Kampala, Uganda | THE INDEPENDENT | In Arusha, Tanzania, Lubega John Nsamba represented his ailing father, John Mary Nsamba. The family says the East African Crude Oil Pipeline (EACOP) took his land without fair compensation.
More than a month after his burial near the pipeline, his fight for justice continues in the courts. John Mary Nsamba had refused compensation. He believed the valuation of his crops violated Uganda’s Constitution and ignored long-term loss of livelihood.
When domestic avenues brought little relief, he joined other project affected persons (PAPs) in petitioning the East African Court of Justice (EACJ). Nongovernmental organizations such as AFIEGO, CEFROHT, Natural Justice, and the Centre for Strategic Litigation joined them.
The petition sought to halt the human rights, environmental, and climate risks of EACOP. However, the court dismissed the case on technical grounds.
“We thought maybe there, someone would listen. Now we don’t know where to go.” — Lubega John Nsamba
Undervalued crops along the EACOP corridor
For thousands along Uganda’s oil corridor, it was yet another door closing. In Kyotera District, farmer Cosmas Yiga walks through land that once held 56 mango trees, now cleared for the pipeline.
“A coffee tree was valued at 80,000 shillings, yet one tree can produce more than 100,000 shillings in a year. If a tree produces about 10,000 fruits in a season, sold at roughly 250 shillings each, that could amount to 2.5 million shillings annually.” — Cosmas Yiga, farmer, Kyotera District
Officials insist that compensation followed approved frameworks. Residents, however, argue that the figures ignore the loss of perennial crops that would have supported them for years.
“These are perennial crops. You remove them once, but they would feed us for years.” — Cosmas Yiga
Floods and fallen trees in Buliisa
Whenever it rains, some households suffer severe floods that destroy homes and crops. Residents have written to the oil and gas developers. So far, there has been no real response and no solution.
Bernard Barugahara, a former Community Development Officer in Buliisa, describes the flooding as a direct result of oil operations.
“Being a flat area, when land is raised for drilling, water runs down and overflows into community lands. Even systems installed to capture water sometimes overflow. This has become a big problem.” — Bernard Barugahara, former Community Development Officer, Buliisa
He says he has pushed hard for action, and the issue has now reached the Minister of Water. A committee bringing together NEMA, local government, and the Ministers of Energy and Water is now involved.
“We told them, you demarcate. Since the water has started finding its way, put the marks. If a community member digs beyond the marks, then don’t compensate, because the person has encroached. But before the marks, then you have to compensate this person.” — Bernard Barugahara
He also criticized weak tree replacement programs. “Thousands of trees have been destroyed by pipelines and flow lines. Indigenous trees resistant to local weather are not being replanted. Meanwhile, 96 percent of Buliisa households still rely on firewood,” he said.
A human-wildlife-oil conflict
In parts of Buliisa and Nwoya, communities complain of a surge in elephant crop raids and human-wildlife conflict. Wathum Frederick Edie of Buliisa Paralegals calls it a human-wildlife-oil conflict.
“The oil companies entered the elephants’ territory. The noise, lights, and activity disrupted natural habitats. People are now in closer contact with wildlife. We have lost six people.” — Wathum Frederick Edie, Buliisa Paralegals
TotalEnergies plans to drill 426 wells, including 200 water injector wells and 196 oil producer wells, on 31 well pads in Nwoya and Buliisa districts. The company says it uses a state-of-the-art automated rig known as the “walking rig.”
The rigs stand about 60 meters tall in the middle of the national park. They are painted beige to blend with the surrounding savanna grasslands. A source, speaking on condition of anonymity, explained that the rigs have technology to reduce noise in the park and nearby. For Wathum, that explanation is not enough.
“I’m 67 years old. I was born in Buliisa. I married a woman from Buliisa. My children are Bagungu. And I will die, I will be buried in Buliisa. I’ve never all my life… slept with an elephant. To me, I think that oil companies went to the empire of the elephants. Because if you’re on your way going to Pakwach, there are those forests of palm trees. Those palm trees were planted by them, not by human beings.” — Wathum Frederick Edie
He also blames oil operations for worse flooding. “The companies dig holes to manage water, but when these overflow, gardens and crops are destroyed,” he says. He adds that communities are working with the companies to clear drainage, but those measures are not yet fully in place. “I can say that not all floods are from oil developments. For instance, when you go to Butiaba, the floods are from the lake.”
The regulator’s view
In November, Petroleum Authority of Uganda (PAU) Executive Director Ernest Rubondo presented the authority’s achievements in regulating the oil sector.
“Since we are a regulatory agency, the key aspect of our work is ensuring that development in the country’s oil and gas sector complies with the law and international best practice.” — Ernest Rubondo, Executive Director, PAU
According to Rubondo, Uganda is cited globally as a benchmark for balancing oil development with sensitive ecosystems. “All waste generated from petroleum operations is managed at state-of-the-art facilities, including thermal desorption units rare even internationally,” he said. He added that environmental and social frameworks, covering land acquisition, resettlement, and oil spill preparedness, are in place to prevent harm to communities.
“Some of the criticisms from international anti-fossil fuel campaigners were genuine, others were misleading. We had to stay the course, rely on rigorous environmental assessments, and maintain transparency. Today, Uganda’s petroleum projects are technologically advanced and among the least carbon-intensive in the world.” — Ernest Rubondo
Families still fighting the EACOP land battle in court
According to EACOP authorities, the project required 6,400 hectares of land, affecting 19,262 households. By January 31, 2026, they said, 99.3 percent of affected households had signed compensation agreements and 99.2 percent had been paid.
Among those who did not sign is Jealousy Mugisha, one of 42 people named in a court application. His story is also told in our earlier report on how Uganda’s oil production is built on broken families.
“We didn’t have an interest in cash compensation. The land was for the family; we asked for land for land, the equal size. The process has been on since 2018, when they stopped us from using that land. And sometimes I call it a miracle or a wonder, the government of Uganda to take the money for the land in the court of law.” — Jealousy Mugisha
In December 2023, the government sued 42 households in Hoima to obtain vacant possession of land for the Tilenga and EACOP projects. The families had rejected the compensation as inadequate. Justice Jesse Byaruhanga ruled against them within four days.
“We suffered an unfair judgment. Cases we filed since 2014 remain undetermined, yet a case against us was concluded in four days. So you can imagine that. We have been asking ourselves, has our government been taken over by the devil?” — Julius Asimwe, affected landowner
Despite assurances from authorities and developers, community voices point to persistent gaps.
“We fought in court to have our rights recognized. The judgment may have favored the government, but the truth is on the ground.” — John Nsamba
Dickens Kamugisha of AFIEGO stresses the constitutional dimension. “Section 6 of the Compulsory Land Acquisition Act allows the government to deposit compensation in court if landowners reject it. But Article 26 of the Constitution requires fair and adequate compensation before acquisition. This has not happened for many families, and they continue to wait for justice,” he says.
Unanswered questions
The oil projects promise billions in revenue and regional integration. Along the route, however, development is measured in trees cut, floods endured, and families relocated.
PAU points to regulatory achievements, thousands compensated, and hundreds resettled. Yet affected communities still ask: Why do floods persist despite environmental safeguards? Why are indigenous trees and resilient ecosystems not being restored? Why are constitutional rights to compensation still contested? And how are human-wildlife conflicts managed when oil operations move into natural habitats?
“The oil will flow soon. Whether a sense of closure flows with it remains uncertain.” — John Nsamba
The gap between official claims and community realities lies at the heart of Uganda’s oil corridor story. It is a reminder that mega-projects need not only technical oversight but also justice, transparency, and accountability at every stage.
This article was produced with financial support from the Environmental Defenders Journalism Grants 2025. It was first published by The Independent.