The protesters were opposing the East African Crude Oil Pipeline (EACOP) and Tilenga oil field project in Uganda and Tanzania, initiated by TotalEnergies
The protesters were opposing the East African Crude Oil Pipeline (EACOP) and Tilenga oil field project in Uganda and Tanzania, initiated by TotalEnergies PHOTO/COURTESY

Overview:

The suit was brought by two French and four Ugandan NGOs, which accused TotalEnergies of taking land from more than 100,000 people without adequate compensation.

A French court has dismissed a case against TotalEnergies for a massive oil project in Uganda and Tanzania after several rights organizations filed a suit to suspend the multi-billion project.

Activists had alleged human rights violations and the French court would set a legal precedent to halt projects deemed harmful to the environment and human rights.

The court on Tuesday ruled the case was “inadmissible”, saying the plaintiffs did not correctly follow court procedures against the French energy giant.

It said the plaintiffs submitted accounts to the court in December that were “substantially different” from those that were presented to TotalEnergies in a formal notice in 2019 when the case was initiated.

The suit was brought by two French and four Ugandan NGOs, which accused TotalEnergies of taking land from more than 100,000 people without adequate compensation.

They also said the company drilled wells in the biodiversity-rich Murchison Falls National Park on the shores of Lake Albert.

Friends of the Earth and Survival, the two French NGOs, and the Ugandan groups denied having substantially modified their submissions to the court.

They “only clarified them and consolidated their arguments with more than 200 documents of supporting evidence”, said Juliette Renaud, a campaigner with Friends of the Earth.

The plaintiffs, who can appeal against the decision, said they would speak to “the affected communities” about the next steps, Renaud added.

TotalEnergies welcomed the ruling.

It told AFP the verdict recognized the firm had “formally established a vigilance plan” with elements “sufficiently precise to not be regarded as cursory”.n