Genuine EACOP Stakeholders

Relevant to the East Africa Crude Oil Pipeline (EACOP), in the context of Uganda, the following understanding of a stakeholder that is tailored to the oil and gas sector seems the most appropriate:

“A stakeholder is any individual, group, or organization that has an interest in, is affected by, or can influence a company or industry’s activities and decisions. Stakeholders can be internal, like employees and shareholders, or external, such as local communities, regulators, and environmental groups,” Louis Lieutenant

EACOP is owned by TotalEnergies E&P Uganda (62 percent shareholding). It follows logic, therefore, that the legitimate external stakeholders for EACOP in Uganda are those with established mandate to act on behalf of the 45.9 million people of Uganda.

Those who Ugandans have delegated authority and power to act on their behalf in administrating Uganda, representing and protecting the interests of its people, its territory, its wealth, etc., for the greater good of Uganda.

Those with legitimate power and authority to “influence public perception; regulatory approval and financial support” for EACOP. They are:

• Central Government (President, Cabinet, Parliament, Judiciary and Uganda Law society) – politicians and technocrats.
• Local Governments of the 10 EACOP districts (at Village, Parish, Sub-County, County and District levels) – politicians and technocrats..
• Kingdoms (Buganda and Bunyoro), including their technocrats.
• Civil Society (representing special interest groups and deriving mandate from members of those groups).

EACOP Declared Stakeholders

EACOP uses the International Finance Corporation (IFC) definition of a stakeholder as:

“A person or group who is directly or indirectly affected by a project. Including, those who have interest in the project and or the ability to influence its outcome, either positively or negatively.”

On which basis EACOP identified, grouped and declares its stakeholders in Uganda in four categories as follows (copied verbatim from EACOP Uganda Stakeholder Engagement Report):

• Authorities – National government, Local government (district/county and subcounty), Regulatory institutions, Policy makers, District technical experts, Village elected officials, Health and educational institutions and Police.

• Directly affected groups, including vulnerable people – Landowners, Local residents, Farmers (nonland owning), Shopkeepers, Traders, Business owners, Pastoralists (cattle herders), Fisherfolk, Women (including women in the workplace), Minorities, Youth (including unmarried), Elderly, Sex workers, Children (including orphans), Widows and female headed households, People with mental and physical disabilities, Chronically ill (i.e., those with HIV and AIDS), Refugees and migrants.

• Civil Society – Community groups and community-based organisations, Media, Non- governmental organisations (NGOs), Religious leaders, Traditional leaders and organisations and Traditional leaders.

• Others – Business sector, Professional organisations, Research institutions, Academia, Tourism service providers and Emergency services.

Discussion

By passing legitimate people’s representatives and establishing parallel ‘private structures’, such asTotalEnergies E&P Uganda (with 62% shareholding of EACOP), the ‘big company’, seemingly has done in the case of EACOP is not best practice.

It provides a loop-hole through which the people’s representatives are let out and off the hook, so to speak; and leaving the people vulnerable to the ‘big company’.

Ideally, the ‘big company’ should engage with and through the people’s representatives and be held accountable by the people, through the people’s representatives..

While the people access and negotiate with the ‘big company’ via their representatives, whom they have the civic duty, right and power to hold to account for the activity of the ‘big company’.

EACOP declared stakeholders are clearly vague.

For example, what does it mean by National government?

Would it not make sense for EACOP to specify which bodies of government are its stakeholders, representing what interest and power?

Are the others grouped under “Authorities” other than National Government and Local Government, outside of government?

If so, from whence do they derive power to negotiate and represent on behalf of Ugandans and Uganda?

EACOP stakeholder groupings are indeed curious.

How is it that EACOP lumps within civil society, the kingdoms of Buganda and Bunyooro, which claim territorial ownership of the land – 25 sub-counties and 10 districts – EACOP will traverse?

The kingdoms are surely among the “authorities” of their territories through which EACOP shall be installed.

And Why does EACOP refer to them as “traditional leaders and organisations”?

Another example of vagueness in EACOP declared stakeholders. Why so?

Contextualized in the reality, for example, that Buganda Kingdom has a full governing structure, including its administrative structures, Lukiiko (parliament), a Land Board and more.

It is certainly of interest to learn how from the very beginning, EACOP has engaged with the Kingdoms, as stakeholders, if at all.

For more on why and how the kingdoms of Buganda and Bunyoro are genuine stakeholders for EACOP, read “EACOP in Uganda – the people and land tenure.” Click here to access it.

Lately, since 2023, there are media reports about “courtesy visits” from EACOP big wigs to Bulange Mengo, the headquarters of Buganda Kingdom.

Is this indicative of a correction in course or was it intended that they would engage this way via “courtesy visits”?

Albeit likely done within the existing Uganda legal framework, EACOP declared stakeholders insinuate its stakeholder engagement in Uganda is Machiavellian and patronizingly dis-empowering of the host country and its people.

Validating the call for action by Government to urgently establish and enforce a legal framework for stakeholder engagement by the ‘big company’ and the people, with the view of protecting the people.

Learn more about the state of affairs of current stakeholder engagement practices in “Challenges and opportunities of stakeholder engagement for the sustainable development of Uganda’s petroleum extraction sub-sector,” an empirical analysis by Paul Mukiibi. Click here to access the PDF for free.