For years, the East African Crude Oil Pipeline (EACOP) project was marketed as a transformative infrastructure endeavor for Uganda and Tanzania. It promised jobs, revenue, and a new chapter for energy development on the continent. But now, the sheen of progress is being marred by a rising chorus of environmental and human rights concerns — loud enough that some of Total Energies’ investors are pulling the plug on their faith, and their funds.
At the heart of the uproar is a $15 billion pipeline stretching 1,443 kilometers from Uganda’s oilfields in Hoima to the Tanzanian port of Tanga. Total Energies, one of the world’s largest energy companies, holds the lion’s share in the EACOP consortium. But recent developments have turned this oil dream into a public relations nightmare.
On May 22, 2025, Germany’s Union Investment, a major European asset manager, made headlines by dropping TotalEnergies from its sustainability funds. The reason? Allegations of human rights violations tied to the construction and planning of the pipeline. Union Investment also demanded an independent audit into the social and environmental impacts of EACOP, citing a lack of transparency and accountability by the French energy giant.
Their decision was not made in a vacuum. For years, civil society organizations and environmental watchdogs — including Friends of the Earth and 350.org — have criticized EACOP’s potential to displace communities, pollute sensitive ecosystems, and lock African economies into fossil fuel dependency. Recent reports claim that up to 100,000 people have been affected by land acquisitions tied to the project, many allegedly forced off their land with inadequate compensation or none at all.
Activists point to evidence of violence and intimidation against those resisting displacement. One woman from a village in Uganda’s Albertine region told a local journalist she was threatened for refusing to sign over her land. “They came with local officials and said I must agree, or the government would take it anyway,” she said. Similar testimonies are piling up.
Meanwhile, TotalEnergies has defended its involvement, stating that the company is committed to responsible development. In press releases, the firm emphasizes its compliance with environmental and human rights standards, highlighting community development projects and environmental safeguards. “We are confident that EACOP will contribute to the sustainable development of the region,” a spokesperson said.
But sustainability is not just a matter of paperwork and public relations. As global attention turns increasingly toward climate commitments and ESG (environmental, social, and governance) investing, firms like TotalEnergies are finding themselves under scrutiny not only from environmentalists but also from shareholders with ethical mandates.
Union Investment’s decision may not hit TotalEnergies’ bottom line immediately, but it sends a potent signal. When capital starts fleeing a project tagged as “dirty” or “abusive,” it can trigger a chain reaction. Other European institutional investors are reportedly reassessing their positions. The reputational cost could rise even faster than the price of oil.
Moreover, the backlash comes at a sensitive time. COP29 is just months away, and pressure is mounting on both developed and developing nations to decarbonize. In this context, a massive oil pipeline — no matter how technically advanced — looks increasingly anachronistic. Critics argue that Africa’s energy future should lie in renewables, not in projects that risk turning the continent into a sacrifice zone for fossil fuel interests.
Uganda and Tanzania, however, are banking on EACOP as a catalyst for economic growth. Government officials argue that their countries have the right to exploit natural resources, just as industrialized nations have for decades. Ugandan President Yoweri Museveni has brushed off criticism as neocolonial and hypocritical, saying Western countries cannot deny Africa the development tools they themselves used.
It’s a complicated tug-of-war between development and environmental justice. But what’s becoming clearer is that the EACOP project sits at the fault line of competing visions for Africa’s future. One sees fossil fuels as a bridge to prosperity; the other sees them as shackles to a warming planet.
As TotalEnergies tries to keep its pipeline plans afloat, it now has to do more than drill through rock — it must drill through mounting global skepticism. Investors like Union Investment are making it clear: the age of accountability has arrived, and oil giants ignoring the writing on the wall may soon find themselves in freefall.
