ICIJ
|
By
Sasha Chavkin
This article was reported by the International Consortium of
Investigative Journalists, a Washington DC-based global network of 185
reporters in 65 countries who collaborate on transnational
investigations.
Internal watchdog finds link between World Bank financing and Ethiopian government's mass resettlement of indigenous group
The
World Bank repeatedly violated its own rules while funding a
development initiative in Ethiopia that has been dogged by complaints
that it sponsored forced evictions of thousands of indigenous people,
according to a
leaked report by a watchdog panel at the bank.
The report, which was obtained by the International Consortium of
Investigative Journalists, examines a health and education initiative
that was buoyed by nearly $2 billion in World Bank funding over the last
decade. Members of the indigenous Anuak people in Ethiopia’s Gambella
province charged that Ethiopian authorities used some of the bank’s
money to support a massive forced relocation program and that soldiers
beat, raped and killed Anuak who refused to abandon their homes. The
bank continued funding the health and education initiative for years
after the allegations emerged.
The report by the World Bank’s
internal Inspection Panel found that there was an “operational link”
between the World Bank-funded program and the Ethiopian government’s
relocation push, which was known as “villagization.” By failing to
acknowledge this link and take action to protect affected communities,
the bank violated its own policies on project appraisal, risk
assessment, financial analysis and protection of indigenous peoples, the
panel’s report
concludes.
“The bank has enabled the forcible transfer of tens of thousands of indigenous people from their ancestral lands,” said
David Pred, director of Inclusive Development International, a nonprofit that filed the complaint on behalf of 26 Anuak refugees.
Anuak
children in Gorom Refugee Camp in South Sudan. Many Anuak fled Ethiopia
during a government relocation campaign called "villagization". Photo
credit: Andreea Campeanu/ICIJ.
The bank declined to answer ICIJ’s questions about the report.
“As
is standard procedure, World Bank staff cannot comment on the results
of the Inspection Panel’s investigation until the Executive Board of the
World Bank Group has had the opportunity to review the Panel’s report
over the coming weeks,” Phil Hay, the bank’s spokesman for Africa, said
in a written response.
In previous responses to the complaint, bank management
said
there was no evidence of widespread abuses or evictions and that the
Anuak “have not been, nor will they be, directly and adversely affected
by a failure of the Bank to implement its policies and procedures.”
Because
the panel’s report has not yet been published, some of the language may
be revised before a final version is released, but its basic
conclusions are not expected to change.
The report stops short of
finding the bank responsible for the most serious abuses. The panel did
not attempt to verify the widely reported allegations of forced
evictions and human rights violations, finding that the question was
beyond the scope of its investigation. The bank did not violate its
policy on forced resettlement, the report
says,
because the relocations were conducted by the Ethiopian government and
were not a “necessary” part of the health and education program.
Since
2006, the World Bank and other foreign donors have bankrolled the
Promoting Basic Services program, which provides grants to local and
regional governments for services such as health, education and clean
water. The PBS program was designed to avoid funneling aid dollars
directly to Ethiopia’s federal government, which had violently cracked
down on its opposition after disputed 2005 elections.
By 2010,
federal and provincial authorities had embarked on an effort to relocate
nearly 2 million poor people in four provinces from isolated rural
homes to village sites selected by the government. In these new
villages, authorities promised to provide the relocated communities with
health care, education and other basic services they had lacked.
The
government relocated 37,883 households in Gambella, roughly 60 percent
of all households in the province, according to Ethiopian government
statistics cited by the Inspection Panel. The Ethiopian government has
said that all resettlements were voluntary.
Many members of the
Anuak, a mostly Christian indigenous group in Gambella, have said they
didn’t want to move. Anuak and their advocates say that they were pushed
off their fertile lands by soldiers and policemen, and that much of the
abandoned land was then leased by the government to investors. The
evictions were “accompanied by widespread human rights violations,
including forced displacement, arbitrary arrest and detention, beatings,
rape, and other sexual violence,” according to a
2012 report by Human Rights Watch.
The
Human Rights Watch report and Anuak refugees’ complaint to the
Inspection Panel contended that the bank’s money was being used by local
and regional authorities to support forced relocations. For example,
they say, money from the PBS initiative was used to pay the salaries of
government officials who helped carry out the evictions.
The bank
continued to fund the PBS program throughout the villagization
campaign. The bank approved new funding for PBS in 2011 and 2012, and
its support for the program continues today. Since the nationwide health
and education initiative launched, Ethiopia has reported strides in
reducing child mortality and increasing primary school enrollment.
The
villagization campaign ended in 2013, and is believed to have resettled
substantially fewer than the nearly 2 million people anticipated by the
government.
The Ethiopia case is one of several recent World
Bank-financed projects that have drawn fire from activist groups for
allegedly funding human rights violations. These projects include a loan
to a palm oil producer
in Honduras
whose security guards have been accused by human rights advocates of
killing dozens of peasants involved in a land rights dispute with the
company, and a conservation program by
the Kenyan government that members of the Sengwer people say was used as tool for pushing them out of their ancestral forests.
In
the Ethiopia case, the Inspection Panel decided that the most severe
allegations of forced evictions and violence were beyond its mandate, in
part because bank rules limited its investigation to only the most
recent funding installment of the PBS program.
During its investigation, the Inspection Panel asked
Eisei Kurimoto,
a professor at Osaka University in Japan and an expert on the Anuak
people, to travel to Gambella and help review the Anuak’s complaint.
Kurimoto told ICIJ that Anuak he spoke with told him Ethiopian authorities used the threat of violence to force them to move.
Ethiopian
officials who carried out the villagization program “always went with
armed policemen and soldiers,” Kurimoto said. “It is very clear that the
regional government thought that people would not move happily or
willingly. So they had to show their power and the possibility of using
force.”
Inclusive Development International’s Pred said it is now
up to World Bank president Jim Yong Kim to decide whether “justice will
be served” for the Anuak. “Justice starts with the acceptance of
responsibility for one’s faults – which the Inspection Panel found in
abundance – and ends with the provision of meaningful redress,” he said.