African Network For Animal Welfare v A.G. of Tanzania (Reference 9 of 2010)
Observed later treatment
No later-treatment classification is recorded for this judgment.
Citator coverage is limited to judgments in the Wakilii corpus and source-matched treatment records. Absence of a signal is not an assertion that the case remains good law.
AI-generated summary. This summary was generated by AI from the full text of the judgment. It may contain errors or omissions—always read the source judgment before relying on it.
Holding
The Court held that Tanzania's initial proposal to construct a bitumen standard road across Serengeti National Park violated Articles 5(3)(c), 8(1)(c), 111(2) and 114(1) of the EAC Treaty, which require Partner States to promote sustainable utilization of natural resources and protect the environment. The Court granted a permanent injunction restraining Tanzania from constructing or maintaining a bitumen standard road across the Park, finding that such construction would cause irreversible damage to the Serengeti ecosystem. The Court dismissed preliminary objections that the Treaty provisions were unratified or that the Applicant lacked standing, holding that Tanzania had ratified the entire Treaty and that non-conclusion of a protocol does not oust Treaty obligations.
Outcome
Permanent injunction granted restraining Tanzania from constructing bitumen standard road across Serengeti National Park; declaration issued that proposed action violates EAC Treaty
Facts
The Applicant, a Pan-African animal welfare NGO, challenged Tanzania's proposal to upgrade the Natta-Mugumu-Tabora B-Kleins Gate-Loliondo Road, 53 km of which would traverse Serengeti National Park. The Government initially proposed upgrading the entire 179 km road to bitumen standard to serve 2.3 million people in Serengeti and Ngorongoro districts. An existing earth road of 53 km within the Park was used mainly by tourists and park administrators with special authorization. Environmental impact assessments identified numerous negative impacts including disruption of animal migration, habitat fragmentation, increased poaching, wildlife mortality from road kill, and deterioration of air and water quality. UNESCO expressed utmost concern that the proposed alignment could result in irreversible damage to the Serengeti's outstanding universal value as a World Heritage site. Following these concerns, Tanzania suspended the project and retreated to conduct further studies, but had not formally abandoned the bitumen standard proposal.
Issues
- Whether the Respondent intends to upgrade, tarmac, pave, realign, construct, create and/or commission a trunk road across the Serengeti National Park.
- Whether the disputed road exists and is in use.
- Whether the proposed action infringes the provisions of the EAC Treaty and international instruments.
- Whether the Applicant is entitled to the prayers sought.
- Whether the Reference is bad and untenable in law as it seeks to enforce a part of the Treaty which is yet to be ratified by all Partner States.
- Whether the Applicant has locus standi to institute the Reference for alleged violations of International Conventions and Declarations on Environment and Natural Resources.
- Whether the Reference is placed before the wrong forum.
Orders
- A declaration is issued that the initial proposal or proposed action by the Respondent to construct a road of bitumen standard across the Serengeti National Park is unlawful and infringes Articles 5(3)(c), 8(1)(c), 111(2) and 114(1) of the Treaty.
- A permanent injunction is issued restraining the Respondent from operationalising its initial proposal or proposed action of constructing or maintaining a road of bitumen standard across the Serengeti National Park subject to its right to undertake such other programmes or initiate policies in the future which would not have a negative impact on the environment and ecosystem in the Serengeti National Park.
- Each party shall bear its own costs.
Rules and key headnotes
Legislation cited (17)
- Treaty for the Establishment of the East African Community Article 1
- Treaty for the Establishment of the East African Community Article 3
- Treaty for the Establishment of the East African Community Article 5(3)(c)
- Treaty for the Establishment of the East African Community Article 8(1)(c)
- Treaty for the Establishment of the East African Community Article 27
- Treaty for the Establishment of the East African Community Article 30
- Treaty for the Establishment of the East African Community Article 30(1)
- Treaty for the Establishment of the East African Community Article 111(2)
- Treaty for the Establishment of the East African Community Article 114(1)
- Treaty for the Establishment of the East African Community Article 126
- Treaty for the Establishment of the East African Community Article 130
- Treaty for the Establishment of the East African Community Article 151
- Treaty for the Establishment of the East African Community Article 152
- Treaty for the Establishment of the East African Community Article 153(1)
- Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties Article 11
- East African Court of Justice Rules of Procedure Rule 41
- East African Court of Justice Rules of Procedure Rule 68(5)
Cases cited (4)
- Mukisa Biscuit Co Ltd v West End Distributors Ltd [1969] EALR 696
- Pimentel v Executive Secretary G.R. No. 158088 (2005)
- Democratic Party v Secretary General, East African Community and 4 Others (EACJ Reference No. 2 of 2012)
- Society for the Protection of Silent Valley v Union of India (1980) Kerala HC
Full judgment
The original judgment as reported. Read the original PDF before relying on any passage.