Regional Mombasa Port Access Road

Complaint

Between June 2017 and October 2019, the EIB-CM received emails from more than 200 individuals complaining about the implementation of the Resettlement Action Plan (RAP) for the Regional Mombasa Port Access Road project in Kenya.

The project concerns the rehabilitation of a 41.64 km-long road section, 40.31 km of which is included in the project. The project is divided into two lots:  Lot 1, financed by African Development Bank (AfDB) and the Government of Kenya and governed by the AfDB’s social safeguard policies – which was under implementation at the time of the complaint; and Lot 2, co-financed by KfW and the EIB – construction had not yet commenced at the time– and governed by the EIB Social and Environmental Standards. Mirroring the fact that both Lot 1 and 2 fall under a single project definition, the lenders agreed with the promoter to issue a single RAP. The implementation must follow the respective lenders’ standards in each lot, to encourage equivalent resettlement impact management measures across the two lots.

 

EIB-CM work performed

The EIB-CM grouped the different allegations into the following categories: failure to compensate Project-Affected Persons (PAPs) promptly for affected assets; inability to detail compensation awards reflecting the full replacement cost; failure to cover all PAPs in the project corridor and avoid forced eviction; failure to conduct a transparent and inclusive stakeholder engagement process throughout all phases of the project and provide a functioning grievance mechanism. The EIB-CM performed a review of the project compliance with the EIB E&S Standards and of the possible role of the Bank.

 

Conclusion and outcome

Based on the EIB-CM inquiry, it could be concluded that all parties agreed that there are shortcomings in the implementation of the resettlement process. The EIB-CM noted that the promoter, supported by the EIB operational services and the other lenders, was putting in place considerable efforts to address these challenges. In order to ensure the compliance of Lot 2 with EIB standards, the EIB-CM, the EIB operational services, the promoter and the Kenya National Land Commission agreed on an action plan including monitoring for Lot 1 and concrete steps to be taken for Lot 2. It was agreed that the EIB services would continue to cooperate with the other lenders and the promoter to address the current issues in Lot 1 and to avoid the likelihood of repetition when construction works would start in Lot 2. It was concluded that the EIB-CM would monitor the implementation of the action plan together with the EIB operational services until all pending issues for Lot 2 have been resolved.

Monitoring

Construction for lot 2 has started in the meanwhile, and based on a review of the monitoring by EIB in 2023 and 2024, the EIB-CM finds that out of the 7 actions contained in the Conclusions report’s action plan, all except action 1 (transparency on valuation methodology) & action 3 (transparency on breakdown of assets and compensations) are being monitored by the EIB operational services. Based on the findings from their regular field visits and monitoring of lot 2 implementation, they issued a number of recommendations and requested the Promoter, the Ministry of Roads and Transport and the National Treasury to endorse them.

 

These recommendations aim at minimizing E&S non-compliance risks related to the following areas: 

·         Regular RAP implementation planning, budget forecasting and reporting to the EIB; 

·         Budget to pay for the upcoming compensations of PAPs; 

·         Timely and standardized approach for the compensations of PAPs that experience payment delays due to withholding/technical issues (e.g. due to personal situation, personal documentation, etc.); 

·         Livelihood restoration of all PAPs eligible under the RAP including those that may not be captured in the National Land Commission updated census;

·         Promoter, contractor staff and grievance committees capacity and trainings; and 

·         Adequate stakeholder engagement and transparency about the livelihood restoration approach. 

 

Despite the EIB’s best efforts and recommendations in the above listed areas, most challenges identified in the EIB-CM conclusions report remain. Therefore, given ongoing risks of E&S non-compliance and the lack of monitoring by the EIB of two actions included the EIB-CM conclusions report’s action plan, the EIB-CM is continuing the follow up on this case.