Category: Institutions Financières Internationales

WE, the Governors, representing Member Countries of the African Development Bank and State Participants of the African Development Fund (the “Bank Group”), convened virtually for the 2020 Annual Meetings from 26th to 27th August 2020 chaired by Her Excellency Mme NIALÉ KABA, Minister of Planning and Development for Côte d’Ivoire and Chairperson of the Boards of Governors: 

1.    Take note of the enormous challenges posed by the COVID-19 pandemic, including severe disruptions to the development trajectories of our Regional Member Countries (RMCs). In this connection, we commend the Bank Group for the adoption of the COVID-19 Rapid Response Facility (CRF) to provide a flexible range of exceptional support to lessen the severe economic and social impact of the pandemic on our RMCs. We call for the effective implementation of the CRF in accordance with the Bank’s financial sustainability framework, to achieve its laudable objectives and the adaptation of the Bank Group’s interventions to address the medium to long-term challenges occasioned by the persistence of the pandemic. We also commend the Boards of Directors, Senior Management and Staff for the temporary measures adopted towards ensuring the continuity of Bank Group operations despite the disruptions;

2.    Welcome the Bank Group’s sustained attention to ensure the continued financial strength of the institution by updating its financial sustainability framework, and encourage further steps to establish buffers, manage lending levels, and adopt automatic actions to protect capital adequacy thresholds and ratios during the pandemic;

3.    Given the highly uncertain outlook related to the pandemic, we call on the Bank Group to continue implementing its programmes with particular attention to addressing the financial and operational risks that may arise, in order to safeguard its ability to deliver on its development mandate in the most effective manner;

4.    Note the statements made at the Governors’ Dialogue, in reference to the far-reaching reform programme undertaken by the Bank Group within the framework of the Seventh General Capital Increase (GCI-VII) and the Fifteenth Replenishment of the African Development Fund (ADF-15). While we commend the steps taken to date to implement the reform programme, we urge the Bank Group to redouble efforts to fully and timely deliver on the various commitments, with a view to sharpening its strategic focus, enhancing its efficiency and effectiveness while ensuring financial sustainability, strengthening its capacity to deliver results and at scale, and positioning it to achieve impact as a trusted development partner on the continent. We exhort the Boards of Directors, President, Senior Management and Staff to work constructively and proactively on the implementation of this programme;

5.    Acknowledge the continued relevance of the High 5 priority areas with an emphasis on selectivity to help bridge the infrastructure finance gap in areas where the Bank Group has comparative advantages such as transport, telecommunications, agriculture, energy and digital economy. We recognise the critical role of quality healthcare infrastructure for the African continent. In this regard, the Bank should further articulate how to develop its role in this area, taking into account other development partners’ areas of expertise and its internal capacity;

6.    Call on the Bank Group to strengthen its internal governance, compliance, control and accountability functions to align with best practices of peer institutions. In this connection and in a spirit of unity and collaboration, we authorize the establishment of an ad-hoc Committee of the Board of Governors to oversee a review of the Bank’s ethics and complaints handling governing framework. This review will consider and update the Whistle Blowing and Complaints Handling Policy, the Code of Conduct for Elected Officers, the Terms of Reference for the Ethics Committee, and any other relevant rules to strengthen governance of the Bank Group, ensure the highest levels of accountability, credibility, integrity and promote transparency and independence. We agreed to reconvene on this matter during the next Annual Meetings to assess the findings and recommendations of the review;

7.    Encourage the Bank Group to reinforce its focus on its areas of comparative advantage relative to other multilateral development banks, within the global development landscape while exploring areas of synergies and coordinate in other areas with other development partners for accelerating the implementation of its High 5 priorities and the Sustainable Development Goals in Africa as well as the objectives of the African Union Agenda 2063. To this end, we urge the Bank Group to deepen its collaboration with the African Union and the Regional Economic Communities (RECs) to fast-track Africa’s integration and economic and social transformation particularly in view of the implementation of the African Continental Free Trade Area, which has the potential to increase growth, enhance competitiveness, improve the business climate, as well as ensure greater investment and development of regional and continental global value chains;

8.    Encourage the Bank Group to step up its support to RMCs to enhance capacity in quality infrastructure development, domestic resource mobilization, quality job creation, support for women and youth empowerment, public financial management, debt management and transparency, private sector development, combating corruption, stemming the tide of illicit finance, addressing the challenges associated with climate change, the adoption of approaches that ensure energy security, expand access to affordable and reliable energy services and stimulate low-carbon development in line with national climate-related action plans, such as, Nationally Determined Contributions (NDCs), and a sustained focus on aligning its investments with the principles set out in international climate agreements, including principally the Paris Agreement, based on the joint MDB framework adopted at COP24 and the continued use of renewable energy towards achieving inclusive economic growth;

9.    Encourage sustained investments in the private sector in RMCs. In this regard, we call on the Bank Group to increase the focus of its support to sectorial policy and regulatory reforms with the aim of fostering a business-friendly environment; and leveraging significant new investment commitments for projects in Africa, including through the Africa Investment Forum;

10.    Call on the Bank Group to strengthen its effectiveness to respond to the unique needs of RMCs that may be in fragile and conflict situations as well as small, middle income and island states, including advocating for and incentivizing prudent macroeconomic policy frameworks, and providing sound advice on debt sustainability in coordination with the IMF and World Bank. We also encourage the Bank Group to identify ways to support the G20 initiative on the suspension of debt servicing obligations for low income countries and to deploy more human resources to States in fragile situations; 

11.    Call for increased capacity and resources to strengthen implementation of the Bank Group’s social and environmental safeguards, for updating the Integrated Safeguards System, and for continued improvements in the accountability mechanism so that aggrieved parties have a voice and can seek redress;

12.    Encourage a stronger commitment to gender equality in Bank Group operations in order to enhance human progress and structural transformation in RMCs. In this regard, we commend the Bank Group for the partnerships it is forging to increase women’s economic empowerment and access to finance, including through the Affirmative Finance Facility for Women in Africa (AFAWA) to be implemented in the next few months;

13.    Call on the Bank Group to increase efforts towards facilitating more and better opportunities for the youth to help stem migration from the continent. Accordingly, invite the Bank to better integrate the impact on employment, especially on young people, as a selection criterion for operations financed by the Bank;

14.    Commend the Boards of Directors, Management and staff of the Bank Group for the operational and financial performance in 2019 and welcome the unqualified opinion of the Bank Group’s external auditors on the financial statements ending 31 December 2019 and their confirmation of the effectiveness of the internal controls of the Bank Group;

15.    We re-elected Dr. Akinwumi Ayodeji Adesina of the Federal Republic of Nigeria as President of the Bank Group for the next five years commencing 1 September 2020. We congratulate him on his re-election, commit to support him and wish him success in driving the work of the Bank Group;

16.    Look forward to the next Annual Meetings scheduled for 24 to 28 May 2021, in Accra, Ghana.







Please find this article at :

On 25 November 2009, the Board of Governors of the African Development Bank (AfDB) approved a EUR 55 million loan to Nykomb Synergetics Development AB, a Swedish company, for the construction of a 125-megawatt coal-fired power plant named Sendou in the municipality of Bargny, overlooking the Atlantic Ocean and 30 kilometers outside of Dakar, the Senegalese capital. It consists of a Public Private Partnership (PPP) under the “build, own, operate” (BOO) model, lasting for 25 years and with the coal to be sourced from South Africa.
Based on our research on the AfDB’s operations, Lumière Synergie Développement (LSD), a founding member of the Coalition of African Civil Society Organizations and a locally-based environmental association, found in 2010 that the project did not comply with the bank’s social and environmental safe- guards policies.1 In fact, the project started without adequate consultation with the local community. It was planned to use an area for the power plant which had been promised to the victims of coastal erosion, however the 1,433 plots of land were expropriated without compensation. In addition, more than 1,000 people, mostly women working in fish processing plants and seasonal workers, were put at risk of losing their workplace and means of livelihood. This was because a safe distance between the power plant and the ovens used to smoke fish could not be maintained as the power plant was too close by. The project would also entail enormous risks to the environment and the health of communities, and it was not in compliance with the Senegalese environmental code (Article L13).2

Yet, like the AfDB, the other two development banks, The West African Development Bank (BOAD) and the Dutch Development Bank Nederlandse Financierings-Maatschappij voor Ontwikkelingslanden (FMO) have environ- mental and social safeguards policies, whose ultimate goal is to avoid as much as possible any adverse effects, or to minimize social and environmental impacts. Therefor

Khelcom Logo

Fisher women working around the power plant station in Bargny


Press conference with Takkom Jerry members in 2016

e, in partnership with Takkom Jerry, LSD decided to engage with international financial institutions (IFIs), using their expertise on Independent Accountability Mechanisms (IAM).
On 9 May 2016, LSD and Takkom Jerry filed a joint complaint at the Independent Review Mechanisms (IRM) of the African Development Bank, the Dutch Public Development Bank, and the West African Development Bank’s Independent Complaint Mechanisms, for the non-compliance3 of the Sendou project with their respective environmental and social safeguards policies. Safeguards policies are a set of standards established by multilateral development banks to prevent and/or avoid that their investments and operations harm the environment or human rights. On the other hand, complaint mechanisms such as the AfDB’s IRM are intended to “make avail- able to all those who have suffered damage as a result of a project financed by the Bank Group, an independent mechanism through which they can request the Bank Group to act in accordance with its rules and procedures.”4

Grievances Brought to the Attention of Banks
In the complaint, LSD raised the shortcomings of the project in violation of the banks’ social and environmental safeguards which these three banks should address, in particular:

  • Inadequate community consultation;
  • Lack of compensation for land;
  • No resettlement of women working in fish drying facilities;
  • Violation of Article L13 of the Environmental Code (as this included a buffer zone of 500 meters to the next residential area, which has not been kept);
  • Risk of air pollution, marine ecosystem pollution, and threats to fishing;
  • Threat to cultural heritage (one sacred Baobab tree is situated in the power plant enclosure and is thus not accessible for the population, while other sacred trees were felled);
  • Failure to address the cumulative impacts of the planned coal power plant and the cement factory SOCOCIM that is close by in the Environmental Impact Assessment.

Three Years of Advocacy and Lobbying
A complaint cannot solve everything. Thus LSD combined it with other national and international advocacy and lobbying strategies, supported by an unprecedented media campaign with various tools, as well as the use of social media.5 The LSD complaint reached the AfDB 15 days before its Annual Meetings where the main theme was “Energy and Climate Change”, so the timing was a great opportunity for advocacy.6 Besides, LSD seized every opportunity to put pressure on the banks involved, through bilateral meetings with Sendou project managers, expert panels and/or influential members of the AfDB Board of Directors. The most decisive lobbying meetings were held at the US Treasury Department in Washington D.C., which represents the United States at the AfDB. LSD also went to the respective headquarters of the AfDB and FMO in Abidjan and the Hague. Here, the support of LSD partners Both Ends and the Centre for Research on Multinational Corporations (SOMO), two Dutch NGOs based in Amsterdam, was very decisive for our pressure on FMO. Since the banks care about their image, the naming and shaming strategy obviously succeeded.
On 20 September 2016, four months after the complaint, a big meeting was convened in Bargny by the Prefecture of Rufisque, the department in which the community is located. It was attended by the Mayor of Bargny, the Director of the Environment and Classified Establishments Department (DEEC), the Head of Major Projects at Senegal’s electricity company SENELEC, the Administrator (and his staff) of the other big electricity company in Senegal (CES), all the municipality councillors of Minam
and Bargny, the imams and resource persons of the village, and finally representatives of NGOs and associations (including fisherwomen groups, Takkom Jerry, and the Collective of the Affected Community). The Mayor stated that
the objective of this meeting was twofold: to provide a space for dialogue between the representatives of the community and the project developers, and to adopt a community position that would allow the Municipal Council to take the right decision on the project.7 Therefore, the promoters (CES/SENELEC) recognized for the first time the legitimacy of the community’s struggle since the start of the campaign against Sendou, and proposed the following mitigation measures which the Mayor presented the same day:

  • An investment of 400 million West African CFA Francs (XOF) (around EUR 600,000) by CES during the construction phase, including 30 million for social initiatives, 12 million for education, 11 million for the youth, compensation for land amounting to XOF 450,000 per plot, 50 million for the modernization of the fish processing site, organization of exchange trips to Morocco or South Africa, etc.
  • Finally, the setting-up of a local monitoring committee with the participation of all com- munity representatives.


Between 23 and 26 November 2016, expert panels of all the banks—FMO, AfDB, and BOAD—investigated the case in Bargny.8 The trip, taking place six months after the complaint had been filed, was a first visit to the community. This field visit mission was accelerated thanks to LSD’s lobbying of the FMO expert panel in Amsterdam and the US Treasury Department (through the US representative on the AfDB Board) in Washington D.C., both in October 2016.

All three financial institutions, BOAD, FMO, and AfDB, issued corrective action plans as recommendations to the banks’ managements.

The support and advisory role of NGOs have been extremely important in the process: the identification of requesters or community representatives, the clarification of their complaints, the planning and facilitation of field visits, the preparation of a list of stakeholders to be met in Senegal, etc.9 As a consequence of the investigations, the bank experts took advantage to improve their understanding of the community’s grievances which were raised in the complaints, including the impacts on the environment, on fisheries, on women working in fish processing sites, and finally the land disputes. In addition to meeting with all project stakeholders in Senegal, the panel experts also met with the project’s technical advisor, as well as Quantum Power, the major shareholder in London.

The Tripartite Protocol

On the national level, the pressure was such that the promoters (CES and SENELEC) were in a rush to sign a tripartite memorandum of understanding with the Bargny Municipality10 to address the issues raised in the complaint, which were no more than a synthesis of the mitigation measures set by CES in its new 2017 January action plan laid out as follows:

– Community engagement: CES hired a com- munity officer alongside a new community engagement plan;

– Land: SENELEC increased the compensation package up to XOF 1 billion (around EUR 1.5 million);

– Tax revenue: CES committed to paying approximately EUR 80 million in property tax to the municipality of Bargny for a period of 25 years, representing the project’s duration;

  • Khelcom fish processing site: CES proposed to modernize the site for about EUR 45,000, and to provide a revolving loan of XOF 30 million for women (around EUR 46,000);
  • Hot water discharge: environmental considerations were integrated into the cooling water intake and outlet systems (closed cycle rather than direct discharge into the sea) so as to minimize the plant’s impact on the local marine environment and fishing activities. The outlet system was revised to meet the World Bank guidelines for the temperature of the water discharged;
  • Air pollution: the project was redefined to minimize air pollution by implementing some technical mechanisms such as a more efficient burner;
  • Implementation of the protocol: finally, a local committee was created to follow up on the implementation of the protocol.

Second Victory for the Community over Donors

After the Tripartite Protocol in March, a second victory was achieved when the board of governors of the AfDB authorized a thorough investigation of the project.11 In April 2017, the AfDB board of governors authorized experts of the Independent Review Mechanism (IRM) to conduct additional investigations to clarify the issues raised in the complaints filed by local communities affected by the project. Thus, the AfDB stated that the problems should be addressed before the plant could start operating at the end of 2017. In June 2017, as a consequence, the Collective of the Affected Community filed a second complaint.

An outcome not only of this decision was that all three financial institutions, BOAD, FMO, and AfDB, closed the Sendou case on 16 November 2017, 12 June 2018, and 31 January 2019 respectively, and issued corrective action plans as recommendations to the banks’ managements.

In its final report of 2017,12 the FMO Independent Complaints Mechanism concluded that the Environmental and Social Impact Assessment (ESIA) conducted in 2009 was not fully compliant with the requirements of several performance standards (PS) of the International Financial Corporation (IFC). These are international benchmarks for identifying and managing environmental and social risk and have been adopted by many organizations.

as a key component of their environmental and social risk management. However, PS 1 (2006)—Environmental Assessment and Management Systems—was not fulfilled. The panel acknowledged the real risk of cumulative effects for Sendou II, the community next to Bargny where, according to plans, a new bulk port should be built, which would result in the “thermal pollution” of the sea by the release of hot water.

The panel came to the further conclusion that problems related to possible damage to the community, such as the availability of drinking water, were never considered in the various ESIAs, and as a result the project did not comply with this element of the IFC PS 4 (2012) on Community Health, Safety and Security.

The panel believes that as a lender, FMO should have taken steps to ensure that the project had established procedures and actions to minimize economic displacement, mitigate negative impacts, and provide compensation to any person whose economic rights were affected by the project, regard- less of the number of people affected. Also, it confirmed insufficient consultation and communication had taken place with affected communities regarding cultural heritage, and that the threshold requirement for adequate consultation under the IFC PS 8 was not met. FMO thus suggested an action plan which included an independent advisor to ensure transparent management of SENELEC’s compensation funds. Furthermore, the Senegalese government should issue a decree to safeguard the continued presence of women at the Khelcom site and CES was called to formulate a community engagement action plan in accordance with IFC standards. Finally, FMO committed to participating directly in monitoring Sendou’s environmental performance and ensuring the project’s compliance with IFC standards.

The BOAD has a nascent accountability mechanism, and as such, it aligned its procedure with that of the AfDB. It undertook an environmental and social audit of the coal-fired power plant, which resulted in an action plan summarized as follows:13 It was recommended that the Senegalese government formulate a resettlement plan in collaboration with SENELEC and CES for the relocation of persons affected by coastal erosion whose plots of land have been lost because of the plant.

Independent complaint mechanisms of development banks, backed by a good strategy, provide access to decision-makers and influence national/public institutions and investors.

The complaint was an eye opener for local authorities and investors. It was also an important source of knowledge and learning for local communities.

Anyone whose economic rights have been affected by the project, for example the fisherwomen, should be provided compensation by the promoters. Furthermore, the promoters are called to produce annual air and water quality monitoring reports. Also, the new mineral port of Bargny and SOCOCIM should be included in the analysis of the cumulative impacts of Sendou I and the data in the project’s ESIA should be updated, particularly when related to the environmental aspects of the project, the demographic data of the host area (including the Khelcom fish processing site), and the donors’ recommendations.

The AfDB is the leading player in this project. Its report came rather late and recommended the following: CES should resettle the 115 households and affected persons to Bargny Ville Verte, and that this be financed jointly by SENELEC, the municipality, and CES.

CES was asked to take up again the periodic monitoring committee meetings in order to speed up the process of reaching consensus. A wastewater management system in the Minam and Bargny municipalities, and the construction of a school in Bargny Ville Verte were further recommended. The AfDB supported CES’s project to build a modern fish drying and smoking platform. Addition- ally, the AfDB recommended the removal of the ash deposit and requested CES to seek a permit for temporary storage of ash at DEEC and supported its project to create a factory to manufacture bricks made out of ash. It also recommended an update of the Environmental and Social Management Plan during the operating period: an inventory of air quality and air emissions monitoring, a sampling of all 11 receptors for 12 months, and the setting up of a permanent monitoring station in Minam. To address marine impacts, the AfDB requested that CES conduct a baseline study of marine resources as part of project monitoring, and to take samples of marine, surface and groundwater for the monitoring of physical and biological factors. Finally, to avoid the risks of inadequate water supply on the public network, it recommended the construction of a desalination plant worth EUR 3 million.

Lessons Learned from Engagement with International Financial Institutions

In our view, it is always beneficial for a community to use the independent complaint mechanisms of development banks. If the process is backed by a good strategy, it provides access to decision-makers and influences national/ public institutions and investors. It is also an important source of knowledge and learning for local communities.

In the case of Sendou, the complaint was an eye opener for local authorities and investors: there were several fact-finding missions undertaken by the banks to the project site, and many interactions and discussions took place at the highest level of the three banks (i.e. the boards of directors) and within the Government of Senegal.14

In addition, the project promoters drafted a new Corrective Action Plan with the imple- mentation of actions oriented towards women (EUR 27 million to support women’s activities, budget support to conduct consultation with local community and budget support for the municipality, etc.), while SENELEC offered EUR 1.5 million to settle the land conflict. However, these kinds of processes can be complicated, time-consuming, and costly. It took us four years to complete the case and produce mitigation measures and action plans.

Moreover, the community’s demands might not be fully addressed, especially if their expectations are higher or outside of the mandates of the independent complaint mechanisms. This could then lead to a loss of trust in IFIs’ accountability mechanisms.

This is exactly what happened on 10 March 2019, when during a workshop meant to evaluate the banks’ compliance review reports, Bargny’s representatives rejected all the banks’ action plans and asked for the project to be stopped.

As of February 2020, Sendou is in its 3rd sus- pension. Because of technical and financial problems, the plant has ceased operations since July 2019 and a dispute is in process between the two major shareholders, Nykomb Synergetics AB and Quantum Power in London.
In any case, from the perspectives of the banks, Sendou is classified as a “high risk project” which is actually handled by a focal point whose mission is to advise the banks on how to make a decision going forward.15 However, from our experience, no investor who cares about its image would like to invest in Sendou, which is facing such a bad reputation both nationally and internationally. So, for us—activists, NGOs, and the local community—Sendou is over!


1 Lumière Synergie Développement (LSD) (2014): Empiéter sur les droits des communautés, polluer demain, September 2014. A summary can be found in: Aly Sagne (2014): Sénégal-BAD. Bargny face à 2 Centrales Electriques à charbon, The Voice of Communities Affected by business activities, 25 October 2014, available at https:// electriques-a-charbon/. Last accessed: 06 April 2020.

2 Government of Senegal (2001): Loi no. 2001-01 du 15 Janvier 2001 portant code de l’environnement, available at default/files/loisetdecrets/Loi%20n%C2%B0%202001-01%20 du%2012%20avril%202001%20portant%20code%20de%20 l%27environnement.pdf. Last accessed: 27 March 2020.

3 The objective of the compliance audit is to verify whether bank policies or procedures have been violated and whether, as a result, harm has been caused to the affected parties.

4 African Development Bank Group (AfDB) (2015): The Independent Review Mechanism (IRM). Operating Rules and Procedures, revised 16 April 2015, available at ating-rules-and-procedures-2015-52239. Last accessed: 27 March 2020.

5 See for example this Lumière Synergie Développement post on Facebook: Last accessed: 12 March 2020. 6 In 2016, the Annual Meetings were held in Lusaka, Zambia. Every year, they are attended by over 2500 delegations from the AfDB and all stakeholders from around the world, including CSOs.

7 Letter of invitation received from the Mayor, see Aly Sagne (2016): Centrale à charbon. La CES reliance les pourparlers avec la communauté – Bargny dit toujours NIET, The Voice of Communities Affected by business activities, 20 September 2016, available at https://alysagne. pourparlers-avec-la-communaute-bargny-dit-toujours-niet/. Last accessed: 6 April 2020.

8 The independent mechanisms are made up of the banks’ internal staff and independent experts (usually academics). They are independent of the banks’ management and report directly to the Board of Governors, hence their “independent” status vis-à-vis the bank. 9 During their stay in Senegal, the panels met with all relevant stakeholders: affected communities, local authorities, the Prefect of Rufisque, the Director General of SENELEC, the project promoter, former politicians, the Ministry of Environment and Sustainable Development, the Mayor of Bargny, the Ministry of Energy, the World Bank, the Dutch Embassy, and local consultants.

10 The Minister of Energy and the Director General of SENELEC personally attended the signing of this protocol at the Bargny Municipal Council.

11 Jennifer Patterson (2017): Sénégal: La BAD va réétudier les doléances que soulève la central au charbon de Sendou, AfDB, 20 April 2017, available at news-and-events/african-development-bank-to-further-examine-so- cial-and-environmental-concerns-on-sendou-coal-fired-power-plant- in-senegal-16990. Last accessed: 12 March 2020.

12 Maartje van Putten, Michael Windfuhr, and Stephen Gibbons (2017): FMO Inde- pendent Complaints Mechanism. Panel Report No. 2. Sendou I Coal Power Plant. Bargny, Senegal, 12 October 2017, available at https:// 83a5-75e4d1a5e8b3/compliance+review+report+sendou_english. pdf. Last accessed: 12 March 2020.

13 AfDB (2019): Plan d’action concernant le rapport de revue de conformité du projet de la centrale à charbon de Sendou réponse de la Direction, January 2019, avail- able at Compliance-Review/Sendou-Coal_Fired_Power_Plant_Compli- ance_Review_Report_FR.pdf. Last accessed: 12 March 2020.

14 The Prime Minister of Senegal even made a public statement on the project on 25 May 2018: Energie. Transition au gaz annoncé pour 2021 par le Pm. Bargny refuse des années de pollution au charbon, Le Quotidien, 28 May 2018, available at energie-transition-au-gaz-annoncee-pour-2021-par-le-pm-bargny-re- fuse-des-annees-de-pollution-au-charbon/. Last accessed: 12 March 2020.

15 All options are considered by the banks (including the banks’ withdrawal from the project). But the AfDB and FMO are looking for a new investor to restart the project, while saying that in that case, they will ensure the full compliance of the project with social and environment safeguards.












The Compliance Review and Mediation Unit (BCRM), the Secretariat of the Bank’s Independent Review Mechanism (IRM), organized an information webinar for civil society organizations (CSOs) on “Handling Complaints from People Affected by Projects Financed by the African Development Bank Group (AfDB)” on Wednesday, 10 June 2020. 

The session brought together 61 participants from civil society organizations representing 8 countries in West Africa (Benin, Burkina Faso, Cote d’Ivoire, Ghana, Liberia, Mali, Nigeria, and Senegal); 3 in Southern  Africa (South Africa, Botswana and Eswatini); two Central African countries (Cameroon and Democratic Republic of Congo); two  East African countries (Kenya and Uganda); 3  North African countries (Morocco, Mauritania and Tunisia); and the United States of America and 5  European countries (Germany, Belgium, France, Great Britain and the Netherlands).

The participants became acquainted with the IRM through the presentations delivered focusing on the IRM mandate, roles, and procedures for handling complaints through problem-solving and compliance review.

Following the presentations, a panel of three  Representatives of CSOs shared their experiences with the IRM in handling of cases, and also informed the participants how they conduct outreach activities with affected communities. Finally, BCRM updated the participants on the ongoing third review of the IRM. BCRM encouraged the participants to submit their views and comments once the draft report is published in the Bank website for public consultation in coming months. The session provided an opportunity for participants to discuss and highlight the challenges and impacts of the IRM work on communities affected by projects financed by the AfDB and in helping the Bank achieve its sustainable development objectives.

The webinar was organized in partnership with three (3) CSOs: Accountability Counsel in the USA, Lumiere Synergie pour le Developpement (LSD) in Senegal and the Centre pour le Developpement de la Region de Tensift (CDRT in Morocco with the support of the Bank’s Civil Society and Community Engagement Division.

African Development Bank joins Nasdaq Sustainable Bond Network


Nasdaq (Nasdaq: NDAQ) on Wednesday announced the inclusion of the African Development Bank, one of the world’s  largest issuers of social bonds, in the Nasdaq Sustainable Bond Network (NSBN). The NSBN is a global and publicly available platform designed to improve transparency in the market for green, social and sustainability bonds.

Ten Bank bonds were added to the platform, including its landmark $3 billion Fight COVID-19 Social Bond launched in March 2020, the largest Social Bond ever launched at the time in international capital markets. Fight COVID-19 remains today the largest dollar-denominated Social Bond.  It aims to help alleviate the economic and social impact of the pandemic on livelihoods and Africa’s economies.

By joining the Nasdaq Sustainable Bond Network, socially responsible issuers are provided a unique opportunity to bring attention to their concrete actions in terms of financing climate change and green growth.

“Nasdaq welcomes the inclusion of the African Development Bank on our Nasdaq Sustainable Bond Network especially with its Fight Covid-19 Social Bond, launched to alleviate the impact of the pandemic on African economies and livelihoods,” said Ann-Charlotte Eliasson, VP, Head of EU Bond Listings and Sustainable Debt.

“We are proud to offer visibility to an issuer with such a strong social mandate, which the world needs more than ever, especially in these challenging times.”

Since the launch of Nasdaq Sustainable Bond Network(link is external) in December last year, more than 40 issuers from 13 countries have added over 4,000 bonds to the platform, including the Nordic Investment Bank, HSBC and Fannie Mae.

“The Nasdaq Sustainable Bond platform allows us to showcase our work in combating poverty and in helping move the African continent forward. Our Fight Covid-19 social bond is about saving lives and livelihoods,” said Hassatou Diop N’Sele, Treasurer of the African Development Bank.

The African Development Bank established its Social Bond framework in 2017 and has raised the equivalent of $5.5 billion through five transactions supporting 89 eligible social projects in 28 African countries as of 31 December 2019. In 2018, the Bank was designated “Second most impressive social or sustainability bond issuer” at the Global Capital SRI Awards and the Bank’s NOK 1 billion 3-year Social Bond issued in 2019 was awarded “Social Bond of the Year” by Environmental Finance.

Read Nasdaq press release on inclusion here(link is external)

About Nasdaq

Nasdaq (Nasdaq: NDAQ) is a global technology company serving the capital markets and other industries. Our diverse offering of data, analytics, software and services enables clients to optimize and execute their business vision with confidence. For more information, visit is external)



The NEPAD Infrastructure Project Preparation Facility (NEPAD-IPPF) has advocated the establishment of a regional information hub to advertise bankable projects in Africa.

NEPAD-IPPF proposes that each country should have a window linked to the centralized hub as part of an overall objective to unlock bankable investment opportunities in Africa.

“It would be both a ‘project hub’ and a ‘help desk’ – a centralized IT platform for bankable projects which potential investors can access. Such a hub could be housed by the AfDB to ensure credibility and confidence by both project owners (governments) and potential investors,” Shem Simuyemba, Coordinator for NEPAD-IPPF said at an assessment and programming session to develop a pipeline of bankable infrastructure projects for three years, 2018-2020.

The assessment and programming session was held at the AfDB Headquarters in Abidjan, Cote d’Ivoire on 20July 2017.

Simuyemba explained that the ‘one-stop-shop’ initiative would not just be a listing of projects, but a differentiation of the ‘financial-readiness’ of the projects in terms of all the key returns that investors look for: assurance of transparent procurement practices, tenure, risk, returns, availability of co-financing, depth of local capital markets, among others.

“The important point to remember is that projects need to be bankable from the point of view of the person who will provide the risk capital to make the project happen. While bankability is about figures, it is also about risk and reality and these factors all go together in making an investment decision,” Simuyemba said.

He stressed the need for bankable investment opportunities in Africa to be unlocked to attract regional and international investors.

Unlike other regions such as North America, Europe, Asia and Latin America which have strong private sector project developers and sponsors, the emergence of an indigenous class of trans-continental investors such as Dangote was just the beginning for Africa.

This is attributable to a number of factors, among which is a history of state monopoly companies which crowded out the private sector and stifled its growth; heavily controlled and regulated sectors particularly in infrastructure – which did not have the necessary enabling environment and incentives for private sector participation; as well as weak capital markets.

Unlocking investment opportunities in Africa requires a number of measures to be undertaken as a matter of policy priority.

Simuyemba outlined three other measures to be taken to achieve this.

The first is the liberalization of sectors which are still dominated by government. He gave examples of the information, communications and technology (ICT) sector whose liberalization a few decades ago opened massive investment opportunities for the private sector.

He observed how African countries which have recently opened up their energy-power sectors have witnessed major investments by independent power producers (IPP) and even smaller players in off-grid green energy investments.

“The transport sector for both road freight and passengers is now vibrant because it is predominantly private sector driven. However, the same cannot be said about railways where governments still need to provide clear guidelines on an ‘open access rules’ for railway operations. Equally, despite the Yamoussoukro Decision (of an open African air transport market), investments in airport infrastructure, safety and industry have remained relatively limited. The key to unlocking investments in these sectors is clear market rules.”

“The second is the need to scale-up capacity for project preparation and development as this is the only means to assess, package and structure the projects in such a way that there is a ‘rolling pipeline’ of bankable projects.

Speaking at a NEPAD-IPPF Project Financing Roundtable facilitated by the international law firm – Baker and Mckenzie – on 2 May 2017, investors lamented the absence of bankable-investment-ready projects tailored to the needs of public financiers, concessionaires (public-private partnerships) and the private sector.

Investors had noted that the appetite to invest depended on risk considerations which were very different depending on whether the investor was a Development Finance Institution (DFI), a project developer or a private investor.

“To achieve this requires considerable scaling-up of capacities and resources for project preparation and development. This is a space largely neglected in terms of resources even though it has been demonstrated that US$1 committed to project preparation and development unlocks between US$80-100 in investment financing. Thus, a project with US$10 million in preparation costs can unlock between US$800 million to US$1 billion in financing depending on the sector and project location,” Simuyemba explained.

He also spoke on the importance of regional markets which he said need to be created through deliberate policy reforms, enabling environment, incentives and strengthened partnerships.

Most African countries are too small to be attractive markets for major infrastructure investments or even major industries. While there was a lot of debate related to the lack of political will in the past, African countries have more recently shown a new resolve by undertaking bold reforms and also reaching consensus on major African Union (AU) continental initiatives such as the Programme for Infrastructure Development in Africa (PIDA), the Continental Free Trade Area (CFTA) and the AfDB’s High 5’s.

For instance, major investments in power generation and transmission lines currently going on in Africa will achieve a greater economic impact if they are accompanied by policies to create a vibrant continental energy market whose elements are already in place through the regional power pools.

To spur industrialization in Africa, there is need to create inter-connected trade and transport corridors to enhance efficiency and reduce transaction costs so as to make African industries, and therefore, make imports and exports competitive within African, intra-regional markets and international-global markets.

While Africa has huge potential particularly in the infrastructure sector, bankable investment opportunities in Africa must be unlocked. There has been much talk about Sovereign Wealth Funds, Pension and Insurance Funds, and other institutional investors investing in infrastructure in Africa, but this has not happened to the scale envisaged. These institutional investors have not been guided towards the right types of projects tailored to their specific profiles and financing needs and given the massive resources in these institutions. This gap needs to be bridged as a matter of urgency to unlock these funds for the much needed infrastructure investments on the Continent.

The NEPAD Infrastructure Project Preparation Facility (NEPAD-IPPF) is a multi-donor Special Fund hosted by the AfDB. It supports African countries to prepare regional infrastructure projects in energy, transport, ICT and transboundary water to make them bankable for investment.

Established in 2005, the Facility supports African countries to prepare bankable regional and cross-border projects across the infrastructure sectors. It is funded by a number of Donor Partners, namely, Canada, Germany, the UK, Spain, Denmark and Norway.

From: 01/08/2017
To: 03/08/2017
Location: Abidjan


The Compliance Review and Mediation Unit (BCRM) of the African Development Bank Group (AfDB); the Office of the Compliance Advisor Ombudsman (CAO) of the International Finance Corporation (IFC) and the Multilateral Investment Guarantee Agency MIGA) of the World Bank Group are organizing two regional workshops at the headquarters of the AfDB in Abidjan from 1 to 3 August 2017.

The central theme of the workshops is: « Strengthening Accountability Mechanisms in the Context of Development Projects in West Africa: Environmental and Social Management Systems , Access to the Recourse Systems and Conflict Resolution in Private Sector Projects Supported by the African Development Bank Group and the World Bank Group (IFC and MIGA) « .

The first Regional Workshop will be held on 1 August 2017. Invited participants include some 30 private sector stakeholders including sponsors implementing projects co-financed by the IFC and the AfDB as well as private companies from other countries in West Africa.

The second regional workshop will take place on 2 and 3 August 2017 and will bring together representatives of 30 West African Civil Society organizations. These organizations act generally as the interfaces between the people negatively affected by projects (PAPs) funded by the AfDB and IFC / MIGA. As such, they can file a complaint on their own right or on behalf of the affected communities.

The aim of these regional workshops is to enhance the understanding of these major development actors on the importance of environmental and social safeguard issues in project development.  They will be briefed on the roles and mandates of the BCRM and the CAO and how these two accountability mechanisms process complaints they receive from People negatively affected by projects finances by the organisations.

The civil society and private sector participants will share their experiences in engaging with communities and resolving complaints.  They will also learn from practical examples on various dispute resolution techniques that are used in finding solutions to complaints.

De: 01/08/2017
A: 03/08/2017


Abidjan, Côte d’Ivoire


L’Unité de vérification de la conformité et de la médiation (BCRM) de la Banque africaine de développement (BAD), le Bureau du conseiller médiateur de la Société financière internationale (SFI) et l’Agence multilatérale de garantie des investissements (MIGA) de la Banque mondiale organisent, en août 2017, deux ateliers de travail au siège de la Banque africaine de développement à Abidjan.

Le thème de ces ateliers qui concernent l’Afrique de l’Ouest en est : « Renforcer les mécanismes de reddition de comptes dans le contexte des projets de développement en Afrique de l’Ouest : Gestion environnementale et sociale, Accès au système de recours et Résolution des conflits dans le cadre des projets du secteur privé soutenus par le Groupe de la Banque africaine de développement et le Groupe de la Banque mondiale (SFI et MIGA) ».

Le 1er atelier régional a lieu le 1er aout 2017. Il est destiné à une trentaine d’acteurs du secteur privé, dont les promoteurs qui conduisent des projets cofinancés par la SFI et la BAD, ainsi que des entreprises privées d’autres pays de l’Afrique de l’Ouest.

Le 2e atelier régional a lieu les 2 et 3 août 2017. Il réunit des représentants de 30 organisations de la société civile en Afrique de l’Ouest. Ces organisations sont souvent l’interface entre les personnes sur qui des projets ont pu avoir un impact négatif et la BAD, la SIF ou la MIGA. A ce titre, elles peuvent porter  plainte en leur nom propre ou au nom des personnes affectées.

Ces ateliers régionaux ont pour objectif de mieux faire comprendre à ces acteurs majeurs du développement l’importance des questions de sauvegarde environnementale et sociale ainsi que les rôles, mandats et processus de traitement des plaintes des services concernés à la BAD et la SFI. Organisations de la société civile et secteur privé  partageront leur expérience en matière d’engagement avec les communautés et de règlement des plaintes. Grâce à l’étude de cas pratiques, seront également enseignées diverses techniques de règlement des différends pour traiter les plaintes.


femmes transformatricesLe Conseil d’administration du groupe de la Banque africaine de développement (BAD) a approuvé l’évaluation de la recevabilité à une vérification de la conformité  du projet de construction d’une centrale à charbon de 125 MW dans le village de Bargny Minam au Sénégal, financé par la Banque. En approuvant ce rapport, le Conseil d’administration a également autorisé que les experts du Mécanisme indépendant d’inspection  poursuivent  des recherches plus approfondies  pour clarifier les problèmes soulevés par les plaintes de deux groupes de plaignants au nom des membres durement touchés des communautés de Bargny au Sénégal.

Les deux groupes ont soulevé 8 questions similaires, dont : l’option politique gouvernementale jugée non viable consistant à utiliser des centrales électriques à charbon au Sénégal ; le choix du site d’accueil du projet en violation du Code national de l’environnement ; la vulnérabilité accrue des communautés exposées à la pollution de l’air et la perturbation éventuelle de leurs moyens de subsistance en raison de la proximité de la centrale à charbon de la ville et son impact négatif sur un site du patrimoine historique du pays. Ces groupes ont également mis en évidence des risques sanitaires imminents dus à la pollution de l’air imputable aux particules émises par la centrale de Sendou ; la vulnérabilité accrue de la communauté face à l’érosion côtière ; l’insuffisance des consultations publiques avec les personnes affectées par le projet (PAPs) et le non-respect des normes environnementales, sociales et des droits de la personne de la BAD. Ils pointent notamment du doigt l’absence d’un Plan d’action pour la réinstallation (PAR) visant à atténuer les impacts sociaux négatifs du projet.

Après avoir enregistré ces plaintes, la Banque s’est rendu compte qu’il était impératif de mettre en place des mesures d’atténuation suffisantes avant que la centrale ne devienne opérationnelle d’ici la fin de 2017, étant donné que la non-conformité avec la politique en matière de déplacement involontaire des populations, la gestion intégrée des ressources en eau et les procédures en matière d’études environnementales pour les opérations du secteur privé nuiraient aux communautés concernées. Les problèmes identifiés dus au non-respect des politiques de la BAD incluent notamment (a) l’ébranlement des moyens de subsistance de plus de 1000 femmes et autres travailleurs saisonniers et temporaires dont les activités de séchage et de conditionnement des poissons sont informelles ; (b) la reprise sans compensation par le gouvernement des parcelles attribuées aux résidents ; les risques sanitaires imminents dus à la pollution de l’air imputable à la centrale de Sendou ; (c) le risque de pollution des eaux de surface et souterraines ; (d) l’insuffisance des consultations publiques avec les personnes affectées par le projet (PAP).

Le projet a été approuvé par le Conseil d’administration en 2009 pour un montant de 206 millions d’euros, que la Banque cofinance avec la Banque ouest-africaine de développement (BOAD) et la Nederlandse Financierings-Maatschappij voor Ontwikkelingslanden N.V. (FMO). Le financement de la BAD comprend un prêt privilégié de 55 millions d’euros et un prêt supplémentaire de 5 millions d’euros.

Le projet a été conçu sur la base de contrat de type  « construire, posséder et exploiter » et vise à produire jusqu’à 40 % de l’énergie électrique du Sénégal, un pays qui tire actuellement son électricité de centrales électriques alimentées au diesel. Le gouvernement du Sénégal (GDS) a défini une stratégie visant à diversifier et à augmenter sa capacité domestique de production d’énergie électrique en intégrant des énergies renouvelables à sa puissance de base thermique conventionnelle. Ce sera la première centrale à charbon du Sénégal.

Le charbon sera importé par voie maritime  et déchargé au port de Dakar d’où il sera acheminé par camions au site de stockage de charbon de la centrale. Le projet vise à produire au moins 925 GWh d’électricité par an. L’énergie électrique alimentera le réseau interconnecté national de la SENELEC, la Société d’électricité publique  du Sénégal. Le projet comprend l’aménagement, la conception, l’acquisition, la construction, l’exploitation et l’entretien de la centrale électrique à charbon sur un site de 22 hectares. La production d’électricité pourra passer subséquemment à 250 MW grâce à un projet de deuxième phase dont les préparatifs n’ont pas encore commencé. Le projet prévoit la construction d’une ligne de transmission de 225 kV sur 1,6 km et un poste d’interconnexion associé pour relier  la centrale à SENELEC.

Il convient de rappeler que le projet se situe à environ 600 mètres de l’océan Atlantique et près de deux communautés, la ville de Bargny, située à 2 km au nord-ouest et un village de pêcheurs de 600 habitants, Minam, au sud.



The Board of Directors of the African Development Bank Group (AfDB) has approved the eligibility assessment for compliance review of the Bank-financed construction of a 125 MW Coal Sendou Power Plant Project in the village of Bargny Minam in Senegal.

By approving the project, the Board has also authorized that Independent Review Mechanism experts carry out further investigations to clarify issues raised in the complaints by two groups of complainants on behalf of adversely affected members of the communities in Bargny, Senegal.

Both groups raised 8 similar issues including, unviable government policy option to use coal-fired power plant for Senegal; the selection of the project site in violation of the National Code of the Environment; increased vulnerability of communities to air pollution and potential disruption of livelihoods because of the proximity of the coal power plant to the town and adverse impact of the coal power plant on an historic heritage site. The groups also highlighted imminent health risks from air pollution due to emissions from Sendou plant; increased vulnerability of the community due to coastal erosion; inadequate public consultations with people affected by the project (PAPs) and breach of AfDB’s environmental, social and human rights standards. In particular, no Resettlement Action Plan was prepared to mitigate the project’s negative social impacts.

Following registration of complaints, the Bank realized that adequate mitigation measures should be put in place before the plant becomes operational by the end of 2017, since, non-compliance with the Involuntary resettlement policy, Integrated water resources management and the Environmental review procedures for the private sector operations, would harm the related communities. Issues identified as a result of non-compliance with Bank policies, comprise among others (a) disruption of livelihoods of over 1000 women and other seasonal and temporary workers who have informal business of drying and packaging fish; (b) plots assigned to residents retaken by Government without compensation; imminent health risks from air pollution of Sendou plant; (c) risk of pollution of surface and ground water; (d) inadequate public consultations with PAPs.

The project was approved by the Board in 2009 to the tune of Euros 206 million, which the Bank co-finances with the Banque Ouest Africaine de Développement (BOAD) and the Nederlandse Financierings-Maatschappij voor Ontwikkelingslanden N.V. (FMO). AfDB’s financing comprises a senior loan of 55 million Euros, and a supplementary loan of 5 million Euros.

The project is being developed on a “build, own, and operate” basis and targets to supply up to 40% of Senegal’s electricity which currently derives 80% of its electricity from diesel-fueled power generation. The Government of Senegal (GOS) has outlined a strategy for diversifying and increasing domestic power generation capacity with a combination of conventional thermal base load and renewable energy. It is the first coal-fired plant in Senegal.

The coal will be imported via sea and unloaded at Dakar harbor from where it will be transported by trucks to the coal storage site on the plant. The project aims at producing at least 925 GWh of electricity a year. The power will be delivered to the national interconnected grid system of SENELEC, Senegal’s public electricity utility company. The project includes the development, design, procurement, construction, operation and maintenance the coal-fired power plant on a 22 hectare-site. Power production can be expanded to 250 MW through a second phase project, for which project preparation have not yet started. The project will also build a 1.6 km 225 kV transmission line and associated switchyard to connect the plant to SENELEC.

It may be recalled that the project is located about 600 meters away from the Atlantic Ocean and near two communities, the town of Bargny located at 2 km north-west and a fishing village, Minam, with 600 inhabitants to the south.


Bargny le 20 09/2016

Par Aly Marie Sagne, PDT LSD-Senegal

Le conflit entre les promoteurs de la centrale à charbon de Bargny et la communauté fait toujours rage. La centrale sort petit à petit de terre (25% des travaux de Génie Civile réalisés) alors que la contestation s’intensifie et s’organise davantage dans le village.

Un an après la première rencontre de médiation initiée l’année dernière par la Direction de l’Environnement et des Etablissements Classées (DEEC) avec l’accord de la Municipalité de Bargny, la Compagnie d’Electricité du Sénégal (CES) a remis encore çà.


Ce 20 septembre 2016 encore, une consultation de 6 heures d’horloge a réuni le Préfet de Rufisque(qui présidait la réunion), le Maire de Bargny (et son Conseil Municipal), le Directrice de l’Environnement, le responsable des grands projets de la SENELEC, l’Administrateur de la CES (et ses collaborateurs), l’ensemble des conseillers de quartiers de Minam et de Bargny, les imams et personnes ressources du village, les représentants d’ONG et d’Associations (dont les femmes transformatrices, le Takkom Jerry et le Collectif des personnes affectées).

Une nième audience publique

De façon officielle, cette réunion avait pour objectif de créer un espace de dialogue entre les représentants de la communauté et le promoteur sur la base d’une présentation de l’état d’avancement du projet, ses impacts et les mesures d’atténuation/accompagnement proposées et inscrites dans le Plan de Gestion Environnemental et Social (PGES).

Selon le Maire, Il était donc attendu à l’issue de cette rencontre de dégager une position commune de la communauté et de permettre au Conseil Municipal de prendre une délibération sur le projet. A notre avis, cet exercice n’était ni plus ni moins qu’une nième audience publique convoquée par la CES pour se donner encore une chance d’avoir le consentement de la communauté !

Respect des normes environnementales élevées et étalages de réalisations sociales

Tour à tour, le consultant du cabinet Quartz Afrique, l’Administrateur de la CES M. Eric Lomé, M. Badara Guèye le responsable l’environnement de la CES ont tenté de convaincre l’auditoire sur l’importance et la nécessité de consulter les populations locales, l’engagement de la CES et de SENELEC sur le respect des normes environnementales, les mesures d’atténuation et d’accompagnement dans le domaine social.

photo0298Les présentations ont véritablement ciblées les points de divergences avec la communauté :

  • Respect des lois nationales (Art.L13): Centrale à moins de 500 m des habitations ;
  • Les rejets de polluants dangereux : Minimiser selon les normes de la Banque Mondiale et élévation des cheminées de 150m ;
  • Rejets d’eaux chaudes dans la mer : construction de canaux de rejet à plus de 200m dans l’océan et loin des récifs en reconstruction ;
  • Foncier : Revoir l’indemnisation des ayants droits ;
  • Site des femmes transformatrices de poissons : Modernisation et accompagnement des femmes ;
  • Emplois locaux : 50% des effectifs de recrutement au niveau local (330 jeunes) ;
  • Actions sociales : Financement de projets sociaux (Education, jeunesse, santé, etc.)

photo0303Un projet contre la volonté de la communauté

Ce qui est dramatique, voire tragique dans ce feuilleton, c’est que la CES a reconnu que la communauté a toujours été constante dans son refus d’accepter ce projet, refus qu’elle avait fait savoir il y a maintenant 7 ans lors de l’Etude d’Impact Environnementale et Sociale (Précisément durant l’audience publique). Ce qui a fait dire à un des intervenants (plus de 60 sur la liste) en s’adressant aux autorités : « Est-ce que la parole de Bargny a une valeur, puisque ce projet est mis en œuvre contre notre volonté ! »


Il faut souligner la mobilisation du Takkom Jerry dirigé par son Président Ibrahima Diagne et du Collectifs des personnes affectées avec à leur tête Cheikh Fadel Wade et Daouda Guèye (Larry) qui ont non seulement sensibilisé et mobilisée la communauté, mais qui ont répliqué avec une présentation et des preuves à l’appui concernant les manquements graves et l’inopportunité de ce projet de centrale à charbon.

Le message était donc claire pour la CES : « Les populations de Bargny dans leur intégralité ne veulent pas de votre projet » a lancé un intervenants à l’Administrateur de la CES (M. Erik Lomé), qu’il intima avec ironie  « de plier bagages et de rentrer chez lui»!

Le ton était souvent dur et passionné, comme ce fut le cas lors de la présentation Daouda Guèye qui a été tiré du bras par l’Administrateur de la CES lui lançant : « Vous êtes un menteur ! » Ou quand lorsque Fadel Wade comparaît les actions sociales de la CES à la corruption, ce qui fâcha le Préfet qui s’est fait un peu plus menaçant.

20160920_132809.jpgEnfin, à l’extérieur du bâtiment du Centre Socio-culturelle, une partie de la communauté qui ne pouvait pas accéder à la salle où il fallait montrer patte blanche pour entrer manifestait avec  des pancartes où on pouvait lire ‘’Bargny dit non à la centrale’’, ‘’La centrale à charbon une menace pour la pêche’’, ‘’La centrale à charbon une menace pour l’économie locale’’. Mais également, tenait des points de presse pour alerter l’opinion publique nationale et internationale.

dsc02434Des pistes de sortie de crise proposées – Une seconde chance pour la CES ?

Par ailleurs, quelques intervenants ont tenté de revoir leur position, puisque pour eux, malgré leur opposition, les travaux continuent sur le site, et que la centrale sera livrée. En effet, des propositions ont été évoquées :

  • Création de projets structurant pour la Commune ;
  • Renforcement des avantages du projet pour la commune ;
  • Réhabilitation du stade municipal et le connecter à la centrale gratuitement ;
  • Construction d’un hôpital ;
  • Dédommager les pertes de terrain d’habitation ; etc.

Comme l’a si bien résumé un intervenant : « Si Bargny accepte de réduire son espérance de vie en acceptant la centrale, au moins que la CES facilite l’accès à l’électricité de Bargny ! »

Le Maire, un allié pour le camp du non?

Durant son allocution, le Maire a rappelé le mandat de la Municipalité et a insisté sur l’objectif qu’il s’est fixé qui consiste à ‘’veiller au respect de la loi et assurer que les intérêts et préoccupations de la population locale sont pris en compte dans tous les projets de sa commune’’.

dsc02394En réalité, nous avons constaté qu’il a tout fait pour rester en phase avec ses administrés. Avant de clôturer la rencontre, il a demandé aux représentants de la communauté de rester encore quelques minutes pour une discussion entre fils de la localité. Durant ses minutes, il a présenté les détails financiers des propositions de la CES sur les différents points de discordes en soulignant les avantages et les inconvénients. Mas il finira par dire à la population qu’il faudrait dégager une position tout en soulignant qu’il n’y a que 2 options :

  1. Accepter avec résignation le projet tout en négociant pour des mesures d’accompagnements justes ;
  2. Ou continuer la lutte qui dure depuis 7 ans et ne rien obtenir puisque personne à son avis ne pourra arrêter les travaux maintenant.

Pour l’instant, aucune réponse n’a été donnée par la population qui a demandé une seconde rencontre interne le mardi 27 septembre prochain pour statuer définitivement sur une décision.

Pendant ce temps les plaintes déposées par le Takkom Jerry et le Collectif des personnes affectées suivent leurs cours. Et là, il est attendu des banques (BAD et FMO) de revoir leur copie pour manque de conformité du projet avec leurs politiques  de protection environnementales et sociales.

La question de la License sociale est capitale en matière de conduite de politiques de Responsabilité Sociétale d’Entreprises, malheureusement beaucoup d’entreprises comme la Compagnie d’Electricité du Sénégal semblent souvent l’oublier ou la négliger lors de la mise en place de projets de développement. Bien évidemment, cela leur aurait évité des pertes inutiles de temps et malheureusement d’argent.