understanding land investment deals in africa - Oakland Institute

which the CDC and Finnfund are willing to prioritizethe interests of local populations over their desire tomake profits. The lack of transparency associatedwith these investments also precludes meaningfulgovernmental and civil society oversight, leaving thepeople who were on the receiving end of the company’ssocial and economic abuses with no viable means ofseeking redress. By promoting such large-scale landinvestments before the proper regulatory frameworkis in place, the government of South Sudan and itsinternational partners are exposing South Sudanese tounjustified risk and greatly reducing the benefits thathost populations can expect to receive from their landand natural resources.Al Ain National WildlifeIn July 2008, Al Ain National Wildlife, a United ArabEmirates (UAE) company, entered into a 30-yearagreement with the GoSS Ministry of Wildlife to developand manage a 1.68 million ha tourism project in BomaNational Park, Jonglei State. Although the company’srights are not exclusive, they plan to relocate a largenumber of people—possibly as many as 15,000—fromthe project area. 132 Al Ain began operations in 2009 andby August 2011, the company had constructed its projectfacilities, including guest accommodations, offices anda large airstrip, near a village called Maruwa. Accordingto officials at the RSS Ministry of Wildlife, the companyplans to begin receiving guests in December 2011. Theanalysis of this investment is based on the terms of theinvestment agreement, interviews with officials in theRSS Ministry of Wildlife, and interviews with residentsin affected communities. Despite several attempts, OIwas unable to reach Al Ain’s representatives.Lack of Prior ConsultationBoma is among the least developed places in SouthSudan. The road infrastructure in the area is severelyunderdeveloped, and during the rainy season, travelover land to and from Boma is virtually impossible.Boma is also among the most ethnically diverseregions in South Sudan. The communities residing inthe area include people from the Murle, Jie, Kachipo,and Anyuak ethnic groups. A 2011 report from the UKbasedMinority Rights Group (MRG) emphasizes thelack of political representation for these groups asan underlying cause of underdevelopment in Boma.According to a local resident:“Up to now you can’t even see a road. You can’taccess telephone networks. There are no goodschools, there’s no water. That is because we don’thave a voice in the government… We can’t reallysay what the government is going to do. Even thegovernor of the state does not come here. Wehave no way of taking a message to them. I wouldtell the governor that you must always have equaldistribution of resources in the state.” 133The marginalization of groups residing in Boma is alsoevident in the manner in which they were excludedfrom the negotiation of the investment agreementwith Al Ain. The Al Ain agreement was brokered at thehighest levels of government in South Sudan. Afterthe president’s return from a trip to UAE in which hemet with representatives of Al Ain, the office of thepresident reportedly instructed the Ministry of Wildlifeto sign the investment agreement with the company. 134According to residents in affected communities, thegovernment did not consult with them at any pointduring the negotiations, contrary to the spirit of theinterim constitution of Southern Sudan, which states:“All lands traditionally and historically held or used bylocal communities or their members shall be defined,held, managed, and protected by law in SouthernSudan.”Non-Performance of Social ObligationsAccording to a local government official, sincesigning the agreement, Al Ain has held just onemeeting with local leaders in Boma. In that meeting,company representatives pledged to provide affectedcommunities with a variety of development projects andservices, including: educational and health services,boreholes, housing and road infrastructure, andthree strategically placed airstrips. The company alsopromised to build “model villages” at locations outsideof the project area in order to encourage communitiesto resettle outside of the park. None of these obligationswere formalized in a written agreement with theaffected communities. The investment agreement withThe Oakland Institute understanding land investment deals in africa: south sudan | 33