillages of oil and other hazardous materials within the working areas of the plant and on the well pads will be collected, either in the closed drain system (for processing areas where oil spills are likely) or in the open drain system (where occasional spillage is possible). In both cases, these spillages are managed, in terms of the design, to eliminate the risk of any discharge of oil-contaminated water.”¹⁶⁸ It continued: “Ugandan law prohibits the disposal of petroleum wastes on the well pad or in the surrounding environment. All petroleum wastes defined in Schedule 2 of the regulations must be collected, transported, treated (as necessary) and disposed by an independent petroleum waste handler, contracted by the licensee (CNOOC), and registered with the regulator. All of these wastes may be temporarily stored at the well pads in impervious facilities, protected from rainfall runoff and flooding and covered to prevent direct rainfall ingress, before being transported off-site.”¹⁶⁹

CHAPTER III - The Population in the Kingfisher Area

Originally, Buhuka parish was a game reserve. In the 1990s former village chairpersons and other local leaders petitioned the Central Government, through local authorities and the Uganda Wildlife Authority (UWA), to recognize their village and remove its game reserve status. This request was subsequently forwarded to Parliament, leading to official action in 2001.¹⁷⁰ According to the chairman of one of the villages in the area, one village, Nsonga, was divided into Nsonga A and Nzunzu A in 2001, and then further divided into Nzunzu B and Nsonga B in 2004. Other villages were subsequently established due to the continuous increase in the population in the area.¹⁷¹

The ESIA for the Kingfisher project states that in 2017, “Within the Buhuka Parish, there are eleven villages that were included in the Local Study Area: Nsonga (A and B), Nsunzu (A and B), Kyabasambu, Kyakapere, Kiina (located within the Buhuka Flats and therefore in close proximity to the main Project infrastructure) Busigi, Kyenyanja, Ususa, Kacunde, Senjojo, and Sangarao. […] These villages had a total estimated population of 2,830 households at that stage. […] Household size in the sampled areas ranged from between 1 to 11 persons, with an average of 8 members per household.”¹⁷² Therefore, in 2017, the population in the Buhuka Flats area was estimated to be around 22,600 people.

CNOOC ESIA vol 1b - Village growth on the Buhuka Flats in the period 2003 - 2017 p

Village growth on the Buhuka Flats in the period 2003-2017¹⁷³

Interestingly, the ESIA also stated that three quarters of the respondents interviewed during the 2013 Socio-Economic Household Survey for the Project reported that they owned the house they lived in. Most of the remainder indicated that they lived in rented houses or rented single rooms. Among those who owned their houses, 93 percent indicated that they owned the land as well. Most households (62.2 percent) reported that they had purchased the land, although the selling sources were not disclosed. Twelve percent of respondents said that they had acquired the land through the customary laws of land transfer. Just over 10 percent said that they had acquired their current pieces of land through a lease from the sub-county.¹⁷⁴

According to a CNOOC study in 2018:

Villagers report that the influx was because of people seeking opportunities from fishing and fish processing operations at Lake Albert. Cattle herders from the north also migrated into the Buhuka Flats, where they currently reside with large herds of cattle and other animals. […] Little or no in-migration has been reported because of current Kingfisher Project activities on the flats, although this is certain to increase as jobs and other opportunities become available.¹⁷⁵

Where, as is the case for the Kingfisher project, there is a significant time lag between the completion of the survey of affected persons and implementation of the resettlement or livelihood restoration plan, the Guidance Notes for PS5 make clear that “planners should make provision for population movements as well as natural population increase; a repeat census may be required to allow for these natural changes.”¹⁷⁶

Fishing boats at Lake Albert. © Mathieu Ajar

Despite all of the above information, the Petroleum Authority of Uganda reported in May 2024 that only 727 Project Affected Persons were affected, and all of them “have been compensated” and that 61 resettlement houses for families whose homes were impacted have been handed over with titles.¹⁷⁷ However, the number of people affected by the Kingfisher project is much higher, in particular by taking into account people living on communal land who have been affected and those who have been driven out by UPDF soldiers.

CHAPTER IV - Increased Military and Security Forces Presence

The UPDF has a strong and growing presence across the Kingfisher area. Since the discovery of oil in 2006, their presence has significantly increased. Already, at the time of the exploration activities, “Heritage received ample protection from the Uganda Peoples’ Defence Forces (UPDF)” recalled the Oxford study ‘Oil in Uganda,’¹⁷⁸ becoming particularly prominent in 2012 after the arrival of CNOOC.¹⁷⁹ According to the Oxford study, “The increased military presence has brought stricter security and decreased mobility to the Lake Albert region, stirring up social grievances towards the oil industry among the local population.”¹⁸⁰

Indeed, the arrival of CNOOC in 2012-13 coincided with a significant increase in the presence of UPDF soldiers in the area. General Wilson Mbadi, Chief of Defense Forces of the UPDF until March 2024, has stated that the UPDF has been deployed to ensure that Uganda’s oil resources in the Albertine are secured. On October 4, 2021, he said that, while the army was already on the ground to secure oil and gas installations, extra measures would be put in place to ensure that no external forces disrupted the operations: “First of all, currently we have about three layers of security. You must have seen some physically there. That is the first security point. They are there. And then working with our marine forces who patrol the lake. And then we have the fisheries protection unit. And we are putting in place other measures.”¹⁸¹

Local residents interviewed by Climate Rights International said that there has been a steady increase in UPDF and other security forces in the Kingfisher area since 2018. Local media have made the same observation. For example, the Daily Express reported that, “In the intervening decade [since CNOOC arrived], local communities have reported rising deployment and activity of UPDF soldiers to guard CNOOC’s installations. If seen near the lake, villagers have been beaten or apprehended. Military forces have also arbitrarily seized several fishing boats from the community without notice or explanation.”¹⁸²

The authorities have established a “safety check station” on the sole road leading to the Buhuka Flats from the escarpment. This checkpoint is manned by the military, police, and the private security company Saracen. Joshua Ntale, a resident from Kyehoro, explained:

Authorities have blocked some feeder roads, which could go to Sebegoro landing site. They blocked that one a year ago. And now we have to use only the main road with the checkpoint.”¹⁸³

2024 CRI Kingfisher area Checkpoint 2024 06 15-50 w legend

Satellite image showing the last access road to the Buhuka area, with the checkpoint before descending the escarpment.
Taken on June, 15th, 2024.

After closing all other pre-existing roads, everyone going to this area or to the villages within the Buhuka Flats must pass through this checkpoint, which is guarded 24 hours a day. The ESIA stated that the Safety check station “will enable safety and security checks for inbound and departing vehicles transporting equipment materials and passengers to and from the [Kingfisher Field Development Area]”¹⁸⁴

Peter Muzini from Kyakapere told Climate Rights International:

We now have a lot of restrictions, when we leave, checking us, want to open our bags. Before we used to move freely. That disturbs too much our peace! Everywhere there is more security. It was good to have oil, but what we see, there is no balance. They don’t block us totally from moving, but me as a Ugandan, they check me every time and that disturbs me so much that I can’t move freely. And that is the impact of oil.¹⁸⁵

According to Paul Baliu from Nsunzu A:

They place some police checks, but it’s just to disturb us. Police check to verify if some things were stolen from oil camps and activities. Now, if you buy some cement, and police see you with a bag of cement, they assume you have stolen that from their camp.¹⁸⁶

Sam Opol from the village of Kyabasambu said that controls are carried out throughout the day by the military, who do not hesitate to say to people during identity checks:

Don’t you know that they don’t want people to stay here?¹⁸⁷

Many residents believe the army employs residents as unofficial spies within the villages. Vincent Yeno, the chairman of one of the villages in the area, said that:

In each village, they have nominated two men to spy on the community.¹⁸⁸

Christopher Nambalirwa, a boda boda rider, agrees:

I know some Boda Boda who are used as spies. But I can’t give the name of my fellow Boda Boda guy. But they [UPDF] use also some other people as spies.¹⁸⁹

These accusations are neither recent nor isolated. “In 2010 there were reports that an ‘oil intelligence network using local informants, to dispel community unrest’ was being established, which has coincided with increased police presence around drilling sites,” wrote the researchers James Van Alsine and his colleagues in 2015.¹⁹⁰ This practice has been condemned by various Ugandan organizations, including the Environment Governance Institute.¹⁹¹

The militarization of the area, combined with frequent checks and allegations of spies recruited from within the various villages, has created a sense of constant tension and fear among the local population. It also makes it much more difficult for NGOs and independent journalists to visit the area to independently collect testimonies from the residents of the Kingfisher area. The authors of the Oxford study were of the view that “[t]he militarization of the region by the Uganda Peoples’ Defence Forces (UPDF) and personalization of security by Museveni should caution rather than comfort oil companies.”¹⁹² Indeed, the UPDF and other security forces have not just been providing security. Instead, as documented in the chapters below, they have committed serious and persistent human rights abuses.

CHAPTER V - Forced Evictions and Disappearing Villages Resulting from CNOOC’s Kingfisher Project

Forced evictions by the UPDF linked to CNOOC’s Kingfisher project have been widespread and persistent. In some cases, soldiers have expelled whole villages in the area. Witnesses reported that at times the police were present but were not active participants.

The process has at times involved violence. Families forcibly evicted have lost their homes, most of their possessions, their land, and means of subsistence without any compensation. Many forced evictions have been carried out without any prior notice.¹⁹³

Some of the evictions by the UPDF occurred in villages where residents had been told by Bucola, on behalf of CNOOC, to leave.¹⁹⁴ Many, but not all, of the areas completely cleared by the military have later been used by CNOOC and other companies involved in the Kingfisher project, as for example in Kyabasambu.¹⁹⁵ Many of those interviewed believe that the authorities decided to evict people even from areas not needed for the project to clear the area of potential opponents. This is not the first time that the Ugandan authorities have used such a method. For example, for the Kabaale refinery construction project, Ugandan NGO Afiego concluded that “the Ugandan government compulsorily acquired over 29 sq. km of land beginning in 2012. The acquisition affected 13 villages, 1,221 households and 7,118 people.”¹⁹⁶ The amount of land acquired was well in excess of the amount needed for the construction of the refinery’s future infrastructure.

While the ESIA acknowledged that land acquisition and resettlement would be required for the Kingfisher project, it asserted that the project “will however not have any involuntary resettlement and the affected persons (on less than 10 percent of the project area) will have to give their voluntary consent to occupation within the project area.”¹⁹⁷

The reality has been very different.

Seven villages expelled for a new military base

In 2011, the army began forcibly evicting people from the top of the cliff above Bukuka Flats in order to establish a base. According to Maj. Gen. Joram Mugume, then head of the defense ministry’s land board, the goal was to “increase the army’s presence around oil-rich areas […] to increase the security of that area and also low-lying areas.”¹⁹⁸

To achieve this, the UPDF decided to evict the inhabitants of seven villages located at the top of the cliff: Kitikara, Ngurwe, Ngoma, Nyakatehe, Kituti, Kabanena, and Kasonga. The United Nations Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR) described these as “forced evictions” affecting more than 3,000 people, “for the purpose of establishing an army base near the oil wells in the region.”¹⁹⁹ While the army announced that fewer than 3,000 people would be displaced, Swamadu Wantimba, the Hoima Resident District Commissioner (the President’s representative in the district), stated that the number of people evicted was higher than this figure.²⁰⁰

A few years later, the military base had still not been established, so many inhabitants, who had not received land to settle on, returned. However, the evictions resumed in 2018. Robert Nsubuga, who was living in Kabanena at the time, explained to Climate Rights International that the soldiers came back to his village in 2018:

The army said it’s their land, so you have to leave. They came and just gave an order, gave us three days. They were in people’s homes, asking “What do you do? You are not moving.” So, just in three days, people left. Most of the people left and are now in the Kikuube district. They have put up some small houses in the direction of Kiziranfundi [the DRC refugees camp]. Others just ran away.²⁰¹

Forced evictions from the village of Kyabasambu

Kyabasambu is the village with the most oil infrastructure for the Kingfisher project, housing two oil well pads (the drilling pads 2 and 3), the Central Processing Facility (CPF), an airstrip, and two worker camps, among other infrastructure.²⁰²

The weakness of the 2018 ESIA, developed on behalf of CNOOC, is exemplified by its claim that only four households in Kyabasambu would be affected by the Kingfisher project.²⁰³ A 2019 review of the ESIA by The Netherlands Commission for Environmental Assessment, undertaken at the request of the Ugandan National Environment Management Authority, noted that the concentration of facilities in and around the village were likely to make it almost uninhabitable:

The village of Kyabasambu will completely be surrounded by airstrip and installations of the oil company. It will become almost uninhabitable because of the noise volumes, far above (Ugandan and international standards) acceptable levels. In addition to noise and visual aspects, traffic, security issues, sense of isolation, smell (?) could be a problem. Will children be safe to go out of the village and play somewhere? Where will cattle have possibilities to cross? These impacts are underestimated. It is questionable if the co-existence of the village and the nearby oil drilling activities is possible.²⁰⁴

2024 CRI Kingfisher area Kyabasambu installations 2019 01 18 -45

Satellite image of Kingfisher infrastructure in and around Kyabasambu village, June 15, 2024.²⁰⁵

While the ESIA asserted that only four households in Kyabasambu would be affected, nearly the entire village is now being used by CNOOC and its sub-contractors after the residents were driven out by the army. The household surveys carried out on behalf of CNOOC in 2013 indicate that there were already 127 households in the village of Kyabasambu at that time.²⁰⁶ The ESIA states: “based on the village level assessment, undertaken across all settlements in November and December 2017, the population numbers as obtained from LC I Chairpersons” in Kyabasambu was 500 people.²⁰⁷

Initially, families were gradually driven out to make space for future oil facilities. However, at the end of May 2020, authorities opted for a more drastic approach. Henry Lwanga, a father of five, describes this turning point in his life and the village’s history:

I was in Kyabasambu village when the UPDF came one night during the evening and said that by tomorrow at 7 a.m., I should have left the place. Around 10 soldiers were there with guns. The police were also there.²⁰⁸

Edward Nserek, another former resident, told Climate Rights International about his experience when he saw the soldiers coming the morning of the eviction:

Challenges started when the UPDF came and gave us just hours to leave our house. “You have to leave today,” they said. Soldiers came and told us that the authorities had allowed them to chase us. Some boys started taking pictures and the soldiers began to beat them, asking, “You are taking pictures as who?” After that, people had just a few minutes to leave. All our properties were lost, including our animals, etc.²⁰⁹

Richard Ssebunya tells a similar story:

I saw the army coming from nowhere and chasing people away. [They] came at 7 p.m. and said the government has closed the village and you have to leave the place. From 7 p.m. to 7 a.m., everyone should have vacated the place. When we requested at least one week to prepare and carry our stuff, they refused. And it was during the COVID pandemic, so a very bad time. We saw in the morning that the whole village was [filled] with the army and guns, and they told us to leave the place… Because of the fears of guns, everyone just left anything, just leaving with what you can in your hand, but leaving behind animals and other things. People ran to churches, hospitals, schools, or other villages.²¹⁰

Henry Lwanga told Climate Rights International:

The majority of the people that night ran and slept in the school. Me, I just left directly with some small things I could carry, thinking I could come back later to transport the other bigger things. But when I came back during the morning at 7 a.m., everything had already disappeared. So I also lost my 13 iron sheets, my solar battery, my 13 goats, chickens, clothes, bed, sofa. The house was totally empty. I lost my boat afterward.²¹¹

Paul Sserwanga, another former fisherman from Kyabasambu, told Climate Rights International a similar story:

One evening, the UPDF came and told us to leave the place that same evening and to carry the small things we could. The other items left behind were gone by the next morning when we came back. We took some clothes and small items we could carry, but the heavier items in the house, the goats, ducks, we couldn’t take. I lost my boat at that time also. For everyone, all the stuff disappeared.²¹²

Emma Prelo explains how he managed to save a portion of his livestock:

In Kyabasambu, I was a cattle keeper. I had 30 animals, but I have only 18 now. The UPDF came and told us to vacate the place. They approached me in the morning and instructed me to leave immediately. I started to move with my cows immediately when I saw the soldiers chasing other people. I went with my cows but lost my goats and chickens.²¹³

Many homes in Kyabasambu were demolished. Those evicted felt that they could not complain to the police or other authorities, as the police were present alongside the army during the evictions, as Henry Lwanga explained: “I did nothing because I couldn’t go to the police, as the police were there with the UPDF who chased us.”²¹⁴

Francis Okoth, a former fisherman from the village, highlights the significant presence of security forces now located in the village:

There is a UPDF camp in Kyabasambu. Marine and infantry. Two different barracks.²¹⁵

Richard Ssebunya from Kyabasambu says that CNOOC told the inhabitants that:

It wasn’t them [CNOOC] who chased us, but it was the soldiers. Nevertheless, it is indeed CNOOC that is using the land.²¹⁶

2024 CRI Kingfisher area Kyabasambu 2019 01 18-44

Before

2024 CRI Kingfisher area Kyabasambu 2024 06 15 -43

After

Satellite images of Kyabasambu village taken on January 18, 2019 (before eviction; left) and on June 15, 2024 (after eviction; right). Almost all the dwellings have been destroyed. Only a few houses with slate roofs remain.²¹⁷

Following this forced eviction, the Ugandan NGO Civic Response on Environment and Development (CRED) filed a lawsuit with the High Court in Masindi. The case was filed on behalf of the members of the Buhuka Communal Land Association against the State (represented by the Attorney General) and against Major Hassan Muhumuza. It challenged the forced eviction of the inhabitants by the army. On May 25, 2021, the High Court of Masindi issued a temporary injunction in favor of the Kyabasambu residents.

Court order of May 25, 2021, in favor of the displaced villagers against the government following their forced eviction.

The temporary injunction stated that, “The respondents or their servants/agents [the Attorney General and the Major Hassan Muhumuza] are restrained from trespassing on the applicant’s land, threatening violence against the applicant’s members and/or agents, evicting and/or dispossessing the applicant’s members or otherwise interfering with the suit land comprised in Freehold Register Volume MAS3, Folio 8 Block 3, Plot 102 until the main suit is heard and finally disposed of.”

Following the issuance of the injunction, a few dozen people returned to live in the last houses that had not yet been destroyed. Richard Ssebunya told Climate Rights International that the company’s Community Liaison Officer told the residents, “Kyabasambu is no longer within Kingfisher… The CLO said that it’s their boss who told them to stop helping this village because this village is no longer there.” Richard Ssebunya also said that the oil company and its subcontractors continued to seize more and more land from the village in defiance of the court ruling and to the distress of the remaining inhabitants.²¹⁸

When they came to chase us, even for the activities and animals and properties, they didn’t compensate anything.²¹⁹

Satellite images taken on June 27, 2021, after the ruling of the Masindi High Court of Justice mentioned above, and a subsequent image taken on June 15, 2024. Even after the 2021 court decision, the people of Kyabasambu continued to experience significant land loss.²²⁰

Forced evictions from the village of Kiina

Kyabasambu isn’t the only village from which the UPDF reportedly evicted the entire population. Solomon Atuhaire, a man in his thirties, said that the UPDF forced him out of the village of Kiina. After seven years of living on land passed down by his father, where he had built a home for his wife and five children, in 2021 soldiers arrived unexpectedly one morning and told the villagers to leave.

They came and told us we had to leave, just like that. The UPDF came and said we have one week to leave. At first, we asked the chairman what was happening, and he replied that he didn’t know either.²²¹

Three days later, a leader from Bucola arrived, prompting the village chairman to call a meeting. According to Solomon Atuhaire, the person from Bucola asked:

“What did UPDF tell you?” We said we have one week [to leave], but we don’t have anywhere to go. Bucola then threatened, “So wait for UPDF and you will see.” The next morning, UPDF arrived early [So only 4 days after UPDF told them to leave]. By 6 a.m., the village was swarming with 30 to 40 military personnel. The soldiers declared: “We don’t want you here.” People protested that they had nowhere to go, prompting the UPDF to start shooting, some shots fired into the air, others aimed to scare. The villagers began to flee.²²²

During the chaos, Solomon quickly decided to leave:

I immediately entered my house, told my wife we are leaving, closed the house and the shop, and directly left.

Derrick Mwezu, an elder aged around 60 years old from Kiina, describes the panic:

They lost their animals, their houses, and a lot of their properties. We had to run away. We were chased and ran to a place like Nsonga. After running, we asked for some help but received none.²²³

Satellite images of the village of Kiina, taken on January 8, 2019 (before eviction), and June 15, 2024 (after eviction). The majority of dwellings, largely the brown structures, have disappeared.²²⁴

Another villager recounts his seven-year-old son’s injury during the escape:

My child got injuries because he fell while running; he was too scared of the bullets.²²⁵

According to Solomon:

It even took a long time before I managed to return to Kiina to retrieve our belongings. Despite multiple attempts, the UPDF always blocked us and questioned why we wanted to come back. When we explained we just wanted to retrieve our things, they told us “You just have to wait, we will inform you when you can come back to bring your things.” When I went back, I found that everything was taken. Only my bed without the mattress remained. My shop was completely empty. And I had just seven goats left.²²⁶

Since the eviction, soldiers have set up a barracks in the area, which they operate full-time. CNOOC plans to place oil well pad 5 in the village of Kiina and has begun installing the initial infrastructure and machinery at the future site.²²⁷

Jennifer Akello, a young woman from Kiina, offered her views:

There are no economic activities anymore in Kingfisher. UPDF are disturbing us, Bucola are disturbing us, and CNOOC. We have no school, no hospital, no roads. Now we are just seated there and nothing to do, but we are scared. Children are not studying. Women’s health is very bad. […] The Kingfisher villagers are now hopeless.²²⁸

Forced Evictions in Numerous Other Villages in the Kingfisher Area

The UPDF did not limit their expulsions to the seven villages atop the cliff, nor to those of Kyabasambu and Kiina by the lake. Testimonies collected reveal that other villages in the oil exploitation zone were also impacted. The disappearance of numerous houses, and even most or all of entire villages, is confirmed by satellite image analysis of the area.

The ESIA lists the villages in the area as Ususa, Kyenyanja, Busigi, Kyakapere, Kyabasambu, Nsonga, Nsunzu, Kiina, Kacunde, Senjonjo, and Sangaroa.²²⁹ The villages of Nsonga and Nsunzu have since been divided into two parts, known as Nsonga A and Nsonga B, and Nsunzu A and Nsunzu B, respectively.

According to testimonies gathered, expulsions by the army occurred in the villages of Busigi, Ususa, Kyenyanja, Kacunde, Kiina, Kyabasambu and Kyakapere. Some villages have completely disappeared, while in others, only some families have been expelled so far.

Martin Mwesiga, the former chairman of one of the vanished villages, showed us the register book with the list of the former families that lived in his village. He explains:

CNOOC approached me in 2017. They wanted to understand our interests and how we could collaborate, and how I, as chairman, could facilitate communication with the public… But all of us were evicted, in 2020. It was during COVID-19. It was the UPDF who evicted us, claiming it was the land for the UPDF. We never received compensation.²³⁰

Oliver Kaggwa, a local resident, described a similar situation in the village of Kacunde. He told Climate Rights International that, when members of his family lived there and part of his livestock was kept there:

From nowhere, the army came, and they give you one day to leave, or “We kill you,” the soldiers said. Around 100 households lived there. All chased away. And they never received a compensation.²³¹

2024 CRI Kingfisher area south of Kiina 2019 01 08 -49

2024 CRI Kingfisher area south of Kiina 2024 06 15 -48

Satellite images of the village of Kacunde taken on January 8, 2019, and June 16th, 2024. Apart from a few houses in the middle of the forest, all the dwellings have disappeared.²³²

Ballack Watcho, a resident of Nsunzu village in Buhuka Flats at the bottom of the cliff, recalls that before the arrival of CNOOC and the army:

There were 13 villages. But some villages have disappeared, taken over by soldiers.²³³

On July 10, 2024, TotalEnergies, following “discussions with [their] partner and operator CNOOC” and other national and local authorities, asserted that “[r]egarding the displacement of 13 villages and displacement of 1,200 people [in the Kingfisher project area], we were able to establish from our consultations and engagements with the community that six villages had been disbanded by the government, as they were considered illegal settlements which were not officially gazetted through the local government structures.”²³⁴ However, both a Local Councils Chairman and residents have contradicted this claim to Climate Rights International.²³⁵ Moreover, these villages are identified in the Kingfisher project’s ESIA and are referred to on the official website of the Ugandan national electoral commission.²³⁶

CHAPTER VI - Lack of or Inadequate Compensation from CNOOC for Land and Other Assets

Compensation for land and other assets taken through a legal process for economic development or other official purposes can be in the form of cash or in-kind, such as the construction of new houses in a different location to replace those lost from a project. Although the IFC PS5 favors compensation in-kind, in reality most compensation for land taken for the Kingfisher project — to the extent compensation has been paid at all — has been in cash.

The large majority of those interviewed by Climate Rights International who received cash compensation said that the amounts they received were far too low to facilitate the purchase of land comparable in terms of size and quality to the land taken by the project. Andrew Odongo from Kyenjojo was one of the many people who said the compensation was insufficient. Odongo said that the compensation only helped him to pay for his children’s school fees, but wasn’t enough to buy new land comparable to his former land. He also said that he never received any details of an assessment that was supposed to be carried out about his previous land and instead just received a lump sum for the land, trees, and other infrastructures on the land.²³⁷

Moses Ssempala said that he was able to keep his house but lost a lot of land for the feeder pipeline. He managed to buy a piece of land, but it was smaller and located far away.

With the money I got, I managed to buy another half-acre, but very far because it was cheaper than where they took my land. Of course, that disturbs me a lot to have to go far to farm, but I had no other choice.²³⁸

Mercy Nalubwama reported the same problem from her village of Ndongo, along the feeder pipeline:

Samuel Ochieng explained the consequences for him:

During the time of compensation, people complained a lot. They used to complain about poor compensation, but when you complained, CNOOC told us this is a government project and this is the price we are supposed to pay you. With the compensation, I used it to pay school fees and to build a small house because there was not enough money to buy new land. Right now, I have to rent land somewhere else, which is so hard for me.²⁴⁰

Several individuals whose homes were impacted explained that, while they previously had multiple houses for different family members, CNOOC only built them single units. Fred Nsubuga from a village on the Buhuka Flats told Climate Rights International:

They just constructed for me one house. I had four temporarily constructed houses, with a total of 12 rooms. The new house has only two bedrooms and one living room. I told them it’s too small, but they replied that everybody has the same things. All the PAPs [Project Affected People] are the same, even if you have a big family with many houses before.²⁴¹

Alex Kato reported:

The chairman of a village made the same point:

Something very bad in this village: when they want to displace you, if you have two houses, they build only one house.

Charles Lubega, from the village of Nzunzu A, shared his observations:

People started to sell their house at a small price. A house of 5 million, they sell it at 1 million. In my village, the population was 1,000 people four years back. Now maybe a maximum of 500. The people left, because life became too difficult. A house rented before at 30,000, now even for 10,000 you can’t find a tenant.²⁴³

Coercion and Intimidation in Land Acquisition

Many residents told Climate Rights International that they faced threats, coercion, and intimidation when they questioned or opposed the acquisition of their land by CNOOC. Peter Musoke, a farmer in his thirties from the village of Nyenseke, along the feeder pipeline, explained the process by which his affected crops were assessed:

First, when they [CNOOC] did their survey, we lacked information about what they were doing. Initially, they passed through our land without informing us. At first, they were alone, then they involved the chairman [of the village]. They engaged the communities. They told us that they surveyed the land where the pipeline of the Kingfisher project is going through. Then later, valuers and other teams came, without telling us anything. They were very rapid and harsh. Sometimes they could not count some of the things. We called our chairperson that they didn’t count some of our crops, he called the CLO [Community Liaison Officer], they said they were aware.²⁴⁴

When Musoke refused to sign the document of assessment, he says that CNOOC agents told him: “If you delay, we have our lawyer so we will send you to court.” According to Musoke:

They have never recounted. They compensated only for what they counted, and not for what they missed. They told us we could open a case in the grievance mechanism committee, but they told us if we do that, the matter will go to court. So here we are afraid to go to court against CNOOC, that’s why we didn’t open a case.²⁴⁵

Joseph Mugisha from Nzunsu B reported that CNOOC workers threatened him with losing everything if he persisted in his refusal to sign the “voluntary” compensation agreement:

I was not happy and didn’t want to sign at the beginning. But [CNOOC] told me that if I didn’t sign, the land would be taken freely.²⁴⁶

Andrew Odongo, who lives in a village outside of the Buhuka Flats along the feeder pipeline, reported similar pressure, saying threats that he would lose everything without compensation prompted him to sign the documents:

They used to tell us, if you refuse to sign, your land will be taken freely and you as an individual, you can’t let the government programs fail to move on. At first, I wanted to refuse to sign, because the money was too little. So they told me that all other people agreed, so if I refuse, they will take my land freely. So I had to accept and sign.²⁴⁷

Moses Ssempala, who lives in Kyenjojo, also reports having been pressured by officials from CNOOC:

I was not happy and didn’t want to sign at the beginning. But they told me that if I didn’t sign, the land would be taken freely.”²⁴⁸

Feeder pipeline for the Kingfisher project in Kikuube district. © Mathieu Ajar

Emmanuel Kizza from the village of Nzunsu said that CNOOC workers were frequently accompanied by Ugandan police and army forces, which significantly increased the pressure on the people to accept the compensation. The presence of police or military personnel can create an atmosphere of intimidation and coercion can undermine the affected individuals’ ability to negotiate freely and make informed decisions. According to Kizza:

The compensation money they gave us, to me it’s not enough, and at that time they were actually forcing us to sign the form.… So after the assessment, they just called the chairman then the PAP and told each of us, “That is the compensation we are going to give you.” Always they could tell us, “If you are not willing to sign, you can go to court as the project continues.” They used to move with the police, sometimes with UPDF. At the table, you could see CNOOC, their lawyer, and the police. During assessment, UPDF was there also. They used to leave some property out, which they had no time to come and revalue. So to me, the money was inadequate and not enough.²⁴⁹

Daniel Okello reported that he received death threats in early 2023 after he refused a compensation offer from CNOOC:

LC2 [Local Council 2], called [name withheld], told him that CNOOC said that if I refused the compensation, CNOOC would come with a tractor and throw me into the middle of the lake.²⁵⁰

Emmanuel Kizza reported that:

Many people living in the Kingfisher area are illiterate. Some affected individuals told Climate Rights International that they lacked knowledge and understanding of the content of the documents they were signing. Moses Ssempala from Kyenjojo village said:

They had papers and told me to sign these papers. I signed without knowing what I was signing for.²⁵²

CHAPTER VII - Abuses in CNOOC's Acquisition of Communal Land: Subcontracting Responsibility to Bucola

Following the discovery of oil in the Kingfisher area in 2006, five individuals attempted to seize the land encompassing five villages within Buhuka Flats in 2008 – Nsonga, Kyabasambu, Kyakapere, Nsunzu and Kiina. Subsequently, the villages of Nsunzu A and Nsunzu B, as well as Nsonga A and Nsonga B, were created in the same area. These are the areas where the majority of exploration activities and the first oil discoveries in Buhuka took place. Various local leaders opposed these land grabbing actions. When CNOOC arrived on the scene in 2012, it supported communities against the land grabbers. Patrick Owen, the chairman of one of the Buhuka Flats villages, explains:

In 2012, CNOOC came and helped the community to fight against the land grabbers. Getting a lawyer was hard for them. So CNOOC found the lawyer.²⁵³

Owen said that CNOOC paid some community members to work on various tasks to enable the community to raise the money to cover the legal fees.

Following this legal battle, Derrick Mwezu, an elder from the village of Kiina, recounts that:

CNOOC’s main aim was to bring them together, to be united. They wanted to unite all the five villages [at that time it was only five villages] in one association, pick one leader through whom their voices will reach CNOOC.²⁵⁴

According to the ESIA, in Buhuka “some of the community members opted for individual ownership, [while] most of the other community members opted for a communal arrangement” and resided on communal land.²⁵⁵

However, during the land acquisition process for Kingfisher, CNOOC did not deal directly with people who lived on communal land. Instead, to acquire communal land in the Buhuka Flats villages, CNOOC operates through a “Communal Land Association” named the Buhuka Communal Land Association (Bucola), which was established almost exclusively for this purpose. In its 2018 ESIA report, CNOOC stated, “Registered as the land owner, the Buhuka Communal Land Association is the de-facto representative of the project-land affected community; a mandate held in respect by the client [CNOOC] and other stakeholders but also with some contestations by some of the community members.”²⁵⁶

According to the ESIA, the formation of this land association was also encouraged by the Ugandan government:

Since this date [2014], the Ministry of Land, Housing and Urban Development (MLHUD) began to provide technical assistance, advice, and support to community members residing on the Buhuka Flats. In July 2016, a general meeting was called by the MLHUD in collaboration with the Hoima District Local Government and local leaders, including CNOOC and community members, to address the stalemate that had been reached. This meeting resolved that, in accordance with the Land Act of 1998 and the land regulations, members from the Nsonga, Kyabasambu, Kyakapere, Nsunzu and Kiina villages should form the Buhuka Communal Land Association (BCLA) also referred to as BUCOLA. The members of the erstwhile Community Land Association would become members of the BCLA. It was the intention of the participants that this Committee will receive the money paid for compensation and administer the funds on behalf of the registered members of the Association.²⁵⁷

Derrick Mwezu explained his understanding of the purpose:

CNOOC promised them that for the land that will be used, the community will be compensated through Bucola, and the money will be used by the community.²⁵⁸

Emmanuel Bwende, the chairman of another village, explained that some people harbored distrust for this new organization:

The Ministry of Land and Ministry of Energy, they have to appoint a leader that will manage that communal land of Kingfisher. A lot of people didn’t want the association. They [the officials] wanted just to bring the people with money to the meeting of the association, so others started to be scared and not trust. But they succeeded and formed Bucola. Behind was CNOOC.²⁵⁹

Sam Opol from Kyabasambu echoes similar sentiments about CNOOC and the creation of Bucola:

After winning [the case against the five land grabbers], they [CNOOC] came up with the idea of an association. But remember, they forced people to join the association.²⁶⁰

Indeed, all the residents located on the communal lands of the villages of Nsonga, Kyabasambu, Kyakapere, Nsunzu, and Kiina were automatically made members of the association by default, whether or not they agreed with the Kingfisher project or the idea of creating an association.

Office of the Buhuka Communal Land Association in Buhuka Parish © Mathieu Ajar

Climate Rights International has obtained a copy of the land title issued on May 17, 2018 from the Ministry of Lands in the name of the “Buhuka Communal Land Association” for all of the land in the five villages of Buhuka Flats (Kyakapere, Kyabasambu, Nsonga, Nsunzu, Kiina). This represents a surface area of 1005.958 hectares.

Land title issued on May 17, 2018, in favor of the Bukuka Communal Land Association, covering an area of 1,005.958 hectares on the land of five villages: Kyakapere, Kyabasambu, Nsonga, Nsunzu, and Kiina.

CNOOC’s involvement in obtaining the land title for Bucola has been confirmed by multiple sources, including by CNOOC employees and Bucola members during public meetings. Emma Prelo from Nsonga told Climate Rights International that a source from the executive office of Bucola confirmed this, saying that after becoming chairman of Bucola he went to CNOOC, which helped him to get the land titles.²⁶¹

The first chairman of Bucola was one of the leaders who had fought against the initial land grabbers and had worked closely with CNOOC in the previous years. Charles Kwesiga, who came from Kyabasambu, explains that CNOOC not only helped the association to form but also assisted “to get the community land title of Bucola.” He said he heard this directly from the Bucola chairman during a meeting about the eviction of the residents of Kiina village by the UPDF in 2023.

It was said in some meeting. They had a lot of meetings of Bucola. In one of them last year in 2023, the RDC [Resident District Commissioner] was there, and also the head of CNOOC, and the [Bucola chairman] who showed the land title and said that it was CNOOC who supported him to get the land title. Even soldiers were there.²⁶²

Henry Lwanga from Kyabasambu heard the same thing from a CNOOC employee, a Community Liaison Officer named Kaija:

CNOOC has said they supported Bucola to get the land title. The CLO of CNOOC, Kaija, said that before I was chased. It was during a meeting with many people. And now they said they buy the land from Bucola.²⁶³

After helping Bucola’s leaders obtain title to almost all the land on the Buhuka Flats, CNOOC appears to use them as the sole interlocutor with local residents. Jealousy Opo from the village of Nzunzu B, told Climate Rights International that:

I have a plot within Bucola’s land title. CNOOC will use Bucola to contact me.²⁶⁴

Some local residents say that Bucola hasn’t organized new elections, despite its regulations requiring elections every two years, and that it has failed to provide financial statements to the members, which are supposed to be issued every six months.²⁶⁵

Many people have tried to alert authorities at both local and central levels, as well as CNOOC, about these issues.²⁶⁶ A letter from the residents of Nsonga A village was sent on July 5, 2023, to the Ministry of Lands, with copies to various local authorities, security officials, CNOOC, and the Petroleum Authority of Uganda. This letter highlights the issues of non-compliance with the organization’s constitution and the lack of elections for the current governing bodies.

Letter dated July 5, 2023, on behalf of the residents of Nsonga A village, alerting the authorities and CNOOC to irregularities in the operations of the Bucola Association.

Other individuals also filed complaints in October 2023 against the Bucola Association and its leaders, citing the absence of elections despite the end of their mandate in October 2019.

October 26, 2023, complaint filed against the Bukuka Communal Land Association and its leaders.

Evictions by Bucola Without Compensation

Local residents said that complaints to CNOOC are often met with referrals to the association. When CNOOC wishes to acquire some of the land in Buhuka Flats, it deals directly and solely with Bucola’s leaders. This contradicts both Ugandan legislation and the constitution of the communal association, which states in article 13.4: “Where land is held by the Association has a certificate of title, no transactions or dealings of any kind in respect of the land or any part of the land shall be entered into or undertaken or concluded by the Managing committee unless a two thirds majority of the members in the General Assembly convened for the purpose approves the said transaction or dealing.”²⁶⁷

Ballack Watcho from Nsunzu B explained that:

When CNOOC wants land, they just go through Bucola.²⁶⁸

Michael Omondi made the same point:

If CNOOC takes the land, you don’t receive the compensation. It’s Bucola who receives the money for the land.²⁶⁹

Abraham Byamukama, a former executive member of Bucola who chose to leave the association, told Climate Rights International that:

When CNOOC wants to go to a specific place, they give Bucola some money for this specific place. Every time they give money to Bucola, they give a document [as a receipt]. CNOOC has documents, and I saw them, but I don’t have them.²⁷⁰

The Ugandan Land Act of 1998 provides for the creation of Communal Land Associations to allow a group of people to collectively manage communal lands.²⁷¹ Sections 15 to 19 of this law outline the procedures for the creation and management of Communal Land Associations, while sections 23 to 26 detail the management of land set aside for common use. Common uses are defined in section 23(3):

The purposes for which land may be set aside for common use are:

(a) the grazing and watering of livestock;
(b) hunting;
(c) the gathering of wood fuel and building materials;
(d) the gathering of honey and other forest resources for food and medicinal purposes;
(e) such other purposes as may be traditional among the community using the land communally.

While it is unclear how much compensation CNOOC has paid to the association to acquire land, none of those interviewed by Climate Rights International who had been residing on communal land said they had received compensation for their land, houses, livestock, or other assets from CNOOC or Bucola.²⁷²

Ballack Watcho explained his experience:

The camp is connected to Bucola, and the money goes to Bucola. As the owner of the house, I haven’t received any money. […] When CNOOC wants land, now Bucola just tells you to leave, even if you have a house, and you don’t receive any compensation.²⁷³

CNOOC's failure to compensate for assets

Under article 26(1) of the Ugandan Constitution, CNOOC is responsible for providing compensation after assessing the value of a property and before its acquisition.²⁷⁴

Officially, this is the process required for all oil projects in Uganda, including Tilenga and the pipeline. The companies responsible for these projects are responsible for assessing the value of houses and other assets on the land to be acquired by the project and then compensating the owners for their houses and assets, even if they did not own the land on which these properties were located.

The Kingfisher ESIA stated that, “Communities in Buhuka Parish occupy the public land with sole possession of usufruct rights especially settlement, fish processing, recreation, and cattle grazing. All this land is held under the customary tenure system.²⁷⁵ If Bucola is the owner of the communal land in Kingfisher, the individuals residing on this land and those evicted remain the owners of their houses and other assets, such as their crops, and should be compensated for any losses.

Community members and other entities have also expressed concerns about the compensation process used for communal lands that were used for grazing and other purposes. The Netherlands Commission for Environmental Assessment, which conducted a review of the ESIA for the Kingfisher project at the request of the Ugandan National Environment Management Authority, also expressed concerns about how community members would be compensated for communal lands: “The ESIA is not clear about the way ‘communal properties’ (like grazing land and water, used by the communities but not individually owned), will be compensated as these have a direct bearing on their livelihoods.”²⁷⁶

Some people interviewed by Climate Rights International asserted that Bucola charges residents to remain on their individual land or on community lands. Derrick Mwezu of Kiina told Climate Rights International:

The Bucola guy, he divided the land of the Kingfisher. One part for herdsmen, one part for cultivators. He put a by-law that each and every person should pay for his garden or for his cows. And yet the land belongs to the community. The cultivators pay 520k per person, and you remain with the garden. For one acre. At first they paid 100k per season. Two seasons per year. Those people who don’t pay the money, they just chased you.²⁷⁷

Bucola also reportedly imposes a fee for displaced families to resettle on the community lands in one of the villages in the area. Vanessa Muchum reported that her parents had lived for over 12 years in Kyabasambu.

I was staying at school, but Bucola chased my parents from where they were living and asked them to pay some money. They paid 200,000 shillings in 2020 for the plot where they were living [in Kyabasambu], then Bucola chased them in 2022 from the same plot. Because of that, my parents had to remove me from school and I can’t study anymore. I finished 7th grade, but never went to secondary school. And I haven’t found any job. At the beginning, we were living under a plastic sheet. Even now. We are 11 in total in a house totally made of plastic, from top to bottom.²⁷⁸

Vanessa explained that to install a small makeshift lean-to with a plastic tent for a roof, “We had to pay 250,000 shillings to [Bucola].”

Lean-to homes with plastic roofs used by members of the Buhuka community evicted from their land in the Kingfisher area. © Mathieu Ajar

Some families are unable to pay the amounts demanded by Bucola to resettle and must beg others for funds to pay for the right to stay in their region. Rose Belieda explained:

In Kyabasambu, we bought a plot from Bucola for 400,000 UGX. When we moved to Nsonga [after having been chased from our previous land], they demanded more payments. I had no money, but they demanded 700,000. My friends contributed, allowing me to pay. This misuse of community funds was embarrassing. When I bought that new land, CNOOC built a road through it but didn’t compensate us.²⁷⁹

Emmanuel Bwende, the chairman of a village, explained that when Bucola leaders are asked why they failed to compensate displaced people or the community:

They said that, “The money is not for the people, but for working.”²⁸⁰

Community members and their leaders say they have repeatedly alerted CNOOC at community meetings that both the community and the displaced families did not receive any compensation during evictions. Although interviewees have complained that CNOOC generally tries to not allow them to speak or voice their concerns, many community members have still used these meetings to alert the company about the lack of compensation, but without success. Michael Omondi, a former teacher, said:

If you complain too much, they can also say, “Go to Bucola. Don’t come to us.”²⁸¹

CNOOC undertook to ensure that the people forced to resettle would be in a comparable, if not better, situation than before. It has failed to fulfill that commitment.

Community members also reported that the police are unresponsive when alerted. Ballack Watcho, for example, says:

Even when people go to the police, nothing good happens. The officers tell them that it’s an issue of CNOOC, so they ask complainants to leave, and nothing happens.²⁸²

Compensation for land in areas under the jurisdiction of Bucola has also failed to take into account the existence of individual ownership on this land. Climate Rights International interviewed a number of people who claim that they own land within the area to which Bucola holds title. The Local Chairman of a village affected by the project showed his book of registration of the village to Climate Rights International. He said that there are:

[T]wo kinds of land here, communal land and individual land. The majority of people [who] live on their individual land, they don’t have paper. They just get some papers from me as an LC1 [Local Chairman].”²⁸³

John Palot said that his land in Nzunzu B was taken without any compensation.

I heard that it was taken as communal land, even though my uncle had been there since I was born, so since the 1980s.²⁸⁴

CHAPTER VIII - Impact of Kingfisher on Farmers

Livestock farming is the second most prevalent business activity in the Kingfisher area. The ESIA noted that, “A number of households in the sub-county are engaged in rearing animals at a subsistence level. Recently, there was an influx of cattle keepers from as far as Tanzania and Kasese areas, leading to a tremendous increase in cattle in the area up to Buhuka parish in the flats. In Buhuka, the cattle keepers were attracted mainly by the abundance of water from the lake and open grasslands that are conducive for grazing animals.”²⁸⁵

However, livestock farmers have been severely impacted by the establishment of oil activities in the area. Many farmers have lost all or part of their livestock during forced evictions by the UPDF. Those who managed to flee with some of their livestock often had to leave behind their pigs, chickens, and goats. For instance, during the army’s eviction of Kyabasambu in 2020, Emma Prelo, a cattle keeper, told Climate Rights International:

I went with my cows but lost my goats and chickens.²⁸⁶

Paul Sserwanga recounted how, during the same eviction, he managed to take some clothes, but “the goats, ducks, we couldn’t take.”²⁸⁷

Henry Lwanga explained that when he returned home after the eviction, hoping to retrieve his belongings and livestock:

At 7 a.m. everything had already disappeared. So I also lost my 13 iron sheets, my solar battery, my 13 goats, chickens, clothes, bed, sofa. The house was totally empty.²⁸⁸

Solomon Atuhaire, who was evicted from Kiina, said that he had approximately fifty goats, but after the eviction, “I had just seven goats remaining there.”²⁸⁹

Farmers who have remained in the area have seen a significant reduction in grazing areas due to land confiscated by the oil project. IFC Performance Standard 5, which CNOOC has committed to follow, applies to physical or economic displacement, including “restriction on access to land or use of other resources including communal property and natural resources such as […] grazing and cropping areas.”²⁹⁰ As the Guidance Notes to PS5 make clear, the loss of access to such assets must be taken into consideration in determining compensation. “Whilst these resources are, by definition, not owned by individual households, access to them is often a key component of affected households’ livelihoods, without which they will likely face the risk of project-induced impoverishment.”²⁹¹ Performance Standard 5 requires that, where project-related restrictions cause loss of access to such resources, “implementation of measures will be made to either allow continued access to affected resources or provide access to alternative resources with equivalent livelihood-earning potential and accessibility. Where appropriate, benefits and compensation associated with natural resource usage may be collective in nature rather than directly oriented towards individuals or households”²⁹²

CNOOC has not provided alternative resources for those who have lost access to grazing land. This has resulted in animals having insufficient grass for nourishment, drastically reducing milk production. Many farmers say they have been forced to gradually sell their animals to survive and feed their families.

Peter Muzini, from the village of Kyakapere, observed that:

Even the areas where we used to rear our animals are now used by oil companies.²⁹³

Charles Kwesiga, a farmer who lived in the village of Kina, shared his experience:

Yes, I have been affected by the oil project. […] The grazing area was initially very large, it was adequate. But when the oil companies arrived, the grazing area became very small. I was grazing on the communal land in Kina village. Almost half of the land has been taken. Because the land became too small, the milk yield per animal has significantly decreased. People have to sell their cows, and many are leaving [the area] because of that.

I had around 40 cows before they [CNOOC and UPDF] arrived. But now I have only 20, in 3 years. I also had 50 goats, but now I don’t have any.²⁹⁴

Emma Prelo describes the consequences of this land reduction on his economic activities:

Before, I was selling milk from my animals, but afterward, the place became too small to graze animals, so it was not possible for cows to produce milk and make money from that. No place to graze up to now.²⁹⁵

At the time of his expulsion from Kyabasambu, Emma Prelo explained:

I had thirty animals, but I have only 18 now.²⁹⁶

However, the reduction in land area for grazing is not the only problem encountered by the area’s farmers. Some members of the community told Climate Rights International that leaders of Bucola, who rule over communal lands with the support of CNOOC and the army, require community farmers to pay to graze their livestock on these communal lands. Charles Kwesiga explained:

Before, we didn’t have to pay to use the communal land. Bucola is requesting money for keeping the animals. But we are members of the community.²⁹⁷

Dennis Mukasa from Nzunzu A had a similar experience:

The herdsmen have been chased by demanding a lot of money from them. Bucola which asks them for a lot of money, even if they are community members of Bucola.²⁹⁸

Reginald Nkunda told Climate Rights International that:

The government said the land is for the community, and people are supposed to live for free. But Bucola asked us to pay them money to stay on our plots. Even if we don’t have any money.²⁹⁹

Michael Omondi, a farmer from Nzunzu B, recounted his experience to Climate Rights International:

What is painful, now they divided the land [between] one for grazing and one for farming. Those who were farming before, Bucola divided your garden into different plots of one acre. If you had 2 or 10 acres before, you will get just one acre even if you have worked on it. If you want to use the land, you have to pay 50k for 5 years. And you apply again after 5 years. So it’s not even permanent.³⁰⁰

Farmers and herdsmen with their cattle in the Kingfisher oil area. © Mathieu Ajar

Oil installations cause additional harms for farmers. As the Netherlands Commission for Environmental Assessment highlighted in 2019, some of the infrastructure, notably the feeder pipeline, crosses numerous rivers and other water sources: “The feeder pipeline crosses rivers at various locations. However, the ESIA does not take into account the importance of the river as the ‘water life line,’ both for households (and related gender impacts) and cattle.”³⁰¹ Even for water sources not directly impacted, many paths previously used by herds to access water are now blocked by oil infrastructure, forcing farmers to detour several kilometers to water their herds. Many farmers have also reported traces of oil on the lands where their livestock sometimes graze, poisoning and killing numerous animals (please see Chapter XIII).

Farmers also face increasing challenges due to land acquisitions by CNOOC and its subcontractors. Godfrey Lubwama explains that his farming family lost part of their land:

Our land, a part of it, was taken by the oil companies for the road.³⁰²

With oil activities requisitioning more land, many farmers, especially those near existing installations, fear losing their land soon without compensation. According to Felix Kabugo from Nzunzu B:

They are just near my land but they haven’t taken it. We often hear rumors that they are going to expand the camp [of CNOOC], so we don’t know if they will take our land, and if we will get compensation, because the land belongs to the community. I’m worried because of the low compensation I hear about from others when they take your land, and people are upset… I heard that they want to add 200 meters to their camp, which means they will take my farm.³⁰³

Godfrey Lubwama from the neighboring village Nzunzu A shares similar concerns.

We often hear rumors that all of us who are farming in this area will have our land taken and be relocated. I’m afraid because I don’t have another place to go and farm.³⁰⁴

Farmers fear they could lose the right to use their land at any moment.

Farmers also face the destruction of their crops by companies building oil infrastructure. Samuel Ochieng testifies:

When activities started, they began digging their hole. And they poured the soil on my part of the land that they have not taken. That has destroyed my crops, which are cassava. One full line, so approximately one hundred cassavas. […] There are a lot of challenges. Sometimes they decide to work at one point and impose many restrictions there. When they constructed the road, they changed the path we used to fetch water, and now we must use a longer route.³⁰⁵

CHAPTER IX - Impacts on Fishing Communities: Destruction of Livelihoods, Violence, Arrests, Extortion, and Displacement

The ESIA report for the Kingfisher project states that “the major economic activity in the area is fishing. Men catch fish in the lake while the women, in most cases, are fish vendors. … Fishing is a daily activity for almost all the households. Between six and 12 hours daily are reported to be spent on fishing activities. Between 30kg and 600kg of fish can be caught on the lake during a single fishing expedition.”³⁰⁶ As previously outlined in this report and corroborated by the ESIA, the villages in the Buhuka Flats have experienced an “exponential growth rate,”³⁰⁷ primarily driven by the lucrative fishing sector and available land.³⁰⁸

Fishing boats on Lake Albert near the CNOOC drilling rig. © Mathieu Ajar

However, since the arrival of CNOOC and the Ugandan army, fisherfolk have faced numerous challenges, leading to a decline in the local population and a struggle to survive for those that remain. In an apparent effort to drive local residents out of the area, the UPDF has harassed fishermen and fish traders, imprisoning them, burning their boats and merchandise, causing widespread impoverishment and leading to the flight of an ever-increasing number of community members to other regions far from oil activities.

In November 2015, new national reforms were introduced to fishery management, including rules for fisherfolk and the restructuring of the administration responsible for enforcing fishing regulations. Fisherfolk were prohibited from using vessels smaller than 8.5 meters and certain nets. They also needed a new license to fish and were required to switch from gasoline to battery-powered lights for night-time fishing.

To oversee these regulations, the “local-level fisheries co-management systems, the Beach Management Units (BMUs), were dissolved” through a presidential directive and management was shifted to the military via the formation of the Fisheries Protection Unit (FPU) to enforce compliance on Ugandan lakes. Enforcement was stepped up in various regions in 2017.³⁰⁹

Across the country, there have been numerous conflicts between the UPDF and fishermen, leading Parliament to condemn the military management of fisheries.³¹⁰ Despite a general reduction in such abuses in recent years, particularly on Lake Victoria and other regions of Lake Albert, violations persist at the Kingfisher project site.

Enforcement in the Kingfisher Area

While the new regulations have been implemented nationwide to enforce compliance, the level of repression and harassment as described in the Kingfisher area appears to be distinctly more severe.

Jennifer Akello, a young woman from Kiina, explained:

Charles Kwesiga, a cattle keeper from Kiina, noted:

The cattle keepers and fishermen have reduced. And in general, the population reduced, and economic activities reduced.³¹²

Ronald Muhumuza told Climate Rights International that the number of people in the village of Kyehoro is falling:

People leave daily. Now we are approximately 700, down from over 2000 at the beginning.³¹³Ronald Muhumuza.

Agnes Nabwire from the village of Nsonga told Climate Rights International that she had to leave the area where she was born in order to continue her fishing career. She said that friends who had moved told her that there are fewer restrictions in other areas.

One went to Kitebere landing site. Those who went there continue to fish. UPDF is also there, but in Kitebere, you can still fish.³¹⁴

This sentiment is echoed by many fisherfolk who have resolved to leave the region as the result of harassment. Many continue to fish in Lake Albert, whether in the south in the Kitebere district, near the land border with the DRC, or in the north, but in all cases in areas far from the oil installations of CNOOC and TotalEnergies. Dennis Sekabira decided in 2020 to move from Buhuka Flats to the south of Lake Albert, in the Kitebere district, near the border with the Democratic Republic of Congo.

I switched in 2020 to Kitebere, because there were no restrictions on nets, but in Kingfisher the restrictions were already there. They even started to burn some boats in Kingfisher, but there in Kitebere, it was still okay to use them. The restrictions are far too stringent in Kingfisher. At least in Kitebere, we can still continue to use the old method. In Kitebere they don’t burn immediately, so you can negotiate. But in Kingfisher, there are no negotiations possible. I have never heard about UPDF beating some fishermen when they arrest them here.³¹⁵

Frederick Mugerwa left the Kingfisher area in 2022 after living there for 22 years to move further south to Songara in the Kitebere district.

Fishing methods became too restricted, so I decided to switch to Kitebere. In Kingfisher, the restrictions are so high in comparison to Kitebere. Here [in Kingfisher], there is patrolling all the time. In Kingfisher, the restrictions on nets are too high. But there in Kitebere, if you have a good boat and a bad net, they will not arrest you. The people in Kitebere, you can negotiate with them, you can cooperate with them. But in Kingfisher, there is no possibility of cooperation.³¹⁶

Paul Baliu, a fisherman from Nsunzu A, concurred:

The [UPDF] fishing unit is everywhere in Uganda. But in other lakes, they continue to use small nets.³¹⁷

Nicholas Ssenyondo lived nearly 20 years in Nzunzu before leaving the Kingfisher area. He also compares the behavior of the army and police in the new oil-rich area with the Kitebere district:

The other difference is the restriction in Kingfisher is much stricter in comparison to Kitebere. The reason the restriction is not as strict in Kitebere is because their leaders sometimes talk with the UPDF to at least have the sympathy of the fishermen, because that is the only source of their life. But in Kingfisher, no one talks with the UPDF Marines. And in Kingfisher the UPDF are very harsh. Police and UPDF don’t beat fishermen in Kitebere.³¹⁸

Others prefer to move further north, like Victor Luganda, a 37-year-old fisherman who just spent several months in prison, unable to bribe the army for his release, who said:

I want to go to Kaiso. Even in Kaiso, there are soldiers. But they don’t disturb the fishermen like here, because they allow them to fish.³¹⁹

Joshua Ntale, a fisherman from Kyehoro, suggested a link between the destruction of boats by the UPDF and the Kingfisher project:

At first, there was research from the government to see how many people live on the shore where oil is, and they found there are many people who are staying. With that, they came with a hard method of fishing so that will defeat people. So they have to begin to run away from the landing site. The department of marine told us that if we don’t have the required methods of fishing, people should go away outside the landing site.³²⁰

Aaron Kibumba, a local priest, explains why more and more fishermen are leaving for other areas: “When the government came to change the rules [of fishing], for those who didn’t have the chance to build a new boat, they have to shift.”³²¹

Destruction of Boats

Starting in 2019 in Kyabasambu³²² and Kiina,³²³ and later in some other villages, Ugandan military forces in the Kingfisher area villages began burning boats and fishing nets that did not comply with the updated standards. This continues to the present day.

In most cases, the UPDF did this without giving notice to the owners or an opportunity to modify the boats and nets to comply. These boats and nets, many of which could have been modified and enlarged, were a primary and vital source of income and survival for thousands of people.

Ronald Muhumuza, a fisherman in his thirties from Kyehoro, told Climate Rights International:

Before, in Kyehoro, we had more than 800 boats. Before the new system, I had three boats. On the night of August 27, 2022, a gang of many army soldiers arrived in our village and looked for the chairman. Then he had to call all the residents of Kyehoro for the following morning. So when people came in the morning, they [the soldiers] said the government has come with a new system of fishing. So they no longer want these small boats, they want the long boats. So immediately they started burning these small boats.

According to Muhumuza, between 30 and 50 soldiers were present that day.³²⁴

Sarah Namazzi, from the same village, noted that, according to the fishermen’s association, of which she was a member, 337 boats were burned on that first day in her village. She says the UPDF commander told the villagers:

If you can’t afford buying these new boats, you should go away from that landing site.³²⁵

Wilson Turyasingura, also from Kyehoro, recalls that horrific day, noting that the soldiers refused to let fisherfolk modify their boats, which would have been much cheaper compared to building new ones:

The practice of burning all the boats in a village has occurred in various other locations, such as when residents were expelled from Kyabasambu in May 2020, as well as in Kiina, Kyehoro, and Nzunzu.³²⁷

A UPDF marine throws petrol on a pile of burning nets in the Kingfisher oil field. © Environment Governance Institute

Fishing boats and nets on fire in the Kingfisher oil area. © Environment Governance Institute

The chairmen of two other villages explained that, when this happened in their village, more than a hundred boats were burned in a day. Many people had to leave the region, unable to continue fishing.³²⁸

Numerous fisherfolk persist with smaller boats to survive. The cost of a new, compliant boat is between 3 and 4.5 million shillings (800 to 1200 USD), in addition to new fishing nets costing between 2 to 3 million shillings (500 to 800 USD). This sum is unattainable for the majority of local fishing families, whose boats typically cost between 250,000 to 1.2 million shillings (65 to 315 USD). These amounts are even harder to accumulate following the loss of their primary source of income – their previous boats – and for some, all their possessions, homes, and lands when they were also expelled from their homes by the UPDF or by CNOOC.

Lawrence Ssemwogerere, from the village of Nsunzu A, expressed his plight:

I’m now 41 years old. I was born by the lakeside. I don’t know any other work. And UPDF arrived and blocked us. We know everything about fish, when fish is good and bad, which months we can fish and what [which fish]. But since these units came, we don’t know what to do. Before we had a lot of cash, but now life is difficult.³²⁹

Esther Auma, a widow with seven children, explained why she continues to fish despite the new rules:

I thought about doing something else like selling pancakes, but I found that it was not possible to cater for my family. So I had to fish illegally, since I’m used to doing it for over 30 years. Life is so hard, the fishing now is like you’re stealing, not in the normal way. The risk is anytime I can go to court, because fishing and selling became illegal for me. So I’m very afraid.³³⁰

Two fishermen on a small boat in the Kingfisher area. © Mathieu Ajar

UPDF soldiers patrol daily to monitor fisherfolk, enforcing severe consequences for non-compliance. Joshua Ntale described how he lost his boat in June 2021:

The UPDF saw the boat out of the water, and saw it was too small. So they called me and asked if it was mine. The UPDF told me it’s not supposed to go back to water. Those people can’t allow anyone to talk. I told them not to burn the boats, like that I could increase the size of the boat. But they didn’t listen and just continue burning. I didn’t reply, just lost power. They immediately started to burn them. The commander of the UPDF unit told me, “If you fail to have these methods, you will not be fishing and you must go and get life somewhere else.”³³¹

Benjamin Mutebi from Nsunzu A elaborated on the difficulty of complying with the new regulations:

Since they started implementing, it’s very difficult to do it. Between boat, net, and license. If one is missing, they arrest everything. Life is difficult because now the marines are always looking for the bad things. Even if you have everything good (boat, net, and licenses) but you have trapped a small fish, they will arrest you. So life became difficult.³³²

The harassment that fisherfolk in the Kingfisher area endure is not limited to those who fail to follow the new regulations. Some who have managed to save up or secure loans to purchase new compliant boats and fishing nets explained that problems with the military persist. Julius Bwire from Kyohoro village explained how he is utterly discouraged by the situation:

I waited two months to buy the new boats. Even when I go and fish, I still have issues, because when the UPDF see me with small fish, they arrest us. Happened three times in one year. Even when we used the required net! So after, we still need to pay. Sometimes they request 600,000, the last time 500,000.³³³

Many people complain about outright extortion by the military, even though they comply with all regulations. A chairman from one of the villages, himself a fisherman, said:

The UPDF sometimes doesn’t know the inches of the net. Sometimes they burned even the net. Recently, one month ago. I’m using a fish net which is okay. But I received a call and saw that UPDF arrested my boat. So I showed that I have applied for the license, and after they called the UPDF which confirmed it was okay for me. But they didn’t want to release my boat if I didn’t pay 300,000 for the fuel, even if my boat was okay. So I had to pay. So if that is not corruption, what is it?³³⁴

UPDF soldier watches fishing nets being burned in the Kingfisher area. © Environment Governance Institute

Duncan Kisitu, a fisherman based in Nzunsu A, detailed how the UPDF confiscated and destroyed boats that they themselves had approved merely two weeks previously:

I spent 14 million [approximately 3,700 USD] for the two boats, but they were taken by soldiers in January 2024. I bought them in November 2023. It was the type of boat that is allowed, the same for the net. And I even had a license. I was even surprised. They were the ones who allowed me to fish and gave the license, who arrested me afterward and said it’s not the required one. I tried [to retrieve them], but they asked for 3 million [approx. 800 USD], so I failed, because the money was too much. Even my boats were spoiled because they cut them. I don’t know the clear reason why they do those things. They don’t allow us to fish at all, I don’t know why. I’m not the only one they did that to, even with big boats. Now I’m just at home, seated.³³⁵

Stella Nakibuuka from Nsunzu A reported that:

Before the arrival of CNOOC, we were fishing, and our life was very okay. But when the oil companies arrived, the UPDF also came. And Bucola started their harassment, and CNOOC also told us to stop using our lamps because the oil in the lamps can disturb their oil activities. And it’s from then they started arresting us, burning our boats. So, I think our torture is connected to CNOOC and the oil activities.³³⁶

Arrests and Extortion

Nearly all interviewees describe the behavior of the UPDF towards the fishermen as harassment, with numerous reports of fishermen being arrested, often arbitrarily, and released only after the payment of money.

Vincent Yeno, the chairman of a village, described the ongoing struggles:

They continue harassing people. They continue to arrest them. Some of them have hidden boats and nets, but sometimes they are caught by UPDF.³³⁷

Paul Baliu, a fisherman from Nsunzu A, said:

When they find some people who have small boats and small nets, or also some small fishes, they also arrest you.³³⁸

Benjamin Mutebi, from the same village, recounted his arrest, among eight other people that day, and how he was released:

From water, they bring us to Buhuka police station, then the next day, we were transferred to Kikuube district to the prison. I spent there one week, and never faced a judge. The negotiation was between the Officer Commander from Kikuube prison and the family. The family had to pay 200,000 shillings per person.³³⁹

Gerald Kizito, a boat owner from the area, detailed how the authorities arrested his fishermen and burned his boats and nets:

I had my three boats. But when they [his workers] came back, soldiers came and said that the size of the boat and the nets are against the law. I bribed the police to release them, because they were telling me that if I don’t pay them, they will be taken for further imprisonment. In my boat, there were three, and in the other two, there were two. So seven in total. The police wanted 700,000. Because 100,000 per person. When they arrested them, they wanted 1.4 million. But through bargaining, asking for mercy, they have reduced to 700,000. It was with Nsonga police station.³⁴⁰

Another boat owner, Timothy Bukenya, explained the arrest of his employees:

They arrested my workers. They were four people, and moving in two boats. They spent one week in jail. They took them in Bundibugyo district, in Katojo prison. They arrested them in the lake, they were brought to the coast, transferred them the next day to Ntoroko district, then next day to Katojo prison. They went directly without seeing any judge.

Bukenya said he was informed that he had to pay 300,000 shillings (approximately $USD80) per person for their release.³⁴¹

The chairman of another village told Climate Rights International that once the “UPDF marines have arrested you with a small net or small fish, they don’t bring you to court. They just take your boat and sell the fish themselves.”³⁴²

Sarah Namazzi, a fisherwoman from Kyehoro, observed that the costs to free arrested fishermen have escalated over time:

At first, it was 300,000 to release everybody and the boat. But right now it’s 150k per person and 250,000 for the boat.³⁴³

After investing all her savings, selling her livestock, and securing a loan, Sarah Namazzi managed to build a new boat that met regulatory standards. However, she explained her ongoing struggles with the UPDF:

The reason is UPDF up to now continues to disturb people. So life is still difficult. Once they find fish which is too small, immediately they [seize] your boat, even if the net is of the right size. So that makes our life so hard. Some of my workers have been arrested. Seven times in the last four months. The last one was because now the UPDF wants each worker to carry their license. But they forgot it at their home so they arrested them. When I came with their licenses to Kaiso landing site to their office, they refused to release the boys until I paid them.

Namazzi said she had to pay 150,000 shillings for her three workers.

But the boat remains there up to now. They arrested it three weeks ago. But they want 250,000 shillings for the boat.³⁴⁴

In some cases, detainees remained in prison for several months because they could not pay the amounts demanded by the soldiers or police for their release. None of the people interviewed who said they had been arrested said they had ever appeared in court or seen a judge.

Complaining can be dangerous. A chairman from one of the villages in the area described the regular abuse fishermen face during encounters with the military, particularly if they attempt to speak up or complain:

If you complain, they can beat you and use a gun. For example, two weeks ago, I saw someone who went there to ask for his boat. And the woman who is a soldier started to beat him.³⁴⁵

Dire Detention Conditions

Fisherfolk who have endured imprisonment, despite never appearing before a judge, report conditions that are degrading, humiliating, and inhumane. A number of NGO reports have highlighted the poor conditions and serious abuses during detention in Uganda.³⁴⁶ The testimonies collected by Climate Rights International also describe forced labor practices by prisoners for the army. Some of those interviewed said that detainees receive insufficient food from prison authorities, sometimes with no more than one meal a day.³⁴⁷

One of the major problems associated with detention is overcrowded and unsanitary cells. Martin Ssali provided a harrowing description of the cell conditions:

In addition to being extremely overcrowded, they smelled strongly of urine and feces. Indeed, my cellmates and I couldn’t go outside to relieve ourselves, so everyone had to use the same bucket for one week. We were 25 people in the cell. They gave posho and beans per group of five. Just next to the rubbish, which is still there and smells. For short calls [urinating], they bring a small basin. When it’s full, they pour it into the big one. It was in an open space; we couldn’t hide.³⁴⁸

Geoffrey Nkoyooyo from another village tells a similar story:

The cell was about 6m2 and we were like eight people. We had a bucket where we could relieve ourselves, without privacy. The room was very hot and even smelly. We had to negotiate to sleep; some had to sleep, while others remained awake because of the small size of the room. We were sleeping directly on the cement floor, with lots of mosquitoes.³⁴⁹

Mildred Akello told Climate Rights International that detainees had to sleep “head-to-toe” to fit everyone at the same time.³⁵⁰ This close proximity also fosters violence among detainees. Mildred Akello shared his experience:

We were put in a cell. The place was very dirty. Other prisoners sometimes beat me. Sometimes we were taken out to dig. And there wasn’t enough food.³⁵¹

Climate Rights International also received several reports of forced labor in detention. One fisherman recounted how he had to build a house at one of the UPDF barracks in the area, alongside other imprisoned fishermen.³⁵² Mildred Akello shared his ordeal during three months of detention:

We were digging from morning to evening. The soldiers beat us while we were digging. We were forced to dig faster. Food was not sufficient; we ate only once per day. We had to dig six days per week. It was in Kitoba jail, Hoima.³⁵³

Violence and Deaths

The arrests of fishermen by the Ugandan army, who are not properly trained in law enforcement, are often very violent. Julius Bwire shared his experiences of his latest arrests:

The first and second times we were beaten, but not the last time. The second time, they knocked our boat, and one of my workers fell into the water. But he managed to swim and survive.³⁵⁴

Vincent Wamala, a young man expelled from Kiina, recounts how he was beaten by soldiers during his arrest while he was on a non-compliant boat:

UPDF beat me. One day I was coming back from fishing, and one boat from UPDF came chasing us. We were running to the landing site. When we reached the landing site, we found another soldier. Then that soldier had a stick and beat this fellow on the forehead, and I was beaten on the back. Then they arrested us.³⁵⁵

Moreover, because they are so afraid of the violence of the military, many fishermen prefer to jump into the water trying to escape, even if it means risking their lives. Timothy Bukenya reported that some fisherfolk have died during arrests:

When they see soldiers, fishermen are panicking, people are jumping into the water because they are too scared to go to jail. But they are chased by high-speed boats from the government and they knock [into the boat], causing a lot of accidents. Some people died because of that.³⁵⁶

Sam Opol from Kyabasambu shared a similar story:

The way they handle that [the arrests], it’s not done properly. Last year, at least four guys I know fell into the water. And all of them died, and families suffered up to now.³⁵⁷

According to a local partner, on June 12, 2024, Gilbert Omirambe, a fisherman from the Buhuka area, jumped into the water and drowned trying to avoid arrest by the security forces. He had been fishing with two companions, using nets that were too small and therefore illegal.³⁵⁸

Fishing boats on Lake Albert near a CNOOC drilling rig. © Mathieu Ajar

CHAPTER X - Devastating Impacts on the Rights to Housing, Food, Livelihoods, and Education

Under Article 11 of the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (ICESCR), to which Uganda is a state party, everyone has the right to adequate food.

The African Charter on Human and People’s Rights has been interpreted by the African Commission on Human and People’s Rights as providing implicit recognition of the right to food in articles 4 (the right to life), 16 (the right to health); and 22 (the right to economic and social development).³⁵⁹

Further, as previously mentioned, IFC Standard 5 states that, “When displacement cannot be avoided, the client will offer displaced communities and persons compensation for loss of assets at full replacement cost and other assistance to help them improve or restore their standards of living or livelihoods.”³⁶⁰

CNOOC and its partners have committed to ensuring food security for those affected by the project, explicitly stating: “The primary focus during RAP implementation will be on ensuring continued food security.”³⁶¹

Despite these commitments and legal obligations, the forced evictions by UPDF, confiscation of boats and nets, arrests, intimidation, and lack of adequate compensation have had a devastating impact on communities in the Kingfisher area. Many have struggled to feed themselves and their families. Many individuals report having to live in temporary, plastic houses after being displaced by the UPDF for the CNOOC project.

Edward Nsereko, formerly of Kyabasambu, describes his experience:

Due to the restrictions imposed on fishing, many people have been forced to transition from fishing to farming, even though farming generates a much lower income.³⁶²

In some cases, local leaders assisted them by providing land until they were blocked from doing so by Bucola. Elijah Tumusiime, a former fisherman from Kiina, received two acres from the village chairman for his family with 10 children. Still, he explained that his income significantly decreased after leaving fishing for farming:

Initially, when I was fishing, life was somewhat good for me because, with fishing, I used to fish daily. But with farming, it’s seasonal; you plant and you wait. The income from fishing was much more than what I can earn from farming.³⁶³Elijah Tumusiime.

Felix Kabugo from Nzunzu village said he had to leave his job as a fisherman to become a farmer:

The land is community-owned. Mainly, the land was for people from the community. It was the LC1 chairman who allotted me the land to farm. The chairman registered all the names of people who wanted to farm. They gave me an acre.³⁶⁴

Edward Nsereko told Climate Rights International:

Many now live either in the highlands or just below the cliff. Stephen Katende, who also lived in Kyabasambu, explained:

I have a temporary house, plastic sheet. Like the one they give for the refugees. Because renting was too expensive. A lot of people have this type of plastic sheet house.³⁶⁶

A family’s temporary home made of plastic and fabric following their eviction due to the development of the Kingfisher project. © Mathieu Ajar

The various violations suffered by communities are leading more and more people to move to other areas of the country.

Mildred Akello explains that, following his last arrest and stay in prison, and following all the problems he has encountered in the area, he now wishes to leave the area:

Life is very hard because where you live, you have to pay for it. And when oil companies find you, they displace you without compensation. Fishing is also hard. Children can’t study. There is no medication. Fear of soldiers. That’s why some of us are running away from Kingfisher. I want to go to Kaiso. Even in Kaiso, there are soldiers. They don’t disturb the fishermen like here because they allow them to fish.³⁶⁷

Following forced evictions, many families lost their livestock, their businesses, or their other sources of income. Individuals who lost their fishing boats and nets also found themselves without any sources of income. Many families have reported difficulties in securing sufficient food, with some unable to secure even one meal a day.

Francis Okoth was displaced by the military and later lost his fishing boats during the UPDF attack on his village.

Initially, I was a fisherman with my own boats and net, but when I was attacked by the UPDF, my nets and boats were taken. Now I’m just trying to earn a living. I had three boats. I have five children. My biological children are three, and two are from my late brother. When I had my boat, life was okay. I could have some goats, ducks, chickens. But now I have nothing. I can’t afford the expenses for my children, including school fees. Before, I had two or three meals, but now I struggle to have one meal per day. Sometimes I don’t have any meals, like yesterday. In one month, I can spend ten days without food.³⁶⁸

Henry Lwanga, evicted from the village of Kyabasambu, explained that he lost his income following his eviction from the village and the loss of his boat. His economic situation has deteriorated over time:

I sold my remaining goat, bought a motorbike, and work as a Boda Boda. Afterwards, I also lost my motorcycle because I got the motorbike with a loan but couldn’t pay back the loan, so the owner took it back. Now I don’t have any real job. I’m doing just some small jobs like fishing for other people.³⁶⁹

Lwanga shared the struggles he and his family face daily. He said he sometimes goes and collects firewood to sell it in the market. He attempts to find work as a casual worker among other fishermen, but the income is insufficient.

If I go to work, if I’m lucky, I can get 10,000 shillings [approx. $2.50]. But sometimes I get only 2000, or some fish I can eat at home. I have seven children, five of my own and two from my brother who died. […] We have one meal per day, the same for everyone in the family. Sometimes even that meal is missing, and we take only tea. In January, that happened seven times. In February, three to four days. But even if there’s nothing to eat, we put water on the fire to drink tea before sleeping.

Rosemary Nantongo explains how she lost all her capital after having her goods confiscated three times by UPDF soldiers.

When you mix big and small fish, they take it all at once. We are scared. Initially, they took away my capital of 800,000. In 2022, the second time it was 1 million. The third time in 2022, it was 900,000 also.³⁷⁰

Stella Nakimuli, a mother of four, recounts the impact of her capital loss on her life and her family:

One day they wanted to arrest me, so I lost my phone while running. They took the fish and the phone got lost. That happened three months back. Even feeding is now a challenge. My children stay with me, and it’s difficult now. Previously, we used to have tea for breakfast, lunch, and supper with good food. But now, we manage only breakfast and supper or just lunch and supper. It’s no longer feasible to have three meals a day.³⁷¹

Evictions have also had a devastating impact on access to education for the children of those evicted. According to Article 13 of the ICESCR, everyone has the right to education. The right to education is also protected in several other international treaties to which Uganda is a party, including the Convention on the Rights of the Child and the African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights.

However, many individuals explained that they could no longer afford tuition fees after being evicted (in Uganda, only primary schools are free.) Solomon Atuhaire explained how his life has changed since being driven out of Kiina and losing his business and all his possessions:

Henry Lwanga had the same experience.

I can’t manage to pay school fees for my children.³⁷²

Different studies in Uganda have confirmed the impact of family impoverishment issues on the school enrollment rates, particularly of young girls.³⁷³

Impoverishment appears to have led to some husbands and fathers to abandong their families, causing even greater poverty for the women and children left behind. Rose Belieda recounted how she lost all contact with her husband on the day of their eviction from Kyabasambu in 2020 and how she survives with their 10 children:

It was in the morning when soldiers came and ordered us to leave immediately. We had very little time to evacuate. Consequently, properties were left behind, including animals. We left Kyabasambu and relocated. My husband ran away and abandoned me with our 10 children without any support. We live under a plastic sheet. All ten children stay with me, and securing food is very challenging. Sometimes, neighbors and friends, feeling pity for us, support us with food. After leaving Kyabasambu, I first stayed in a school for six months, then built a house with plastic sheets. My husband went in another direction and never contacted us again.³⁷⁴

According to Christine Nanyanzi from the village of Nsonga:

Some men run away because there is no money and no food, so they are ashamed, and they run away.³⁷⁵

Jennifer Akello thinks that the reason husbands desert their families is because they can no longer provide for their wives and children due to harassment by soldiers or the loss of their land because of the Kingfisher project:

It is common that men are running away because their children have nothing to eat, no school fees, no money to rent houses. When problems become too many, men decide to run away, leaving their wife and children alone. But women can’t leave their children, so they remain with their children. Men run away because they feel sad. Men can’t do anything, so they feel bad because they can’t help. So they run away.³⁷⁶

CHAPTER XI - Impact of Forced Evictions on Graves and Cultural Traditions

The interfaith NGO Greenfaith carried out a study during 2023 on the impact on graves and other places of worship of the Tilenga and EACOP oil projects in Uganda and Tanzania. It explained that:

Graves are property claimed by [Project Affected Peoples] that pose some unique challenges compared to other affected properties, due to the extremely strong symbolic and/or religious character of the graves. They need to be compensated in a similar way to other above ground improvements to the land, but also need to be relocated through exhumation, transportation and reinterment with the help of the Project and additional financial assistance, whilst taking into account specific requirements according to the beliefs of each [Project Affected Peoples] relating to familial, religious and traditional customs… Therefore, graves require a threefold approach dealing with (i) the [Project Affected Peoples]’ loss of investment in grave structures; (ii) the need to relocate the physical burial away from Project-affected land; (iii) acknowledging and facilitating associated exhumation and burial rites and ceremonies as requested by the [Project Affected Peoples] and their families.³⁷⁷

Joseph Mugisha explains that, even in cases in which compensation was provided for specific impacted graves, it was not sufficient:

For now, oil has not benefited the people and has just violated our rights. Some graves have been impacted. They were given a chance to the family member to remove the body, and a chance to be buried somewhere else. They have been compensated but not enough, like 400,000 Shillings. When there are some cultural, the uncle of the dead body has to show where the dead body has to be buried again. And this uncle has to give a goat of the same sex as the dead body. Elders are supposed to be there and stay three more nights if it’s a man, and four nights if it’s a woman. They didn’t give money for that, even if it’s very expensive. So cultural norms were not taken into account, because the dead body has rights culturally.³⁷⁹

People can’t visit their graves due to some restrictions. Some people have complained, but there is no way forward to help them with this.³⁸⁰

Greenfaith reported the extreme distress experienced by some families:

Some households have explicitly explained that daily interaction or contact with the burials and associated ancestral spirits is essential, and potential household residence relocation as a result of Project impact may have a fundamental impact on families fulfilling these obligations. For PAPs who have had to move further afield, their incorporation of Ancestral Spirits into daily life may no longer be viable.

The same concerns are also voiced by those who feel that the processes undertaken for their graves which were relocated were insufficient.³⁸¹

The treatment of graves and the rites associated with them, and the denial of access to remaining graves, are inconsistent with IFC’s Performance Standard 8 on respecting the Cultural Heritage of affected communities, with which CNOOC agreed to comply.³⁸² Under Performance Standard 8, the company should consult with the affected communities to identify cultural heritage of importance and to incorporate into its decision-making process the views of the affected communities.³⁸³ Where the project site contains cultural heritage or prevents access to previously accessible cultural heritage sites being used by, or that have been used by, affected communities within living memory for long-standing cultural purposes, the company should allow continued access to the cultural site or provide an alternative access route, subject to overriding health, safety, and security considerations.³⁸⁴

Under the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, to which Uganda acceded in 1987, everyone has a right to take part in cultural life.³⁸⁵ This includes religion or belief systems, rites and ceremonies.³⁸⁶ States have an obligation to respect, protect and fulfill the right to participate in cultural life. The obligation to protect requires the state party to take steps to prevent third parties from interfering in the right to take part in cultural life.³⁸⁷

CHAPTER XII - Violations of Labor Rights within Kingfisher

Much of the oil-related activity within Kingfisher, from building roads, camps, and houses to installing oil rigs and conducting drilling operations, is carried out by CNOOC’s subcontractors. These subcontractors include foreign companies, Ugandan companies, and joint ventures between foreign and Ugandan companies. CNOOC, as the main operator and contractor, has the responsibility to ensure that its subcontractors comply with laws and commitments made to the Ugandan government and to the public.

Illegal Hours, Hazardous Working Conditions, Fatal Accidents

The Ugandan Employment Act stipulates that employees are entitled to 24 consecutive hours of rest each week. This day of rest can be on any day of the week. Ugandan law also imposes a maximum work limit, not exceeding ten hours per day or fifty-six hours per week.³⁸⁸

Despite this, almost all interviewees complained about harsh, even “horrible” working conditions at CNOOC or its subcontractors.

A major problem is the long workdays and lack of rest days. Workdays often last 12 hours or more, frequently seven days a week. Isaac Mubiru, who worked for various companies in the sector, said:

Benjamin Okello recounts being denied rest days while working for a company involved in the oil sector in Kingfisher:

I tried to ask if I can have a day off, but they say if you are tired, you can stay home and not come back. The bosses have their days off. It’s the local workers that are suffering.

I worked as a casual laborer, some two years back. I worked for one year. The work was so hectic. Because work was too much for what we were supposed to get. We could begin at 7:00 a.m. The contract said to stop at 5:00 p.m., but we had an extra hour of work. Only a lunch break of one hour. The salary was 10k per day. I worked seven days per week. Officially they don’t give a day off, no holiday or anything. In one year, I didn’t get any. Maybe if someone died, you can go, but you will not be paid. But the bosses don’t want you to do that; they say you delay the work.³⁹⁰

John Palot shared a similar experience.

At work, it was tiresome to me, that’s why I left. Seven days per week. No off days. I asked if I could have some off days, but they refused. The reason was they said they can’t deal with workers who want to have some days off. They want workers who can be full-time.³⁹¹

The work hours being imposed on the workers far exceed the limits provided by Ugandan law. Unless the Ugandan Ministry of Labor, in agreement with the Labour Advisory Board, has created “temporary exceptions” – which, to the best of Climate Rights International’s knowledge, is not the case – these practices violate local legislation.³⁹² Long hours also contradict IFC Performance Standard 2 on Labor and Working Conditions, as well as ILO Convention 14, which requires a minimum weekly rest period of 24 hours.³⁹³

Another concern expressed by workers is that, although employees cannot take leave, companies may inform workers on the same day that they will not be working. This is especially problematic as employees sometimes pay high transport costs to get to work or travel long distances to reach the sites. Peter Muzini explained that:

Sometimes companies put some days off without telling them beforehand and without any payment. They don’t inform them, sometimes even on the same day in the morning when they arrive, they learn that.³⁹⁴

Additionally, many workers complain about being asked to perform tasks usually done by machines in Uganda. Geoffrey Nkoyooyo reported:

The hard work, which was supposed to be done by a machine, such as an excavator, but they were using people for that.³⁹⁵

Isaac Mubiru observed the same practice:

To cut big holes to put some tanks [of water or fuel] they used to dig the holes with their hands, not with a machine.³⁹⁶

Several accidents were reported to Climate Rights International, some allegedly due to the lack of or poor quality of protective equipment on the sites. Uganda’s Occupational Healh and Safety Law requires employers to ensure the health, safety and welfare of all persons in the workplace.³⁹⁷ According to John Palot:

I saw safety was not highly maintained. Care about someone victim or injured was not good. Safety gears are old and weak. Helmets are not enough for everyone.³⁹⁸

Jacob Opiyo said that he witnessed various accidents.

I saw some accidents. For example, when they transport some bricks, sometimes bricks fall down on somebody’s legs. They give first aid, like if you have some wounds, they cover it with a bandage, or can give you a tablet.³⁹⁹

Medical care for injured workers appears to vary greatly depending on the subcontractor.

Some companies reportedly take good care of those injured in accidents than others. For example, Luke Mugisha reported:

Some of my colleagues received some accidents. As leg dislocations during transfer bricks. They treated them very well, they went to the hospital.⁴⁰⁰

However, most interviewees reported poor care. Isaac Mubiru described an injury he sustained, which he attributed to the poor quality of protective equipment. He also explained the problems he faced:

I used to get some injuries because I was working in the steel department, and the glove was very weak. So one day, while pulling the steel, it injured my hands. The bosses told me that it is just some minor injuries, so they can’t let me stop working. But it was difficult to work with the injuries. I saw a doctor [at the company] who gave me some tablets, but that didn’t cure anything, so I had to go to a clinic. They told me to first stay one week during the time of the treatment. They washed the wound and injected something and I went back home. I didn’t continue to work during that week. I informed the boss even before starting the treatment of one week, and at first, the boss said okay, but when I came back, they gave me a warning letter.⁴⁰¹

Having to pay for one’s own medical care after a workplace accident that requires the employee to be off work for at least three days appears to be a violation of the Workers Compensation Act.⁴⁰²

Kenneth Kiwanuka witnessed another accident where his co-worker had to pay the clinic:

I saw some [accident]. Someone was working with an iron bar, and this iron bar pierced his leg. They gave him first aid, as they washed the wound and covered it. They had to release him for that day. He went to a certain clinic, but it is the worker who paid for the treatment. He had to use his weekend salary for the clinic.⁴⁰³

Industry activities in Kingfisher have also led to accidents outside construction sites and oil facilities. The fear of accidents, primarily those involving vehicles, cars, and trucks from the oil companies, seems to have become a major problem among residents. The ESIA highlighted that the risk of road accidents was high: “Based on the research over time, vehicle accidents are the leading cause of oil and gas extraction worker fatalities, with roughly forty percent of on-the-job directly attributable to this…. The Project specific risks will be from heavy vehicles, mobile earth moving equipment and light duty vehicles. There will be an increased risk for motor vehicle accidents but children are an especially vulnerable group for pedestrian vehicle accidents, as they are likely to be relatively naïve to the risks of road and pedestrian safety.”⁴⁰⁴

Rosemary Nantongo explained that there have been fatal accidents involving trucks in the area near Nsunga and Nsunzu:

The roads have caused a lot of accidents and loss of lives. From trucks. Some people have died. Like four since they have made their roads from 2017 to 2021. I heard also about an accident but without death, in 2022.⁴⁰⁵

Peace Nakayiza added:

Mostly they are knocking those who are riding motorcycles.⁴⁰⁶

Christopher Nambalirwa, a BodaBoda (motorcycle taxi) rider, shard his experience. He explained that he was involved an accident, but:

They didn’t follow up the case because we didn’t note the number plate of the truck. Even a guy was killed by a truck. Pato the rider died. And one other just accident. It was one year ago. Even one other accident just happened, and the guy was buried yesterday. Also with a truck from a company. There are a lot of others.⁴⁰⁷

All of the victims of fatal accidents reported to Climate Right International involved local residents; none involved workers. However, on October 6, 2023, a truck belonging to one of the subcontractors at Kingfisher crashed and killed a security guard. The guard was reportedly opening the gate when he was crushed to death. The authorities’ reaction was notably different than it was to deaths of residents. Ernest Rubondo, the executive director of the Petroleum Authority of Uganda (PAU), suspended all Kingfisher activities, as it followed an unspecified number of previous safety violations about which the PAU had notified CNOOC. “The purpose of this letter is, therefore, to direct that in accordance with Section 177 of the Petroleum (Exploration, Development and Production) Act, 2013 CUL halts all Kingfisher field development operations from 00.00 hours on Saturday 7th October 2023 until further notice.”⁴⁰⁸ The suspension was lifted a few weeks later.

Low Wages Keeping Families Below the Poverty Line

The Ugandan government, CNOOC, TotalEnergies, and UNOC expect substantial returns on their $USD3.5 billion investment, which would be more than sufficient to pay all workers a living wage.⁴⁰⁹

However, the vast majority of employees and former employees from the communities that Climate Rights International interviewed complained about the extremely low wages paid by subcontractors, reporting salaries between 6,500 and 15,000 Ugandan shillings a day (approximately US$1.70 to US$4).⁴¹⁰ As the international poverty line set by the World Bank is $2.15 per person per day (approximately 8,000 Ugandan shillings), individuals working seven days a week on these wages and supporting at least one family member (such as a child or children, or a nonworking spouse) would fall below the poverty threshold.⁴¹¹

Isaac Mubiru has worked for two different CNOOC subcontractors and shared his experiences with Climate Rights International. The first company he worked for paid him 10,000 shillings (approximately 2.80US$) a day.

They promised at the start that the salary will be increased after four months. But they never increased the salary, so after seven months I left.

However, the second subcontractor company, where he built infrastructure at the CNOOC camp, was even worse because, he said, the salary was never paid in full:

In the village, they come to say that the work will be paid 20,000 shillings [per day], but after they said 10,000, but they give even only 150,000! You worked one full month and they paid you only two weeks. The first month I received 150,000, but I was supposed to get 300,000 shillings. And the second month, I also got 150,000. The issue, they don’t pay us, because [they] said that if we get the whole money at once, the workers will leave because we are not happy. Every time they told you to wait, they are going to put that [the remaining salary] on your phone, but up to now, I have never received it.⁴¹²

Kenneth Kiwanuka, who worked for the same subcontractor for six months in 2023, recounted a similar experience:

I was paid only half for the last four months. I complained and continued to complain. Even my colleague, but they continued to do that. We complained to the CLO. He replied that the money they are getting doesn’t allow them to pay everything, but directly when they will receive the money they will be paid. But that has never changed.⁴¹³

Jacob Opiyo shared a different explanation given by the Community Liaison Officer:

I was told I will be paid 13,000 shillings per day. But they used to pay us after two weeks, but they pay you only half. 90,000 every two weeks. The CLO used to say that it’s because they didn’t receive all the money from the main contractor, so they will pay me later the remaining. When the time I was leaving, they never paid me the remaining.⁴¹⁴

Some employees have complained to the police about the unpaid wages by certain subcontracting companies. Isaac Mubiru told Climate Rights International:

Some of my workmates who have not been paid reported to police. And police called the manager of [the company], he promised he’s going to pay us. But later he didn’t pay us. When they returned to the police, nothing more was done, as police said it was supposed to be CNOOC to handle that, but they don’t do anything either.⁴¹⁵

Michael Opio, who worked for two months with another company, said he earned a daily wage of 10,000 shillings. He explained that, while overtime is not paid, the company did not hesitate to deduct several thousand shillings if an employee arrived late.⁴¹⁶

A member of a village health team told Climate Rights International that workers struggle to feed their families due to low wages:

On the side of the construction of oil [facilities], they should increase the salary, because it’s not possible for them to buy food for the family.⁴¹⁷

Absence of Work Contracts

The Employment Act of 2006 requires all employment relationships to be formalized with a written contract detailing the terms and conditions of employment.⁴¹⁸ IFC Performance Standard 2 also mandates that employment relationships are documented and that workers are informed of their rights and obligations through written contracts.⁴¹⁹

However, many workers and former workers who have worked for different companies involved in the Kingfisher project reported that they were never given an employment contract. Benjamin Okello said:

I never signed a contract. They said the company got a contract, but not me with them. They told you if you work well, you can continue even after three months, but I never signed a contract.⁴²⁰

Isaac Mubiru, who worked for a different company, had the same experience:

They don’t sign contracts with their workers because they say they are just doing sub-contractor work.⁴²¹

Jacob Opiyo said:

I don’t know why we didn’t sign a contract.⁴²²

Michael Opio said he asked [to sign one], but:

They told us that we will sign later, because we just arrived, then we didn’t sign a contract.⁴²³

Silas Mayanja explains that he didn’t receive one either, because:

I dropped out after three months. They give you a contract after you have been working six months.⁴²⁴

John Palot explained that, for the subcontractor where he worked:

We didn’t sign any [contract]. They just send the money through our mobile money contact without signing anything.⁴²⁵

Corruption in Hiring

Some residents told Climate Rights International that they have had to pay bribes in order to be hired. They explained that they often must first pay the chairman of their village (LC1) to obtain a recommendation letter, which is mandatory to show they are a resident of the affected area. They then also have to pay the company recruitment officers to secure a job.

Vincent Wamala, a former resident of Kiina village, outlined the process for getting recruited by companies working on the Kingfisher project:

To apply to the oil companies, you are supposed to pass through the [company’s Community Liaison Officer] and chairperson [of their village]. But those CLO and chairperson request some bribes to get a job that we don’t have, so we remain jobless. The chairperson, that depends on your tribe and how you approach him, but he can ask for 30,000, 50,000, and above. That depends on how you come and your face. For the CLO, that also depends on how you look. But often they dodged us, and told us to come back tomorrow. Or if you are lucky, they will ask you lot of money, like 100 or 200k, something we don’t have, so…⁴²⁶

Geoffrey Balinda shared a similar experience:

Even the subcontractors of CNOOC don’t bring jobs for the natives, only for outsiders. They only ask for bribes. The chairperson asked for 30,000 UGX. The CLO asked for 50,000 UGX. So, we don’t have that money to bribe them, and as a result, we have no jobs.⁴²⁷

Bribes not only facilitate recruitment but also secure better jobs. Isaac Mubiru, who worked for CNOOC and several of its subcontractors, noted:

I didn’t pay to get a job, but some did. They paid the CLO of [company name withheld] to get a job, like 150,000. It was common. Because if you paid the CLO, you can even change from the hard work to one other easier position. I didn’t do it because I didn’t have enough money.⁴²⁸

Demanding money for jobs violates various Ugandan laws, notably Section 6 of the Employment Act of 2006, which explicitly prohibits discrimination, including the extortion of money from job applicants.⁴²⁹ It also contradicts the Anti-Corruption Act, which criminalizes actions involving coercion or deceit to obtain money, including in cases of extorting job seekers.⁴³⁰ CNOOC has also committed to adhering to the highest international standards, particularly the IFC Performance Standards. Standard 2 on Labor and Working Conditions prohibits charging recruitment fees to workers, ensuring fair recruitment practices, and preventing exploitation.⁴³¹

CHAPTER XIII - Sexual and Gender-Based Violence

Research indicates that oil industry activities in Uganda have led to adverse effects on gender equity and violence against women and girls.⁴³² A 2021 study focused on the East African Crude Oil Pipeline reached similar conclusions.⁴³³

Multiple individuals interviewed by Climate Rights International reported that domestic violence within families had risen because of increasing impoverishment following the arrival of CNOOC. Interviewees explained that the traditional gendered division of labor within the family means that men are usually responsible for the financial needs of the family.⁴³⁴ According to the ESIA, women, on the other hand, have the responsibility to “control the family food stocks and determine the day-to-day outflow of food from storage.”⁴³⁵

Research has repeatedly suggested links between reduction in household income, male unemployment, financial stress and intimate partner violence.⁴³⁶ According to findings from a cluster-randomized trial, “Poverty and tensions over men’s inability to provide emerge as potentially important drivers” in intimate partner violence.⁴³⁷

As previously noted, many men in this area have lost their income sources since the arrival of CNOOC and UPDF, including loss of land, homes, and income from fishing, livestock, and farming activities. Interviewees suggested that when women verbalize their concerns about money to buy food and basic necessities, some men have gotten angry and started beating their wives. Indeed, a systematic review of studies in low- and middle-income settings found that food insecurity is associated with double the odds of reported violence against women and girls.⁴³⁸

Agnes Namutebi, the elected Chairperson for Women of one of the affected communities, explained to Climate Rights International:

Men are fighting with women. Domestic violence has increased. Men are supposed to give money for food within the family, so when women start to ask for money which is not there, women start to complain and men start to fight.⁴³⁹

A local NGO worker documenting human rights violations in the Kingfisher area said he also has observed this rise in tensions and abuse:

When in one family there is hunger and no money, so no food, that provokes some fight and gender violence.⁴⁴⁰

Agnes Namutebi is concerned about the long-term consequences for the community and the children:

The impacts will be very high when families are divided. Because taking care of the children will be very difficult. So the children will not be well educated, because responsibilities are divided, and not as before with joining hands.⁴⁴¹

The Ugandan penal code defines rape as: “Any person who has unlawful carnal knowledge of a woman or girl, without her consent, or with her consent, if the consent is obtained by force or by means of threats or intimidation of any kind or by fear of bodily harm, or by means of false representations as to the nature of the act, or in the case of a married woman, by personating her husband, commits the felony termed rape.”⁴⁴²

Ugandan law on sexual harassment also prohibits demands for sexual relations in exchange for preferential treatment or under the threat of detrimental treatment.⁴⁴³

According to the first study on violence against women and girls conducted by the Uganda Bureau of Statistics, in partnership with UN Women and UNICEF, “the reported levels of sexual violence by non-partners since the age of 15 years was 55%,”⁴⁴⁴ and women who are living in rural area (like in Buhuka) are more likely (57%) to have ever experienced sexual violence perpetuated by non-partners.⁴⁴⁵ The study also found that “65% of the women that earn money reported to have experienced non-partner sexual violence compared to 41% of those who do not earn an income.”

The study highlighted that families and the victims’ social circles often discourage reporting these acts of violence, stating, “Family members usually discourage the women from going to report and even her people and family people normally convince her to finish up issues from here, so discourages come from the families, individual level, people always fear to open up their problems especially to girls; for example, if they were raped, they fear.”⁴⁴⁶ Women, girls, and their families understand that disclosure of sexual abuse will likely result in shame, humiliation and loss of social status, especially to outside individuals or authorities.⁴⁴⁷ Studies repeatedly show that women and girls have numerous reasons to fear disclosing sexual assault, including self-blame, betrayal and shock, the relationship to and power of the perpetrator, negative community reactions and little belief that reporting will result in meaningful or legal consequences for the perpetrator.⁴⁴⁸

As noted in a recent systematic review on stigma and violence against women and girls, stigma and fear of social sanctions often prevent survivors from revealing abuse and seeking help, resulting in non-reporting, especially to law enforcement.⁴⁴⁹ When survivors do try to report abuses, their disclosures are often limited as indicated by a study on “Sexual and Gender-Based Violence in the Mining Sector in Africa”, which found that “owing to the sensitivities surrounding SGBV [Sexual and Gender-Based Violence], respondents sometimes provided brief or generalized responses.”⁴⁵⁰

The Kingfisher ESIA noted that, “Increases in cases of sexual exploitation and abuse, and a significant increase in the number of women engaged in sex work in the communities surrounding the gas developments are well documented.” The ESIA stated that, “Increased incidence of sex work among young girls has been seen. Sex trade/prostitution has increased in a number of the villages. Foreigners offer money to women for sex […] It is often native young girls in the area that have taken up the habit as a form of income.”⁴⁵¹

Interviewees told Climate Rights International that the impoverishment of families, and especially of women, has driven some women to engage in survival sex work to support their families or themselves. According to Agnes Namutebi, since Kingfisher started, “There are things that have changed in the behavior of women. Because they need money, some have started prostitution for looking for money, because men don’t bring money anymore. So that has also increased some conflicts within the family.”⁴⁵²

People outside the community, including oil sector employees and soldiers, appear to be the primary consumers of sexual services. Agnes Namutebi explained to Climate Rights International:

Mainly the men who have money, it’s some workers of oil companies. They get their money monthly, and it’s just after they get their salaries that problems start.

While this study was not designed to investigate sexual abuse, many interviewees reported knowledge of sexual violence and coercion. Not surprisingly, few interviewees disclosed their own experiences of abuse to our team.

Various testimonies collected by Climate Rights International have reported that many women have had sexual relations as a result of threats and intimidation or sexual coercion by soldiers in the Kingfisher project area. Many reported that soldiers threatened them with arrest or confiscation of their fish merchandise unless they agreed to have sex with them.⁴⁵³ Climate Rights International also received reports of sexual violence by managers and superiors within companies operating at Kingfisher, including one involving a CNOOC employee.

During the investigation, five witnesses reported that women are often subject to sexual harassment, coercion and violence. Some explained that this occurred during the recruitment process and in the workplace. Others testified about unwanted sexual relations with soldiers following threats, intimidation, or coercion.

Obtaining employment at companies operating in Kingfisher requires community residents to obtain a letter of support of the village Local Chairman. The managers and/or Community Liaison Officers (CLOs) of the companies then decide who will be hired. According to three women interviewed by Climate Rights International, some local chairmen and company officials demand sexual favors to obtain the support letter or the job.

Jennifer Akello explained:

Brenda Nakasumba, a 19-year-old woman, said that:

If you want a job in a camp, you have two options: You can sleep with the chairman and CLO. Or you have to pay today to get the job.⁴⁵⁵

At the job, if you refuse to sleep with your boss, you can be chased away very fast.⁴⁵⁶

Jennifer Akello, who worked for a CNOOC subcontractor, described bosses who made sexual propositions:

But when I refused, they [the bosses] started to hate us.

She said was fired shortly after, accused by her superiors of stealing from the company, which she denied.

When we tried to make business with fish, UPDF arrested us. Then the women resort to sleeping with soldiers so that soldiers allow them to do their trading activities. Even before buying fish, to allow them to trade. But also after being arrested.⁴⁵⁷

Justine Baguma told a similar story:

Another problem is the UPDF disturbing the women when they trade fish. They arrest them and sometimes even force them to sleep with them.⁴⁵⁸

These findings are corroborated by research that has been carried out by a Ugandan NGO and surveys carried out by international NGOs.⁴⁵⁹

CHAPTER XIV - Environmental Harms, Including Oil and Chemical Pollution

The Kingfisher project has caused various types of environmental harms that affect the environment and the local population.

Oil Spills and Dumping

The management of oil waste, the prevention of its release into the environment, and the implementation of strict protocols to prevent such incidents are legal obligations for CNOOC and its subcontractors. Indeed, the Ugandan government has established specific legislation for the management of oil waste through the Petroleum (Waste Management) Regulations.⁴⁶⁰

The ESIA indicated that the drilling phase is likely the most hazardous phase in terms of pollution, explaining why and detailing the contents of local legislation. “Drilling wastes constitute by far the largest potentially hazardous waste stream. It is estimated that an average of 1,158 m3 of WBM (aqueous) and SBM (synthetic) drilling cuttings and liquid waste will be generated per well, together with 656 m3 of other solids. This will extend over the construction phase and into the operational phase for a total period of 5 years. Ugandan law prohibits the disposal of petroleum wastes on the well pad or in the surrounding environment. All petroleum wastes defined in Schedule 2 of the regulations must be collected, transported, treated (as necessary) and disposed by an independent petroleum waste handler, contracted by the licensee (CNOOC), and registered with the regulator. All of these wastes may be temporarily stored at the well pads in impervious facilities, protected from rainfall runoff and flooding and covered to prevent direct rainfall ingress, before being transported off-site.”⁴⁶¹

According to the ESIA, “All produced water will be disposed down reinjection wells and hazardous waste generated at the CPF and on the well pads will be collected and disposed of by hazardous waste contractors at a certified hazardous waste disposal site. Spillages of oil and other hazardous materials within the working areas of the plant and on the well pads will be collected, either in the closed drain system (for processing areas where oil spills are likely) or in the open drain system (where occasional spillage is possible). In both cases, these spillages are managed, in terms of the design, to eliminate the risk of any discharge of oil-contaminated water.”⁴⁶²

However, Climate Rights International has uncovered evidence that at least one of CNOOC’s subcontractors unintentionally and intentionally spills oil into Lake Albert and other waterways, and on land near the oil well pads.

The most affected people and primary witnesses are local fisherfolk. For example, Daniel Okello from Nzunsu said:

When it rains, some oil enters the lake from the pad with the rain, and afterward, I have witnessed some dead fish because of the oil.⁴⁶³

Simon Namukasa, a resident of Nsunga, explained:

CNOOC is pumping water from the river, and afterward, you can see some oil on top of the water that spilled within that water. I saw that several times last year.⁴⁶⁴

Others also report seeing oil in the lake and dead fish. Duncan Kisitu explained that he had seen a pipe from the oil well pad at Kyabasambu spilling oil into the lake:

They pour oil in the water in the lake, and that oil kills fish. We see some pipes that cross a stream of water, and pour oil into the stream of water, in the lake.⁴⁶⁵

Isaac Kato, a fisherman from Nzunsu B, also reported seeing large numbers of fish floating on the lake due to oil spills from CNOOC’s operations:

They discharge oil into the lake, which ends up killing the fish. I witnessed fish dying twice, last in December 2023 and February 2024.⁴⁶⁶

Emma Prelo, a cattle keeper, explained that oil pollution from the drilling rig
has also been detected on the grass fields where the animals graze:

Sometimes some oil just pours it into the community and on the grass. And with the rain, that takes this even to the lake.⁴⁶⁷

Charles Kwesiga, a cattle keeper, said that people believe these oil spills have poisoned some animals:

Some companies pour some residue of oil on the grass, so that’s poisoned the animals. It was in Kyabasambu village. It happened when they drilled, there were some residue of oil and other chemicals. Some animals died in that area at the time, goats and cows, and people think it’s because of that. Sometimes there are some smells.⁴⁶⁸

Whistleblowers Describe Intentional Dumping

Climate Rights International interviewed two “flooring” men who worked for China Oilfields Services Limited (COSL), the drilling service contractor for CNOOC.⁴⁶⁹ A flooring man, or floorhand, in the oil drilling sector is responsible for assisting with the operation and maintenance of drilling equipment on the rig floor, handling drill pipe, and ensuring safety and cleanliness in the work area.

Both claimed that COSL directly disposed of oil waste near the drilling rig, in direct violation of Ugandan law and the procedures set forth in the ESIA.

During the drilling phase, various chemicals are injected into the wells to aid the process. Philip Musoke, one of the two employees, who studied oil and gas in Uganda and has also worked on international projects, explained to Climate Rights International how it works:

When you are drilling, there is muddy water with chemicals, used to drill. Even when not drilling, they put chemicals which are very deadly. It’s used to mix in the base oil, which helps later with drilling. The well pads are just a few meters from the lake, so there’s a risk that the muddy water goes back into the lake.⁴⁷⁰

When this muddy water — a mixture of water, oil, and injected chemicals – emerges from the well, it is initially stored in retention basins. After an initial phase of separation at the well pad, where solid waste is separated from liquid waste, the separated waste is supposed to be transported for treatment to a specialized facility by a third-party company contracted by CNOOC, accredited and approved by Ugandan authorities.

The ESIA stated that if stormwater from uncontaminated areas can be released from the site, all potentially oil-contaminated water must be treated offsite, managed by a third-party waste management company.⁴⁷¹ Luwero Industries Ltd (LIL) has been officially contracted to manage waste accumulated from the drilling for crude oil at the Kingfisher Oil Field. This company is a subsidiary of the National Enterprise Corporation, the commercial arm of the Uganda Ministry of Defence and Veteran Affairs of the UPDF.⁴⁷²

According to the two whistleblowers, the pollution problem reported by both fisherfolk and cattle keepers arises from the fact that while, COSL subcontracts for solid waste management, the retention basins are emptied directly into or near the lake instead of being collected by a waste management company. Philip Musoke explained his experience during eight months working on the rig:

I never saw a company for water waste during my time there.⁴⁷³

Quinton Kizza, who worked for COSL for seven months, told the same story:

The normal process is you are supposed to carry that water with oil from the pit. It’s supposed to be carried by a specialized company. But they never came in the seven months I was working there.⁴⁷⁴

The two men explained that their former supervisor, a Chinese national, instructed them to empty the contaminated water basins directly into the lake or onto vacant land around the oil well pad using a hose and a water pump. Quinton Kizza said:

The main issue was dumping … There were some pits to collect water …The boss said we should pour that water into the lake. We used a water pump to take that water to the lake. From the mud tanks, we put that water in the pits. There was also some oil in this pit. So, you put the water pump in the pits to pour that directly into the lake.

Philip Musoke explained how the basins work:

They are designed to collect all the water drill chemicals and muddy water so it doesn’t go directly to the lake. It’s where they were supposed to be collected by a waste company. All of them when they are full, they just put it in the lake. They asked me to pump that water … Or we could pump it to the hill, but it’s the same; it goes to the lake afterward. We pumped only at night.

Quinton Kizza confirmed this.

We dumped that water around 8 p.m. to 6 a.m., during the night. If it’s the rainy season, even daily. When not the rainy season, at least twice a week.

The ESIA described the extreme sensitivity of the environment around the drilling areas and recognized that the pollution impacts could be very high in terms of both intensity and duration, extending beyond the construction period. “Taking into consideration the high sensitivity of surrounding users and their proximity to the well pads, and the sensitivity of the lake environment, the magnitude of this impact, should it occur, is considered to be very high, following a conservative approach. Duration of impact could be medium term with the effects of pollution, especially in the lake, persisting beyond the period of construction. Geographic extent would also be an increased risk due to the proximity to the lake, and the possibility of the pollutants spreading beyond the local nearshore environment.”⁴⁷⁵

Numerous scientific studies have shown that oil and chemical pollution can not only cause a decline in fish populations but also force fish to migrate away from polluted areas in search of cleaner waters.⁴⁷⁶ Many people told Climate Rights International that they believe the reduction in fish numbers in the Kingfisher area is linked to oil activities. Harriet Nakato from Nzunsu B said:

Before the oil activities, we were getting a lot of fish and making good money. These days, with so many restrictions on the water and the construction of oil facilities, even the fish numbers have dwindled. The fish have moved to other areas because we hear that in some parts of the same lake, where conditions haven’t changed, they catch the same number of fish as before.⁴⁷⁷

Frederick Mugerwa, a fisherman who fled the Kingfisher area for the southern part of the lake, shared his observations:

Before in Kingfisher, there were many fish, but since the oil activities started, the number of fish has decreased. However, in Kitebere, there are still plenty of fish. I think it’s because the oil activities have led to a decrease in fish at Kingfisher, which is why we moved to Kitebere. Initially, before the oil operations, there were more fish in Kingfisher. At Kitebere, there have been no significant changes compared to Kingfisher.⁴⁷⁸

Water Pollution and Flooding Due to Construction Work

Water pollution has been a significant problem affecting the local communities, particularly because community members rely heavily on local water bodies for their daily life. Samuel Ochieng shared his experience since the beginning of the construction:

Peter Musoke, a local resident, described the impact of the construction work on the feeder pipeline over many months:

Their pipeline corridor passes through some water stream and contaminated our water. […] Some managed to find water very far, some others who couldn’t had to use the dirty water.⁴⁸⁰

The inadequate attention by CNOOC to the impacts of construction on community water sources is particularly concerning since the ESIA stated that health issues are among the three “most prominent social challenges faced by communities[…] Common diseases and illnesses include malaria and water-borne diseases such as diarrhea, dysentery, and bilharzia. These diseases are particularly linked to poor sanitation practices in the KCPF LSA as well as poor water supply infrastructure in both areas.”⁴⁸¹

Construction activities have also led to flooding in some areas. Gerald Kizito, a resident from Nsunzu B, recounted an incident that happened during the construction of a road leading to one of the oil well pads:

At some point, they have broken the channel which brings water to the lake, and now the water is coming to people’s homes. Many houses have been spoiled because of that. One of my houses has been spoiled. When water came and became too much around the house, the walls of the house started breaking.⁴⁸²

The chairperson of one of the affected villages noted that CNOOC has done nothing to address the issue, despite alerts from various residents and leaders.

They even broke some water channels, and water now disturbs people. And when we raised the issue to CNOOC, they don’t respond to us at all, just keep quiet.⁴⁸³

Noise pollution

Noise pollution has been a major issue from the outset of Kingfisher activities. The Netherlands Commission for Environmental Assessment had already warned about the problem of “high noise,” particularly during the drilling phase. In 2019, the commission issued an alert regarding the noise, dust, and vibrations that would arise from the construction activities, especially drilling, and their impacts on the community and potentially on wildlife. “Noise is legitimately presented as a serious issue (even after mitigation, the impact is rated as ‘high’), given the high noise levels during drilling in an environment which is, particularly at night, very silent. The noise (and vibration) impact assessment is restricted to the communities and does not assess potential effects on fauna.”⁴⁸⁴

The CNOOC ESIA report stated that, “Noise nuisance and dust nuisance […] are both rated as being of major significance, affecting the Buhuka Flats communities,” and that even after mitigation measures, the impact is still rated as “high.”⁴⁸⁵

The constant noise from drilling operations is particularly troubling for community members. Charles Kwesiga, noted:

When they start to drill, it’s 24/7, and can be during 2 or 3 weeks.⁴⁸⁶

Residents have vividly described the impact on their daily lives. Ballack Watcho from Nsunzu B said:

It’s noisy 24/7. I have never seen them stop during the whole year.⁴⁸⁷

For some, the noise is so intrusive that it prevents sleep. Patricia Asiimwe, a fish seller, explained:

At night, some people don’t care and sleep. But some others can’t sleep at all.⁴⁸⁸

Mercy Nalubwama mentioned that some people leave their homes due to the noise from the construction:

Noise is too much during the construction of the pipeline. Often that forces them to go away.⁴⁸⁹

A recent petition signed by 268 residents of the Kingfisher area addressed to CNOOC stated:

Residents of Nsunzu A & B village in Buhuka have voiced concerns over the incessant noise and intense vibrations emanating from the nearby oil rig, which operates round the clock. This persistent disturbance not only affects the immediate community but also extends its reach, causing physical and psychological strain on neighboring areas. Moreover, the adverse effects ripple through the ecosystem, impacting aquatic life in Lake Albert.⁴⁹⁰

Future Oil exploitation by CNOOC within a protected area

CNOOC’s Kingfisher project represents only the initial phase of the company’s oil exploitation venture in Uganda. In fact, CNOOC has secured a second exploitation license for the Mputa-Nzizi-Waraga Production Licence, which will also be exported through the EACOP.⁴⁹¹ This site is located slightly north of the Kingfisher project, within a the Kabwoya Wildlife Reserve, a legally protected area.

This reserve notably houses “significant populations of Uganda kob, bush duiker, oribi, warthog, bushbuck, bushpig and colobus. There are small populations of hippo and buffalo. The main large carnivores are leopard and hyena. The most significant ‘flagship’ species is chimpanzees, which are found in the riverine forest along the Hohwa River.”⁴⁹²

Regarding exploration activities, the Uganda Wildlife Authority says that “[e]ight wells have been drilled in the reserve, namely Mputa 1-5 and Nziizi 1-3, while 3 wells have been drilled in KTCWA [Kaiso Tonya Community Wildlife Area] namely Ngasa 1-2 and Waraga 1.”⁴⁹³ These exploration activities have shown that viable commercial quantities of oil and gas have been discovered, and the area has been earmarked for production.

However, no information appears to have been made publicly available about the ESIA for this project, or whether an ESIA has been carried out, making it difficult to understand the future scope of the project and to assess some of its potential environmental impacts. According to a document from Uganda Wildlife, which is in charge of managing and preserving the country’s reserves and national parks, “This development [of oil exploitation] will have major consequences for the environment of the area.”⁴⁹⁴

Even during the exploration phase, impacts on wildlife in the reserve have been observed. For example, “Ngasa 1 and 2 where oil activities are taking place are very close to this lagoon. Construction of the oil pads has interfered with movement of hippos going out to graze and other animals coming to the lake for water.”⁴⁹⁵ Additionally, “The oil activities taking place have increased human movements in the reserve which may have an impact on animal behavior in the long term. The roads which have been created because of oil activities have opened up different areas of the reserve to various categories of people including poachers.”⁴⁹⁶

The report continues by stating that “a number of production wells will be drilled within the reserve during production. Oil and gas activities are associated with negative impacts which interfere with wildlife in the reserve. The activities may interfere with breeding area, block wildlife migratory corridors, and pollute some watering points. There is a lot of land taken due to drill pads and roads opened up that lead to biodiversity destruction.”⁴⁹⁷

CHAPTER XV - Attacks on Community Activists and Human Rights Defenders

Within the Kingfisher area, the presence of such a large and active military force has created an atmosphere of fear and intimidation in which many are fearful to speak out.

As a chairman of a village from Buhuka said to Climate Rights International:

I’m afraid that the government can punish us because we spoke to NGOs. We need to be anonymous.⁴⁹⁸

Indeed, except for two people, everyone interviewed for this report was too fearful to be quoted by name. For this reason, we have not identified these two people since it would make them an even greater potential target for retribution.

In addition, a recent petition signed by 268 Buhuka residents and sent to CNOOC and the government states:

Intimidation remains prevalent among the Kingfisher Project Affected Persons (PAPs): Despite PAP’s consistent complaints and reports, the issue of intimidation has yet to be effectively addressed. Those PAPs who have spoken out in demand of fair and sufficient compensation continually receive threats from unidentified individuals, warning them of potential arrest for opposing government projects.⁴⁹⁹https://cri.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/08/English-Petition-requesting-CNOOC-to-address-the-grievances-faced-by-the-Kingfisher-project-host-communities-in-Kikuube-district-1.pdf

Both Human Rights Watch and Global Witness, two international NGOs, published reports in late 2023 documenting what human right defenders who campaign or just report on the negative consequences of oil projects in Uganda face: serious harassment, intimidation, threats, break-ins, arrests, and in some cases, violence. NGOs have also been shut down and their offices raided by the police.⁵⁰⁰

Those who are vocal are can face harsh repercussions. Below are some examples of attacks against human rights defenders that took place between the end of May 2024 and the time of publication of this report in September 2024:

On May 27, 2024, seven environmental human rights defenders were violently arrested by armed police when sitting outside the Chinese Embassy in Kampala in an attempt to present a letter of protest to the Chinese Ambassador.⁵⁰¹

On May 29, 2024, villagers held a peaceful protest and march in Kikuube district to deliver a petition to Daqing Oil Construction, a Chinese company that is in charge of the construction of the feeder pipeline for the Kingfisher project. The petition was signed by different local chairmen from various villages impacted by the feeder pipeline.⁵⁰²

On June 4, Stephen Kwikiriza was abducted and tortured, only to be released at the roadside on June 9. [see below for details]

On June 5-6, 2024, three local chairmen from villages in the Kikuube district who signed and delivered the petition to Daqing were arrested by the officer in charge of the Kaseeta police and a team of Kikuube district police. Another human rights defender, Julius Tumwiine, faced threats and judicial harassment from the police in Kikuube, which was seen surrounding his house on June 5, 2024, at a time when he was not home.⁵⁰³ Nearly two months after the petition was delivered, the local chairmen still have to report to the police regularly and have yet to be presented before a judge.⁵⁰⁴ On June 26, 2024, the police violently arrested 30 individuals who were peacefully marching towards the Chinese Embassy to deliver a petition calling for the cancellation of EACOP.⁵⁰⁵

On August 5, 2024, four environmental activists were arrested while they protested against the oil project at the Chinese Embassy in Kampala.⁵⁰⁶

On August 9, 2024; the police arrested 47 students from different universities on their way to parliament to protest against the oil project.⁵⁰⁷

On July 17, 2024, a group of activists instituted legal action against the Attorney General, as well as several police officers. The activists allege that they have compiled a chronology of incidents over the last three years, in which they accuse the authorities of torture, beating, detention without trial beyond 48 hours, and violation of their rights to freedoms of assembly, speech, expression, and movement.⁵⁰⁸

The Abduction and Torture of Stephen Kwikiriza

The most shocking case took place in June 2024 when Stephen Kwikiriza, an environmental observer with the Environmental Governance Institute was abducted, interrogated, and beaten by the UPDF. Kwikiriza had documented the environmental devastation and human rights violations suffered by his community from the Kingfisher project.

On June 4, Kwikiriza was picked up in Kampala, where he had been staying in a safe house after receiving threats due to his activism. When she couldn’t contact him, his wife filed a missing persons report. The police appeared to take no action to find Kwikiriza.

An application for an order of habeas corpus was also filed at the High Court of Justice of Uganda on June 6 but Ugandan authorities never acknowledged officially his detention.

On June 9, Kwikiriza was found in Kyenyoyo, five hours from Kampala, after being dumped on the side of a road. He had been beaten and tortured, and was then hospitalized for several days.⁵⁰⁹

The UPDF’s official position is that they were not responsible for his abduction – they even accused Kwikiriza of faking the entire episode.⁵¹⁰ However, a senior military officer confirmed Kwikiriza’s detention to the Agence France-Presse news agency on condition of anonymity: “He was taken into custody for questioning regarding his illegal activities, including mobilising fellow activists to oppose the oil pipeline,” he said, adding that he was released after interrogation.⁵¹¹

CHAPTER XVI - Recommendations

To the Chinese National Offshore Oil Company (CNOOC):

End Rights Abuses: Take urgent and effective steps to immediately cease all human rights abuses. Dismiss and refer for prosecution any person found to have committed abuses.
Independent, International Investigations: Appoint an independent and impartial international entity to carry out investigations into allegations of human rights abuses, intimidation, and threats by their own actors or those associated with their operations.
Justice and Accountability: Report human rights violations to appropriate authorities, insist that abuses are investigated transparently and impartially, demand that those responsible are held criminally accountable where appropriate, and protect victims from reprisals.
Safe Reporting: Ensure safe avenues for victims to report and file complaints with companies concerning human rights abuses associated with their operations.
Zero Tolerance: Issue clear and public statements of zero tolerance for human rights abuses, threats, corruption, and intimidation by staff, agents, contractors, and subcontractors. Communicate these messages publicly, including to the Ugandan government and security forces.
Compliance: Conduct human rights and environmental due diligence, and remedy violations, including those documented in this report. Ensure all company policies and practices, including those of partners and contractors, including security contractors, comply with their respective responsibilities under:
- Ugandan law;
- The UN Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights;
- International Finance Corporation Performance Standards; and
- International human rights law.
Compensation: Ensure fair and prompt compensation for communities and individuals who have lost land, assets, or livelihoods due to the Kingfisher project, including those who are or were residing on communal land.
- Ensure compensation amounts are in line with international human rights standards and best practices for land acquisition.
- Review past compensation practices to ensure that amounts paid reflect the cost to replace land at the time compensation was paid and promptly provide supplemental compensation to reflect changes in replacement cost.
- Commission a formal review of past and current compensation practices and promptly publish the results of this review.
- Ensure that payments to BUCOLA reach the intended recipients. When BUCOLA fails to pay compensation, provide compensation directly to ensure that displaced persons receive adequate compensation so that their standard of living is at least equivalent to that which they previously had.
- Take all necessary measures to prevent employees, agents or, subcontractors from using any form of intimidation to coerce individuals into signing documents related to land, including, but not limited to, assertions that their land will be taken without any compensation if they do not sign or express or implied threats of inappropriate legal action.
Additional Payments: Provide additional payments for lost revenue from delays in providing compensation.
Oil and Chemical Pollution, and Illegal Dumping:
- End Dumping: Take immediate steps to end any illegal dumping of wastewater or other drilling by-products, including but not limited to Lake Albert.
- End Pollution: Take all necessary steps to ensure that oil from the well pads does not pollute waterways, including but not limited to Lake Albert.
- Provide a full cleanup and restore affected environments: Rehabilitate wildlife, replant vegetation, restore water quality, and take other reasonable measures proposed by local communities to restore the affected environments.
- Whistleblowers: Protect whistleblowers from retaliation. Appoint an independent entity to investigate the allegations made by whistleblowers.
- Transparency: Provide transparent reports on the cleanup progress.
- Fair Compensation: Compensate affected individuals and communities fairly for loss of income, property damage, and any other losses attributable to oil spillage or dumping of oil or wastewater.
- Health Monitoring and Support: Provide funds for long-term health monitoring programs in affected areas and medical support to any individuals found to be suffering from exposure to hazardous materials.
Accessible and Effective Grievance Procedures: Ensure procedures for reporting grievances are communicated clearly in languages understood by affected persons and communities. Ensure that grievance procedures are accessible to all by broadening the locations and ways in which grievances can be filed. Appoint an independent third party to oversee the grievance process, as recommended in the Kingfisher ESIA.
Resettlement Action Plan for the Kingfisher project: Without further delay, publicly disclose the Resettlement Action Plan and make it available in the languages of all affected communities.
Protection of, and Access to, Graves and Cultural Heritage Sites: Ensure that all graves, and traditional and cultural heritage sites are protected.
- Where graves must be relocated, consult with the affected families and ensure that relocation takes place in a manner and to a location that respects local customs and enables families to perform the rites they feel are necessary.
- If relocations have already taken place without such consultation, take all necessary steps to enable families to perform all necessary rites.
- Where the project site contains cultural heritage or prevents access to previously accessible cultural heritage sites being used by, or that have been used by, affected communities for cultural purposes, allow continued access to the cultural site or provide an alternative access route.
- Demarcate areas that should be avoided at certain times of the week/year by construction activities that cause nuisance, so as to minimize disturbance of nearby traditional ceremonial activities, as recommended in the Kingfisher ESIA.
Emission Disclosure: Publicly disclose greenhouse gas emissions from Kingfisher and all operations related to the East Africa Crude Oil Project.

To TotalEnergies, the Majority Owner of the Kingfisher Project, and the Uganda National Oil Company (UNOC), a state-owned company and Minority Owner of the Kingfisher Project:

Exercise Fiduciary Responsibility: As the business partner of CNOOC, majority owner of Kingfisher (TotalEnergies), and state-owned minority owner of Kingfisher (UNOC), take proactive steps to ensure that all recommendations directed to CNOOC above are addressed and implemented.
Public Commitments to End Violations:
- Make public statements that all allegations contained in this report about the acts or omissions of CNOOC will be investigated by an independent and impartial entitiy, that those responsible for violations should be prosecuted, and that full compensation will be paid to victims.
- Make public statement that all allegations contained in the report about the behavior of UPDF and other security forces should be investigated by an independent and impartial entity, that those responsible for violations should be prosecuted, and that full compensation will be paid to victims.

To the Government of Uganda:

Halt Violations: Publicly instruct Ugandan security forces to immediately halt human rights violations, threats, and intimidation related to the Kingfisher and other oil projects.
Justice and Accountability: Investigate violations documented in this report, including serious abuses by Ugandan security forces such as beatings, ill-treatment and torture, arbitrary arrests, and enforced disappearances. Prosecute perpetrators and compensate victims.
Halt crackdowns on peaceful dissent and protest by defenders, activists, and members of the community: Comply with Uganda’s international human rights obligations and immediately halt arrests of and violence against peaceful environmental, climate and human rights activists and protesters. The government should drop all criminal charges against environmental, climate, and human rights defenders in relation to their peaceful opposition to the Kingfisher and related projects and the exercise of their rights to freedoms of assembly, association, and expression.
Access to Justice: Enable affordable, safe, and timely access to justice for all victims of abuse and those negatively affected by the projects.
Support for Victims: Provide safe reporting avenues for victims, particularly for victims of sexual and gender-based crimes, protect their rights and identities, and offer appropriate counselling and assistance.
Compensation: Ensure that CNOOC provides full and fair compensation to all of those affected by the project in a rights respecting way and in compliance with international standards.
Livelihood Restoration: Ensure that CNOOC complies with obligations to provide livelihood restoration.
Oversight of BUCOLA: Investigate allegations in this report about the failure of BUCOLA to provide compensation and other violations, and hold accountable those found responsible for any violations of the law.
Sign and ratify the Aarhus Convention: The Aarhus Convention, formally known as the Convention on Access to Information, Public Participation in Decision-Making and Access to Justice in Environmental Matters, grants the public rights regarding access to environmental and climate information, public participation, and justice in environmental and climate matters. Issue a public statement subscribing, without reservations, to the rights and obligations enshrined in the Convention, and commit to work with its Special Rapporteur.
Climate Mitigation Policy: Adopt and implement a robust, rights-respecting climate mitigation policy consistent with the best available science, which includes stopping the Kingfisher project and related oil projects, and redirecting resources to renewable energy development.

To: Financial Institutions and Insurance Companies, Including Institutions Reportedly Involved, or Considering Involvement, in the Kingfisher Project, including:

- China Export & Credit Insurance Corporation (Sinosure)
- Export-Import Bank of China (China Eximbank)
- Industrial and Commercial Bank of China (ICBC)
- Standard Bank Group

Do Not Support or Finance: Do not support or finance the Kingfisher or related projects due to their climate, environmental, and human rights impacts.
Public Commitment: Publicly commit to halt all finance and insurance support for all fossil fuel projects due to the high climate, environmental, social, and governance risk.
Redirect Support: Invest in Uganda’s green future and redirect financial support to projects advancing a just energy transition to renewable energy. Certify that green energy technology given as aid, loans, or investment from China was made free of forced labor.

To the Chinese Government and its institutions, including the Ministry of Ecology and Environment, the State-owned Assets Supervision and Administration Commission, the State Administration for Financial Regulation, the Ministry of Commerce, and the National Development and reform Commission:

End Support for Fossil Fuel Projects: The Chinese government has announced an end to support for overseas coal projects. This should be broadened to include all overseas fossil fuel projects, including the Kingfisher project.
Zero Tolerance for Violations of Ugandan law and Human Rights Abuses in CNOOC and other Chinese-funded projects: Investigate the serious allegations of violations of Ugandan law and human rights violations and harms associated with the Kingfisher project. These abuses represent significant reputational, political, and financial risks for China and its standing with the people of Uganda.
Due Diligence: Ensure full compliance with Chinese policies in relation to environmental and social risks of overseas projects. This should include transparent and rigorous reporting and monitoring concerning compliance with national and international standards, and access for civil society organizations and affected communities and peoples to file complaints and grievances.
Redirect Support: Invest in Uganda’s green future and redirect financial support to projects advancing a just energy transition to renewable energy.

To the UN Working Group on the issue of Human Rights and Transnational Corporations and other Business Enterprises; the Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of human rights in the context of climate change; the Special Rapporteur on the issue of human rights obligations relating to the enjoyment of a safe, clean, healthy and sustainable environment; the Special Rapporteur on the implications for human rights of the environmentally sound management and disposal of hazardous substances and wastes; and the Special Rapporteur on Human Rights Defenders:

Launch a Joint Inquiry: Investigate the serious human rights, environmental, and climate harms caused by the Kingfisher and related projects.
Request Information: Seek detailed information from the corporations and governments involved regarding, among others:
- Environmental and climate impacts;
- Human rights violations and harms, including the brutal crackdown on peaceful EACOP protesters, and arrests and intimidation against climate, environmental and human rights defenders;
- Compliance with international human rights law, the Paris Agreement, and the U.N. Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights;
- Effectiveness of grievance mechanisms and access to file complaints for affected persons and communities; and
- Accountability and justice for violations associated with the projects.

To the United States, China, Russia, United Kingdom, European Union member states, Japan, India, Saudi Arabia, other Gulf States, and other large historical greenhouse gas emitters, as well as States and companies continuing to profit from fossil fuels:

End Fossil Fuel Subsidies: End all fossil fuel subsidies now and redirect funds towards sustainable and renewable energy initiatives. G7 countries should fulfill the 2016 commitment to end “inefficient fossil fuel subsidies” by 2025; other countries should make and fulfil the same pledge.
Tax Fossil Fuel Corporations: Implement significant taxes on fossil fuel corporations based on the polluter pays principle. Use the revenue generated to fund climate action and support for affected communities in developing countries.
Increase Renewable Energy Investments: Significantly and urgently increase investments in renewable energy projects, particularly in developing economies. Ensure these projects are community-driven and support local development.
Halt New Fossil Fuel Projects: Reject all new fossil fuel projects and commit to an immediate moratorium on future fossil fuel exploration and development.
Enhance Climate Finance: Scale up climate finance to meet the needs of the most vulnerable countries. Ensure this finance is provided as grants rather than loans to avoid increasing debt burdens on lower-income states.
Support Just Transitions: Ensure that climate finance addresses the needs of developing countries, including loss and damage, just transitions, adaptation, and mitigation.
Adopt Ambitious Climate Targets: Commit to ambitious climate targets for 2035, aligned with the Paris Agreement goal of limiting global warming to 1.5°C.
Implement the Global Biodiversity Framework: Increase climate and nature finance by committing to a new collective quantified climate finance target tailored to the needs of the most vulnerable countries. Urgently implement the financial targets of the Global Biodiversity Framework.
Public Finance for Renewable Energy: Lead the way in financing a fair renewable energy transition in developing countries. Ensure that public money is reallocated from harmful sectors driving the climate crisis to sustainable energy projects.
Protect Human Rights: Ensure that climate actions respect and protect human rights, particularly the rights of Indigenous peoples and other vulnerable communities, as well as the human rights of future generations.
Transparency and Accountability: Commit to transparent reporting on progress towards these climate goals. Ensure accountability mechanisms are in place to monitor and enforce commitments.

Conclusion

As long as Kingfisher and the wider oil project continue, all parties should implement the recommendations above in good faith and as soon as possible. However, the Kingfisher project and the entire oil project are fundamentally incompatible with the Paris Agreement. The project perpetuates climate, environmental, and human rights harms in violation of both national and international law. It should be discontinued.

Acknowledgements

This report was researched and written by Mathieu Ajar, a consultant for Climate Rights International. His name is a pseudonym to protect him and his sources. The report was reviewed by Legal Director, Linda Lakhdhir; Advocacy Director, Lotte Leicht; and Executive Director, Brad Adams.

MAXAR satellite imagery and analysis were provided by Ritwik Gupta at the University of California, Berkeley, Human Rights Center and AI Climate Initiative.

Thank you to Environmental Governance International, TASHA Research Institute Africa, and STREC for their assistance in an extremely challenging environment.

Other organizations and all expert external reviewers asked not to be identified for security or access reasons.

Most importantly, this report would not have been possible without the community members in the Kingfisher area who shared their stories with us.

Appendix: Letters to CNOOC, TotalEnergies, UNOC, and COSL

Climate Rights International sent the following letters to CNOOC, TotalEnergies, UNOC, and COSL outlining the allegations made by residents of the Kingfisher project area but received no reply.

“They Don’t Want People to Stay Here”

How CNOOC’s Kingfisher Oil Project in Uganda Is Causing Human Rights, Environmental, and Climate Harms

Table of Contents

Summary

Kingfisher: A Catalogue of Abuses

Forced Evictions

Coercion and Lack of or Inadequate Compensation

Loss of Livelihoods

Reduced Standards of Living and Impoverishment

Impacts on Graves and Cultural Traditions

Violations of Labor Rights

Gender Based Violence, including Sexual Violence

Lack of Access and Failure of the Legal System to Protect Rights

Environmental Harms, Including Oil and Chemical Pollution

CNOOC’s Failure to Provide Required Remedies

Violence Against and Intimidation of Environmental Defenders

Key Recommendations

Methodology

CHAPTER I - History of the East Africa Crude Oil Project

Discovery of Oil in the Albertine Graben

The East African Crude Oil Pipeline

The Tilenga Project

Technical Details about the Kingfisher Project

CHAPTER II - Relevant Ugandan Law and International Standards

Laws Relating to Land Rights

Labor Laws

Handling of Petroleum Waste

The Kingfisher Environmental and Social Impact Assessment (ESIA) and International Finance Corporation (IFC) Performance Standards

Land Acquisition and Involuntary Resettlement: Performance Standard 5

Compensation Standards

Grievance Mechanism

Cultural Heritage: Performance Standard 8

Pollution Control Standards

CHAPTER III - The Population in the Kingfisher Area

CHAPTER IV - Increased Military and Security Forces Presence

CHAPTER V - Forced Evictions and Disappearing Villages Resulting from CNOOC’s Kingfisher Project

Seven villages expelled for a new military base

Forced evictions from the village of Kyabasambu

Forced evictions from the village of Kiina

Forced Evictions in Numerous Other Villages in the Kingfisher Area

CHAPTER VI - Lack of or Inadequate Compensation from CNOOC for Land and Other Assets

Coercion and Intimidation in Land Acquisition

CHAPTER VII - Abuses in CNOOC's Acquisition of Communal Land: Subcontracting Responsibility to Bucola

Evictions by Bucola Without Compensation

CNOOC's failure to compensate for assets

CHAPTER VIII - Impact of Kingfisher on Farmers

CHAPTER IX - Impacts on Fishing Communities: Destruction of Livelihoods, Violence, Arrests, Extortion, and Displacement

Enforcement in the Kingfisher Area

Destruction of Boats

Arrests and Extortion

Dire Detention Conditions

Violence and Deaths

CHAPTER X - Devastating Impacts on the Rights to Housing, Food, Livelihoods, and Education

CHAPTER XI - Impact of Forced Evictions on Graves and Cultural Traditions

CHAPTER XII - Violations of Labor Rights within Kingfisher

Illegal Hours, Hazardous Working Conditions, Fatal Accidents​

Low Wages Keeping Families Below the Poverty Line

Absence of Work Contracts

Corruption in Hiring

CHAPTER XIII - Sexual and Gender-Based Violence

CHAPTER XIV - Environmental Harms, Including Oil and Chemical Pollution

Oil Spills and Dumping

Whistleblowers Describe Intentional Dumping

Water Pollution and Flooding Due to Construction Work

Noise pollution

Future Oil exploitation by CNOOC within a protected area

CHAPTER XV - Attacks on Community Activists and Human Rights Defenders

The Abduction and Torture of Stephen Kwikiriza

CHAPTER XVI - Recommendations

To the Chinese National Offshore Oil Company (CNOOC):

To TotalEnergies, the Majority Owner of the Kingfisher Project, and the Uganda National Oil Company (UNOC), a state-owned company and Minority Owner of the Kingfisher Project:

To the Government of Uganda:

To: Financial Institutions and Insurance Companies, Including Institutions Reportedly Involved, or Considering Involvement, in the Kingfisher Project, including:

To the Chinese Government and its institutions, including the Ministry of Ecology and Environment, the State-owned Assets Supervision and Administration Commission, the State Administration for Financial Regulation, the Ministry of Commerce, and the National Development and reform Commission:

To the United States, China, Russia, United Kingdom, European Union member states, Japan, India, Saudi Arabia, other Gulf States, and other large historical greenhouse gas emitters, as well as States and companies continuing to profit from fossil fuels:

Conclusion

Acknowledgements

Appendix: Letters to CNOOC, TotalEnergies, UNOC, and COSL

Join Our Mailing List

Quicklinks

Illegal Hours, Hazardous Working Conditions, Fatal Accidents