THE REQUEST
The Request for Inspection was submitted on June 30, 2022, by two community members living in the Project area in Cameroon. On July 18, 2022, an additional 99 Requesters from communities and socio-professional organizations in the Project area authorized IFI Synergy—a coalition of local civil society organizations (CSOs), including Green Development Advocates (GDA), which serves as their secretariat—to represent them. The Requesters asked the Panel to keep their identities confidential. Both ENDS, a Dutch non-governmental organization (NGO), supported the Request.
The Requesters alleged they had suffered or were likely to suffer harm from two projects supported by the World Bank—the Nachtigal Hydropower Project (NHP) and the Hydropower Development on the Sanaga River Technical Assistance Project. They claimed that these Projects did not comply with World Bank policies and procedures and had caused or may cause harm to their communities’ means of subsistence, education, health, and nutrition. The Requesters alleged a lack of meaningful consultation; inadequate resettlement measures relating to both physical and economic displacement; loss of income-generating activities for fisherfolk, sand miners, and fishmongers; untimely and inadequate compensation for land and crops; reduced accessibility to agricultural land; inadequate housing; destruction of sacred sites; loss of medicinal plants and water resources used for healing and rituals; and environmental damage. They also complained that Project activities were increasing social harms in their community, including theft, juvenile delinquency, commercial sex work, marital conflicts, and divorces.
MANAGEMENT RESPONSE
In its Response, Management explained that it had known of the Requesters’ allegations and that the project implementing agency, the Nachtigal Hydropower Company (NHPC), was addressing them. Management noted that the risks and impacts described in the Request were not uncommon for a project of this scale, that it had anticipated them, and had prepared several environmental assessment instruments to address them. To address additional environmental and social issues that were identified during supervision, NHPC had committed to a binding Supplementary Corrective Action Plan with time-bound actions. The Project used an adaptive management approach based on comprehensive monitoring and corrective actions. Management acknowledged that mitigation and compensation measures had experienced some delays, but claimed that these measures were being implemented with comprehensive stakeholder input and supervision by the Project’s financing agencies. Management noted that Project progress had been affected by the need for additional consultations, the longer than anticipated development of Individual Livelihood Restoration Plans (ILRPs), and work delays due to COVID-19-imposed restrictions and a shortage of high-quality cement. Management also noted that the Sanaga River Technical Assistance Project included no physical investments other than some meteorological equipment, and was only financing studies and panels of experts.
PANEL RECOMMENDATION/BOARD APPROVAL/REFERRAL TO DISPUTE RESOLUTION
A Panel team visited Cameroon from August 26–September 7, 2022, to inform its eligibility assessment. In its September 27, 2022 eligibility report for the Board, the Panel noted the strong support for the Project by all stakeholders—including the Requesters—and their unanimous view of the Project’s benefits for the community at large. The Panel recognized the steps that Management was taking to address some of the alleged harm, and that the Lenders , had hired an Independent Environmental and Social Consultant to advise NHPC on actions to implement. The Panel noted that the Lenders had asked a separate consultancy tasked with undertaking the annual evaluation of the RAP and Livelihood Restoration Plan to increase their sample to include all categories of project-affected persons (PAPs). The Panel understood that several fisheries studies and a strategic environmental and social assessment for the Sanaga River basin were underway to understand basin-wide, cumulative impact.
The Panel noted that despite the extensive measures undertaken by the Project, allegations of harm relating to loss of livelihood activities, compensation, and livelihood restoration were consistently raised by significant numbers of fisherfolk and sand miners in several villages. The Panel noted the widespread concerns of downstream sand miners and fishermen who claimed to have lost their livelihoods due to the diminishing resources in the river. The Panel also noted the policy requirement to compensate PAPs prior to the onset of a Project’s impact, but could not determine whether the compensation provided had, in fact, been timely. While the Panel understood that the Project viewed the compensation package as including both transitional support and capital for livelihood investment, it was unclear to the Panel and the PAPs what portion of that compensation was intended to support households transitioning to new activities and what portion served as investment capital for new, income-generating activities. The Panel noted that almost everyone it encountered who had implemented ILRPs claimed their projects had failed. The Panel also noted that several PAPs claimed that they had no, or limited, contact with the NGO engaged to help develop and implement the ILRPs. The Panel was not assured whether the NGO had sufficient capacity to provide the required level of technical support to all those needing it. Many fisherfolk and sand miners contended that the measures put in place by the Project were inadequate to achieve livelihood restoration. Based on its observations and review, the Panel recommended an investigation into the alleged harm and related non-compliance with World Bank operational policies and performance standards, as per Performance Standards for Private Sector Activities (OP/BP 4.03). The Board approved the Panel’s Recommendation on October 19, 2022.
As per the Inspection Panel and Accountability Mechanism Resolutions, following the Panel’s Recommendation, on October 26, 2021, the AM Secretary offered the option of dispute resolution to the Requesters and Borrower (“the Parties”). In accordance with AM procedures, the parties were given 30 days to decide whether to opt for dispute resolution. The parties accepted the offer, and this was reported to the Board, Panel, and Management on December 1, 2022, marking the start of the dispute resolution process. The dispute resolution process is ongoing. On November 30, 2023, the AM Secretary informed that the dispute resolution process is extended for an additional period of up to six months, with a final deadline on May 31st, 2024. Learn more about the DR Process here.
More about the case can be found on the Panel’s website here.