Keypoints:
- Court rejects bid to block pipeline
- AEC says ruling affirms regional sovereignty
- Uganda and Tanzania push ahead with project
EAST Africa has entered a pivotal phase in its energy development after a significant legal victory cleared the way for the East African Crude Oil Pipeline (EACOP). The ruling, delivered by the East African Court of Justice (EACJ), dismissed a long-running case that had sought to halt the Uganda–Tanzania pipeline, reinforcing the region’s determination to pursue a project seen as central to economic transformation.
The decision drew strong support from the African Energy Chamber (AEC), which said the judgment underlined the principle that African states must be free to chart their own energy future. The ruling, based on statements issued by the AEC, affirmed that the case brought by several civil society groups was time-barred under the treaty’s 60-day rule.
Court says litigation came too late
The EACJ’s ruling upheld its earlier finding that the applicants had filed their case outside the required deadline. For regional authorities and project partners, this was not simply a procedural outcome but a broader signal that essential development projects cannot be indefinitely stalled by extended litigation.
After five years of legal back-and-forth, the court reiterated that timelines matter and that legal processes must be respected. The judgment effectively confirmed that a project of EACOP’s scale cannot remain hostage to what it described as procedural manoeuvring.
According to the Chamber, the ruling is a win not only for Uganda and Tanzania but also for TotalEnergies, CNOOC and the local communities set to benefit from jobs, new supply chains and expanded infrastructure linked to the pipeline.
Communities seek opportunity, not abandonment
AEC representatives have toured what activists abroad often describe as affected communities. The Chamber says its on-the-ground engagements contradict many of the narratives circulating in Western media. Rather than demanding a halt to the project, residents voiced a desire for progress, jobs and the chance to benefit from their own natural resource endowments.
EACOP is expected to transport 210,000 barrels per day of Ugandan crude to the port of Tanga in Tanzania, enabling export revenues and supporting value-addition industries across both countries. For governments in Kampala and Dar es Salaam, the pipeline is integral to their industrialisation agendas.
NJ Ayuk, Executive Chairman of the AEC, said the ruling affirmed a long-standing position that foreign-funded litigation is increasingly being used to obstruct critical African energy projects. ‘Ugandans support this project,’ he said. ‘They want jobs, investment and the opportunity to participate in an industrial future. This ruling reinforces what we have always maintained: development cannot be outsourced, delayed or derailed by external groups using African courts for ideological battles.’
Foreign-funded ‘lawfare’ concerns rise
The AEC argues that the pattern seen in East Africa mirrors tactics used elsewhere on the continent. In South Africa, lawsuits backed by international foundations have delayed offshore exploration efforts by TotalEnergies and Shell. The Western Cape High Court’s 2025 decision to rescind the environmental authorisation for Block 5/6/7 followed years of appeals and counter-appeals. Shell’s Wild Coast case, still mired in repetitive legal challenges, is often cited as another example.
The Chamber says such actions, though presented as community advocacy, are increasingly viewed by African stakeholders as systematic attempts to hinder African energy development while Western nations continue expanding their own oil and gas infrastructure.
A similar trend is emerging in Mozambique, where the Mozambique LNG project has faced legal challenges in multiple jurisdictions. These include attempts in the United States to block a multibn-dollar loan from the US Exim Bank and criminal complaints lodged in France alleging complicity in war crimes. While oversight remains essential, the cumulative effect has been prolonged delays to a project seen as vital for regional electrification and long-term economic growth.
A boost for regional confidence
Against this backdrop, the EACJ ruling stands out as an important assertion of African institutional credibility. The Chamber commended both Uganda and Tanzania for what it described as consistent leadership despite significant external pressure. It also noted the commitment shown by project partners TotalEnergies and CNOOC, who have maintained their investment plans even as global activist networks intensified scrutiny.
According to the AEC, EACOP remains one of Africa’s most strategic infrastructure ventures — a pipeline expected to generate new revenue, spur export growth and support local content development for decades.
Ayuk framed the ruling as a rejection of efforts to impose external views on Africa’s development trajectory. ‘This ruling is a statement of confidence in African sovereignty and a rejection of efforts to dictate Africa’s energy future from abroad,’ he said. ‘As the continent grapples with deep energy poverty, it cannot afford to have its progress stalled by foreign-funded litigation that offers no viable alternative for industrialisation.’
He added that the Chamber will continue to support Uganda, Tanzania, TotalEnergies and all partners as they advance the pipeline, describing the project as lawful, strategic and essential for East Africa’s long-term prosperity.
