Empire Voice

Dar refusal leaves the EAC without a framework to address long-standing conflicts over use of cross-border resources such as Lake Victoria’s Migingo Island and the Mara-Serengeti tourism haven, among others.

In a letter to the EAC Secretariat, dated September 4, Tanzania said the protocol — which has already been ratified by Kenya and Uganda — contradicted the one on a Common Market as it seeks to regulate trading in minerals.

“The Protocol contradicts the protocol on establishment of the EAC Common Market. In particular access to and use of land and premises should be governed by national policies and laws,” Tanzania stated in the letter to EAC Secretary General Dr Richard Sezibera.

Tanzania also said the protocol-included provisions on marketing and trading in minerals while it should have restricted itself to protection of the environment in mining activities. 

It also wants tourism removed from the protocol, saying this would be better articulated under another accord the partner states are negotiating on tourism and wildlife management.

“The protocol includes development and transmission of electric power, development of integration policy on rural electrification and inter-connection of partner states electric grids, which is beyond environment and natural resources management,” stated the letter presented during last week’s Council of Ministers meeting in Arusha.

The meeting, chaired by Kenya’s Cabinet Secretary for EAC Affairs Phyllis Kandie, resolved that the council would revisit its previous decision on the matter in order to address Tanzania’s concerns. The council directed the Secretariat to study the issues raised and submit proposals at the next meeting.

During its meeting in May, the council had ordered Tanzania to ratify the protocol, signed in 2005, by the end of this year. The protocol was negotiated before Burundi and Rwanda joined the community.

Tanzania’s position has left the EAC in a quandary since there are no clear procedures for addressing reservations on protocols that some partner states have ratified but are yet to come into force.

“In my view, the best way is to redraft the protocol and confine it to trans-boundary aspects of the environment in particular the shared water body and ecosystems while leaving state members to take care of other matters. This is in line with the principle of permanent sovereignty over natural resources,” Environmental and Natural Resource laws lecturer at Tumaini-Makumira University Elifuraha Laltaika explained.

He added that the protocol was a bit stretched, given the level of integration where land issues are highly contentious.

Although council decisions are binding on partner states, revisiting the previous decision was meant to enable partner states to renegotiate the contentious provisions. Kenya and Uganda were asked to submit any issues they may have with the protocol to the Secretariat.

“The Council directed the Secretariat to convene a meeting of the Sectoral Council on Environment and Natural Resources to study the issues raised by Tanzania and other partner states and submit proposals to the 30th meeting of the council for consideration,” a communiqué from the Secretariat said. The meeting is scheduled for November.

The other option would have been for Tanzania to ratify the protocol and seek amendments later, a course flatly dismissed by Tanzania’s EAC Affairs Deputy Minister Dr Abdallah Saadala. 

“The parallel is telling someone to go to hell first and then be shifted to heaven,” Dr Saadala explained.

The protocol would provide directions on how to administer trans-boundary environment and natural resources for mutual benefits and address conflicts arising from their use.

Previously, some countries in the region have quarrelled over shared resources.

For example, Tanzania and Malawi have been involved in border dispute in Lake Malawi that started in 2012.

Again, since 2008, Kenya and Uganda have been involved in ownership dispute over Migingo Island on Lake Victoria.

Recently, on August 28, Somalia filed a case against Kenya at the International Court of Justice for violation of its territorial waters by entering into agreement with foreign oil companies to explore oil and gas in the Somalia waters in the Indian Ocean.