The African Energy Chamber (AEC) has condemned a lawsuit filed in the UK High Court against the East African Crude Oil Pipeline (EACOP), arguing that foreign-funded litigation threatens African sovereignty, energy security, investment and Uganda’s right to develop its natural resources.
Four Ugandan farmers have filed a legal challenge before the UK High Court against EACOP Ltd., the pipeline’s UK-registered operating company, seeking to apply Ugandan constitutional, environmental and climate laws to the company.
Filed just months before the 1,445-kilometre pipeline is expected to begin transporting Uganda’s first crude oil exports, the suit argues that the project breaches Uganda’s constitutional and environmental protections and asks the English court to prevent it from becoming operational.
The AEC described the case as the latest example of what it called foreign-backed litigation targeting strategically important African energy projects through overseas courts.
According to the Chamber, the legal challenge comes as Uganda and Tanzania stand on the threshold of a major economic transformation through oil development.
“The African Energy Chamber maintains that decisions about Uganda’s energy future should be made in Uganda—not in London,” the organization said.
It added that the timing of the lawsuit was significant because EACOP is approaching one of its most important milestones after years of permitting, financing and construction.
“Just as Uganda prepares to become an oil-producing nation, another legal challenge has emerged—this time asking a British court to determine whether one of Africa’s most important infrastructure projects should proceed,” the Chamber stated.
Describing the lawsuit as an attempt to influence Africa’s development agenda, AEC Executive Chairman, NJ Ayuk, said: “This is colonialism 2.0. For generations, Africa was told what resources it could exploit and how it should develop. Today, some of those same pressures are being repackaged through foreign-funded litigation and ideological campaigns that seek to dictate Africa’s energy choices from thousands of kilometres away. UK courts should not determine Uganda’s energy future. Ugandans should.”
The Chamber said legal campaigns against projects such as EACOP have become an increasingly common strategy for delaying African energy development.
It cited previous legal challenges involving the Mozambique LNG project and exploration activities in South Africa, arguing that while each case differs legally, the cumulative impact has been greater uncertainty for investors, delayed infrastructure projects and slower economic growth for resource-rich African countries.
According to the AEC, EACOP is a strategic infrastructure project that will unlock Uganda’s estimated 6.5 billion barrels of oil resources, connect the country’s production to international markets and create opportunities for thousands of workers, local businesses and suppliers in both Uganda and Tanzania.
The project is being developed by TotalEnergies, CNOOC, the Uganda National Oil Company and the Tanzania Petroleum Development Corporation.
The Chamber said the pipeline is expected to strengthen local content, generate government revenue, expand infrastructure and support broader industrial development across East Africa.
However, environmental and human rights groups have opposed the project, arguing that land acquisition has affected more than 100,000 people while raising concerns over freshwater resources, biodiversity and protected ecosystems.
TotalEnergies has consistently maintained that the project complies with international environmental and social standards and has implemented safeguards, biodiversity protection measures and compensation programmes designed to minimise adverse impacts while delivering long-term benefits to host communities.
The AEC argued that delaying the project would have significant economic consequences.
It said every year that major energy projects remain tied up in prolonged litigation postpones job creation, discourages investment and limits governments’ ability to generate revenue needed to finance schools, hospitals, roads, electricity infrastructure and future renewable energy investments.
The Chamber also contended that the lawsuit raises broader questions about national sovereignty.
It noted that Ugandan institutions have already considered legal challenges relating to EACOP and argued that the country has its own constitutional and judicial mechanisms for resolving such disputes.
According to the AEC, allowing a UK court to determine the future of the project could establish a precedent that enables foreign jurisdictions to influence domestic development priorities across Africa.
“The debate over EACOP has never been about a pipeline alone,” the Chamber said. “It is about whether Africans retain the sovereign right to develop their own resources under their own laws and for the benefit of their own people, or whether those decisions will increasingly be contested in foreign capitals by interests far removed from the communities they claim to represent.”
