THE CHAD-CAMEROON PIPELINE PROJECT

SUMMARY OF CONCERNS

Background: The World Bank is considering whether to finance the Chad/Cameroon Oil and Pipeline Project. The project will involve the drilling of 300 oil wells in Chad, extraction of 225,000 barrels of oil per day (peak production), and the construction of a 650-mile long pipeline through Chad and Cameroon. The pipeline route cuts through farmland and natural forests (including the  territory of indigenous peoples in southern Cameroon), en route to an offshore terminal in the Atlantic Ocean, where the oil will be loaded onto tankers for consumption in Europe and North America. The intended recipients of World Bank support are the government of Chad, the government of Cameroon, and a multinational consortium of oil companies.  The consortium consists of the American companies ExxonMobil and Chevron, and the Malaysian company Petronas. The consortium has negotiated agreements which place the project beyond the reach of national laws in both countries, and which insulate the oil companies from liability in the event of disaster. ExxonMobil has publicly stated that it will not move forward with this project without the involvement of the World Bank group.

The players:

• Chad is currently experiencing extreme political instability, with an armed rebellion in the northern part of the country and ongoing insecurity in the south. The Chadian government has begun to crack down on human rights monitors and journalists.
• The government of Cameroon has been listed by Transparency International as the most corrupt government in the world for the second straight year. In particular, observers have noted that revenues from the oil development in Cameroon are largely unaccounted for.
• ExxonMobil is the world’s largest multinational oil company, and one of the largest economic powers in the world. Its commitment to environmental protection and respect for human rights is questionable.
• Chevron, another US oil company, is currently being sued in US federal court for violations of international human rights law relating to its involvement in the deaths of unarmed civilians in Nigeria who were protesting environmental damage caused by Chevron's subsidiary, CNL. Chevron provided the Nigerian military with equipment and requested the military to help quell civilian protests, resulting in the shooting of non-violent protesters and unarmed villagers in 1998 and 1999. 
• Finally, representatives of civil society organizations in Chad and Cameroon have been trying to play a constructive role in the debate about this project, but have been frustrated by a lack of responsiveness by the governments, the companies, and the Bank. The governments of Chad and Cameroon have responded to civil society concerns with intolerance and intimidation.

The Political Climate: Repression of civil society, intolerance of opposition.

• According to the 1999 State Department Human Rights report for Chad: "State security forces continue to commit extra-judicial killings, and they torture, beat, abuse and rape persons."
  "The government at times restricted freedom of speech and of the press…and interfered with the operation of human rights groups."
  "The Constitution mandates an independent judiciary; however, the judiciary was ineffective, underfunded, overburdened, and subject to executive interference. In practice, officials and other influential persons often enjoyed immunity from judicial sanction."
• The 1999 State Department country report for Cameroon notes that the government’s human rights record "continued to be generally poor."
  "Widespread corruption in government and business also impedes growth."
  "Security forces conducted illegal searches and harassed citizens. The judiciary remained corrupt, inefficient, and subject to political influence."
  "Government security forces limited freedom of movement and at times impeded the activities of nongovernmental organizations (NGOs). Violence and discrimination against women remain serious problems….discrimination against indigenous Pygmies continued."
• A Chadian community-based organization, EPOZOP, that was working with farmers in the project area who have concerns about inadequate compensation, was shut down by the Chadian government in late 1999.
• Massacres of hundreds of unarmed civilians that took place in the oil-bearing region of Chad in November 1997 and March 1998 have never been investigated, and the perpetrators of the killings have not been brought to justice.
• Cameroon issued a new law in December 1999 that gives the government greater control of the activities of NGOs, including the power to shut them down if they are critical of the government, thereby limiting freedom of association. This law was apparently passed as a condition of World Bank structural adjustment lending.

  The controversy: This project has been highly controversial for the past several years, as critics both outside and inside the Bank have raised concerns about the anticipated environmental and social impacts. In response to these criticisms, some changes have been made to the project design, but significant problems remain. Grassroots organizations in Chad and Cameroon are calling on the Bank to focus on good governance, rule of law and citizen participation in decision-making, all of which are necessary requisites of sustainable development. They are calling for a moratorium on moving forward with the oil and pipeline project until these baseline conditions have been satisfied. Some organizations have also challenged the development paradigm that blindly proclaims that poverty reduction can come from promoting fossil fuel development with corrupt, militant governments and multinational oil companies, and predict that this project will result in profits for the elite at the expense of local peoples and their environment. Other organizations question the environmental and human rights track record of the multinational oil companies involved, and are calling for the Bank to examine more critically its relationship with these companies, bearing in mind the disastrous history of oil development in the Niger Delta. 

  The risk of failure: The Chad/Cameroon Oil and Pipeline Project is one of the riskiest projects ever considered by the Bank. If the Bank approves this project under the conditions as they currently exist, it will be promoting an assault on human rights and the environment. The project as currently designed has little chance of delivering the claimed development benefits while carrying major risks of irreparable environmental damage, social disruption, and corruption.

  What local people want: Non-governmental organizations have consistently raised concerns about this project, and feel that these concerns have not been adequately or meaningfully addressed by the World Bank Group. The concerns include technical problems relating to social and environmental impacts, as well as governance concerns that go to the viability of this project and its ability to meet the goal of poverty reduction. Civil society organizations in Chad and Cameroon have called for a two-year moratorium on the pipeline project. They are not asking the World Bank to withdraw from their countries, but rather that the Bank work with them to ensure that the governance issues and legal issues that are critical to the development objectives of the project are in place before the project is approved. The moratorium would allow time to finalize studies, review laws, and draft and implement new laws to reinforce the legal framework that currently regulates the activities of the oil companies in Chad. The moratorium will also allow time for true public consultation and a discussion of the benefits and costs associated with the project.

  In a document called the Bebedjia Declaration, drafted in May 1999, civil society organizations from Chad developed a list of conditions for the governments, the World Bank and the consortium to consider before approving the project. These conditions included: fair compensation for the affected population and respect for their rights; the completion of complementary studies; the reinforcement of the judicial system; a new set of public consultations on the Regional Development plan; the availability of project information in local languages; the completion of baseline environmental studies and a comprehensive assessment of the project's social and environmental impacts; a restructuring of the revenue management plan; involvement of grassroots and civil society in monitoring project design and implementation; the inclusion of a Capacity Building Plan to address civil society and villagers' organizations needs. These and other conditions should be met before the World Bank approves the project. The Bebedjia Declaration has also been endorsed by civil society organizations in Cameroon.

  In recent meetings between representatives of civil society and Bank officials, Chadian NGOs have called for the Board of Executive Directors to employ an independent evaluation and monitoring panel to review the project and assess the situation and report back to the Board, before project approval. This will allow the Board to make an informed decision about whether or not to support this project.
  
  The Bank's response: Some members of the Board of Executive Directors have taken seriously the concerns voiced by Chadian and Cameroonian representatives who have made the effort to travel to Washington. Non-governmental organizations, domestic and international, have made a concerted effort to raise fundamental issues, and that effort has resulted in changing certain aspects of the project, such as the route of the pipeline. Unfortunately, though, Bank
  staff has not been adequately responsive to the concerns of civil society. Project supporters on the Bank staff argue that they have responded sufficiently to outside concerns and that they have reshaped the project. They believe that their work is substantially finished and intend to move the project forward quickly. They have been waiting for the consortium of oil companies to sign a contract; this contract was signed in early April, and it seems likely that Bank staff will now push the project forward in search of approval by the Board of Executive Directors.

  Why is there pressure for this project to move forward? Because ExxonMobil has enormous economic clout and is interested in exploiting the oil fields in southern Chad despite the risks.  Because Bank staff are unwilling to acknowledge that there is significant, unmitigated, risk. And, finally, because Bank staff have not accorded proper respect to the voices and concerns of local affected communities.

  How can we avoid this trajectory towards disaster? It is up to civil society to make their voices heard. Concerned citizens of all countries must contact decision-makers in their finance ministry/treasury department, Congress/Parliament, and at the World Bank. Raise questions about the partners in this venture and their commitment to sustainable development and poverty alleviation. Question the wisdom of moving forward with so many risks to the environment and local people. Demand that the World Bank listen to and heed the voices of civil society organizations in Chad and Cameroon. They are saying something quite simple: Slow down. Don't rush to approval. Focus on the requisites of sustainable development: good governance, the rule of law, environmental protection and legislation, respect for human rights, citizen-based accountability for the management of revenue, and citizen participation in development decision-making.

  For further information, contact:

  Delphine Djiraibe, President, Chadian Association for the Promotion and Defense of Human Rights, and Coordinator of the Chadian Civil Society Advocacy Network.  Delphine can be reached at atpdh@intnet.td.

  Dana Clark, Senior Attorney, Center for International Environmental Law

  Korinna Horta, Environmental Defense. Phone 202.387.3500; fax 202.234.6049; email khorta@environmentaldefense.org, web www.environmentaldefense.org