AEC Backs East Africa Court Ruling, Warns of Escalating Foreign Funded “Lawfare” Against African Energy Progress

East Africa has entered a decisive moment in its energy journey. With the East African Court of Justice (EACJ) dismissing a long-running lawsuit aimed at stopping the East African Crude Oil Pipeline (EACOP), the region has reaffirmed its commitment to advancing a strategically vital project designed to unlock jobs, supply chains and long-term energy security for Uganda and Tanzania.

The African Energy Chamber (AEC) strongly welcomes the ruling. For the Chamber, the court’s decision reinforces a message it has championed for years: Africa must be allowed to build its own energy future without interference, intimidation or weaponized litigation funded from abroad. The judgement is not only a welcome affirmation of the rule of law in the region, but also a clear signal that Africa will not allow externally driven obstructionism to derail its development. After the five years of litigation, the EACJ upheld its earlier finding that the lawsuit brought by a consortium of civil society organizations had been filed outside the treaty’s 60-day limitation period. With this ruling, the region’s highest court has sent a strong message: legal processes must be respected, timelines matter and projects central to East Africa’s industrialization cannot be held hostage indefinitely by procedural maneuvering.

The Chamber views the decision as a win for Uganda, Tanzania, TotalEnergies, CNOOC and every local community that stands to benefit from the jobs, investment and infrastructure linked to EACOP. The Chamber has been on the ground in Uganda, touring the so-called affected areas that activists frequently reference in campaigns abroad. What the Chamber witnessed firsthand contradicts many of the narratives being amplified in Western media. Communities are not calling for projects to be shut down; they are asking for progress, opportunity and the chance to benefit from their own natural resources. EACOP represents exactly that – a strategic pipeline that will deliver 210,000 barrels per day of Ugandan crude to the port of Tanga, unlocking value chains that can transform both economies.

“Ugandans support this project. They want jobs, investment and the opportunity to participate in an industrial future,” says NJ Ayuk, Executive Chairman, AEC. “This ruling reinforces what we have always maintained: development cannot be outsourced, delayed or derailed by external groups using African courts for ideological battles.”

The court’s ruling arrives at a time when foreign funded “lawfare” is escalating across the continent. The same pattern witnessed in East Africa is already well documented in South Africa, where lawsuits filed by non-governmental organizations backed by Western foundations have successfully delayed offshore projects by TotalEnergies and Shell. The Western Cape High Court’s 2025 decision to rescind the environmental authorization for Block 5/6/7, after years of litigation, is now a textbook example of how continuous legal challenges can paralyze investment. Shell’s long-running Wild Coast case follows the same formula – repetitive appeals, procedural hurdles and campaigns designed to generate uncertainty rather than ensure compliance. These actions, while framed as community advocacy, are increasingly viewed by African stakeholders as systematic efforts to block African energy development while Europe and North America expand their own fossil fuel infrastructure.

Mozambique is facing similar obstacles. Litigation targeting financing for the Mozambique LNG project has escalated to multiple jurisdictions, with lawsuits filed in the United States to block a multibillion-dollar loan from the U.S. Exim Bank and criminal complaints in France alleging war-crimes complicity. While legitimate human rights oversight is necessary, the cumulative effect of these lawsuits is the prolonged stalling of Africa’s largest LNG development – a project critical for regional electrification and long-term economic growth. Each delay reinforces the AEC’s argument that Africa is being held to a double standard, expected to meet development needs without the very energy systems that powered the industrial growth of the West.

Against this backdrop, the EACJ ruling stands out as a reaffirmation that African institutions are capable, credible and committed to ensuring that transformative projects proceed within the bounds of law and due process. The Chamber commends Uganda and Tanzania for their steadfast leadership and congratulates TotalEnergies and CNOOC for maintaining discipline and long-term vision while navigating intense pressure from activist networks. The AEC maintains that EACOP is one of Africa’s most important infrastructure projects – a pipeline that will enable value creation, export growth, expanded local content and revenue streams for decades to come.

“This ruling is a statement of confidence in African sovereignty and a rejection of efforts to dictate Africa’s energy future from abroad. As the continent continues to grapple with deep energy poverty, it cannot afford to allow its development to be stalled by foreign funded litigation that offers no viable alternative for industrialization or economic upliftment. The AEC will continue supporting Uganda, Tanzania, TotalEnergies and all partners developing EACOP. The project is lawful, strategic and essential for East Africa’s long-term prosperity,” concludes Ayuk.

Per Kind Favour of APO

Africa Fact: Mali in the 14th century was highly urbanised. Sergio Domian, an Italian art and architecture scholar, wrote the following about this period: “Thus was laid the foundation of an urban civilisation. At the height of its power, Mali had at least 400 cities, and the interior of the Niger Delta was very densely populated”.