Uganda: Bujagali-02/Bujagali Falls
Case Tracker
Complaint Overview
National Association of Professional Environmentalists (NAPE) & Save Bujagali Crusade
Project Information
$100m A & C loans (IFC), $115m guarantee (MIGA)
Synopsis
IFC's support for the Bujagali Falls Hydroelectric Power Plant involved the design and construction of a power plant at Bujagali Falls in Jinga province, Uganda to sell electricity to Uganda’s state owned Electricity Board. The project also included the construction of power transmission lines, associated substations and a reservoir. At its full supply level, the project’s reservoir would inundate 80 hectares of land and 308 hectares of area previously occupied by the Victoria Nile River. This inundation raised serious concern amongst local populations in relation to cultural and spiritual effects.
In June 2001, the National Association of Professional Environmentalists (NAPE) and Save Bujagali Crusade lodged a complaint with CAO. This was the second complaint lodged to CAO by NAPE regarding the Bujagali project. The first, in November 2000, was deemed ineligible for assessment by CAO.
The second complaint raised issues related to:
1. Consultation and information disclosure
2. Environmental Impact Assessment, including consideration of alternative energy sources, approval of transmission lines, and cumulative impacts of a cascade of dams
3. Compensation and resettlement of project-affected people
4. Spiritual significance of the Bujagali Falls
5. Comprehensive management plan for the Nile and diversion of river course
6. Guidelines of the World Commission on Dams
CAO referred issues raised in the complaint relating to bribery and corruption to the World Bank's Office of Institutional Integrity.
Acres International was commissioned by the World Bank Group to undertake a comprehensive assessment and least-cost analysis of all practical alternatives for meeting Uganda’s future power requirements, which identified a hydroelectric plant at Bujagali as the least-cost option. Public consultations were held widely before and after the release of the Environmental Impact Assessment in April 2001. However, significant criticism resulted from the assessment in relation to the exhaustiveness of the consultation process with local communities. This project aroused serious interest by many stakeholders including industry, NGO, Government of Uganda (GOU), civil society and impacted persons.
In the Assessment Report, completed in September 2001, CAO stressed its limitation to the issues raised and accepted in its Ombudsman role, however reiterated its awareness of the broader concerns that relate to the Bujagali Hydropower project. It was found that despite the project remaining in the pre-Board approval stage, it believed that IFC had been diligent in ensuring compliance with IFC Safeguard Policies. CAO noted a number of outstanding issues, amongst which were the lack of conclusive economic analysis of the project, the question of affordability of electricity to poorer sectors and the lack of a comprehensive management plan for the Nile raising long term-management issues. Finally, CAO determined that it failed to see a role for facilitation or mediation at this stage given that IFC had not yet made a final decision concerning its participation. The complaint was closed in January 2005.