1. Allegations relating to EACOP’s exclusion of Kitwai B Despite Prior Recognition Kitwai B Village in Simanjiro District, Manyara Region, is one of the villages traversed by the EACOP Pipeline (Project) in Tanzania and is among the 30 villages where the pipeline passes through Vulnerable Ethnic Groups self-identifying as Indigenous Peoples. Kitwai B Village continues to be formally recognized as a Project-affected village and receives the same level of engagement, consultation, and treatment accorded to all other Project-affected villages along the pipeline corridor. The assets impacted by the EACOP Project within Kitwai B Village were duly identified and valued, and compensation was paid in 2022 to 18 individual households that were verified as the rightful owners of the affected assets. This process was undertaken in accordance with applicable national laws, relevant international standards (International Finance Corporation Performance Standard 5), the approved Resettlement Action Plan (2019 – approved by Tanzania Petroleum Development Corporation (TPDC)), and the established land acquisition procedures. Kitwai B Village, as an institution, was not eligible for compensation, as no assets were identified or verified as being owned by the village authority within the Project-affected area. Additionally, it should be noted that a village being traversed by the Project does not in itself grant eligibility for compensation, which is payable only to affected individuals or institutions whose assets are directly impacted by the Project. Compensation for assets does not include land, as all land is considered public land under Tanzanian law. Furthermore, it should be noted that, in accordance with the national legal framework, individuals are legally entitled to own assets in any part of the country, irrespective of their place of residence. Consequently, where such assets are affected by land acquisition, the lawful owner shall be entitled to compensation, regardless of their place of residence.

Regarding the grievance: On 25 June 2024, EACOP Project received a grievance from the Kitwai B Village Chairperson asserting village was located on land affected by the Project and alleging that the individual households who had been compensated were not the rightful owners. The grievance was reviewed and investigated in accordance with the EACOP grievance management procedure.

During the investigation, all relevant documentation consistently confirmed that compensation had been paid to the rightful owners of the assets impacted by the EACOP Project. The compensated households were found to hold legitimate rights over their assets, and the process was conducted in full accordance with applicable standards. The Village leadership of Kitwai B was invited to substantiate their claim of communal ownership over the impacted assets but was unable to provide supporting documentation or credible evidence to that effect. Upon completion of the review, the findings were formally communicated to the claimant. The claimant accepted the outcome, participated fully throughout the grievance investigation and the closure process, and the grievance was formally closed on 26 November 2025.

1. Allegations relating to Grave injustice in Tanga, Cultural Harm, and Inadequate Compensation

A formal Grave Removal Procedure was established to ensure that all affected grave owners and their families were fully consulted and actively involved throughout the relocation process. Compensation and full logistical support were provided to enable families to undertake culturally appropriate rituals, with all costs covered by the EACOP Project in 2022. The grave removal exercise was conducted in 2023. The approach was guided by national laws, relevant international standards, including IFC Performance Standard 8, and an ethnographic study on Vulnerable Ethnic Communities Self-Identifying as Indigenous Peoples. Additionally, the EACOP Project applied a discretionary approach to identify notable graves requiring enhanced attention and support, in recognition of specific cultural sensitivities and family preferences during the relocation process. With respect to the grave owner mentioned by PINGO, the family was consulted and provided consent for the grave relocation without objection. The family also identified the location for the reburial. During engagement, it was further noted that the compensation previously received for grave relocation had been distributed among family members rather than used for the performance of rituals…

A full statement from EACOP is attached above