University of Arizona’s IPLP Indigenous Rights & Protected Areas Initiative Calls on Tanzania to Suspend Implementation of Presidential Commission Reports Pending Independent Review

TUCSON, ARIZONA — The Indigenous Rights & Protected Areas Initiative at the Indigenous Peoples Law and Policy (IPLP) Program of the University of Arizona James E. Rogers College of Law expresses serious concern over the findings and recommendations of the two Presidential Commissions tasked with investigating land disputes and evaluating the relocation process in Tanzania’s Ngorongoro Conservation Area (NCA). The Initiative calls on the Government of Tanzania to refrain from implementing the Commissions’ recommendations pending an independent review that complies with international human rights standards, including the right of the Maasai Indigenous Peoples to Free, Prior and Informed Consent (FPIC).

The two Commissions — the Presidential Commission on Land Issues in the Ngorongoro Conservation Area (the “land commission”), chaired by Court of Appeal Judge Dr. Gerald Ndika, and the Presidential Commission on the Voluntary Relocation of Residents from the Ngorongoro Conservation Area (the “relocation commission”), chaired by retired Permanent Secretary Eng. Musa Iyombe — were established in December 2024 and presented their reports to President Samia Suluhu Hassan at the Chamwino State House on 12 March 2026.

A filmed documentary accompanying the Commissions’ reports, broadcast across Tanzanian media and at the State House, contains material that misrepresents the culture and dignity of Ngorongoro residents. The systematic denial of services to Maasai communities, including the documented grounding of the Flying Medical Service, which provided essential healthcare access, has had humanitarian consequences and represents a pattern of coercion by deprivation rather than voluntary relocation.

IPLP Engagement with the Presidential Commissions

In April and May 2025, during the Commissions’ mandates, IPLP Indigenous Rights & Protected Areas submitted two reports analyzing Tanzania’s binding obligations toward the Maasai under international law and the scientific and comparative evidence supporting rights-based, co-managed conservation models. The two reports urge adoption of the following recommendations, based on  binding international human rights obligations — including the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples (UNDRIP), International Labour Organization Convention 169, and the jurisprudence of the African Commission and African Court on Human and Peoples’ Rights:

• Enhance legal protections for Indigenous rights by developing policies and frameworks that explicitly recognize Maasai rights to land in accordance with international human rights standards;
• Recognize and protect the role of Maasai Indigenous Peoples in conservation, including their Indigenous knowledge and pastoralist practices;
• Prioritize meaningful consultation with Indigenous Peoples to ensure their Free, Prior and Informed Consent (FPIC);
• Promote programs aimed at achieving sustainable livelihoods and economic resilience while safeguarding Maasai cultural heritage and the natural environment;
• Establish open and transparent channels for continuous dialogue between the Government, conservation authorities, and the Maasai; and
• Review and take into account the various reports and recommendations issued by United Nations human rights mechanisms to the United Republic of Tanzania regarding the relocation of the Maasai from the NCA and Loliondo.

None of these recommendations are meaningfully reflected in the substantive recommendations communicated to the President on 12 March 2026. The recommendations do not approach the recognition, consultation, or rights-based protection required under international law. IPLP views this as a serious failure of process that calls into question the independence and impartiality of both Commissions.

IPLP’s prior submissions are available here.

Findings on the Commission Reports

IPLP’s analysis is based on the public summaries of the two reports, the live-streamed presentations to the President on 12 March 2026, the Terms of Reference for the Commissions, the filmed documentary produced in conjunction with the reports, and independent reporting and analysis published in the weeks since. The full reports have not yet been made public by the Government. IPLP will publish a complete analysis when the full reports are released.

Methodological Failures and Conflict of Interest

The land commission relied heavily on the 2019 Multiple Land Use Model (MLUM) Report, a document the Maasai community has long disputed as non-participatory and as having been prepared to justify their removal from the NCA. The Commission’s report reproduces the 2019 Report’s figures and conclusions — including its 3.6% annual population growth projection (which independent analysis using National Bureau of Statistics data places closer to 1.6%), its identification of the same three wildlife species as having declined or disappeared from the Ngorongoro Crater (oryx, eland, and gerenuk), and its livestock and grazing-area calculations, without independent verification.

Independent reporting in The Chanzo, together with a public statement by MISA, has identified an institutional conflict of interest in the conduct of the land commission: the official appointed as secretary to the present commission previously held the same role in the 2019 MLUM commission whose findings the current report substantially reproduces. This structural overlap — in which the same official superintends the production of a successor report that reaffirms his prior work — warrants public disclosure and independent scrutiny.

The land commission further recommended amendments to the Ngorongoro Conservation Area Act (Cap. 284), which currently recognizes the Maasai presence within the NCA, alongside a recommendation that all “non-conservation activities” be carried out outside the NCA,  a formulation that, in practice, would dismantle the multiple land-use system established in 1959.

With respect to Lake Natron, the Commission failed to recommend halting the Government’s pre-existing decision to upgrade the Lake Natron Game Controlled Area into a Game Reserve, instead recommending only that an “assessment” be conducted to determine whether to proceed. This recommendation was made without any consultation with the affected Lake Natron communities. According to the Maasai International Solidarity Alliance (MISA), the area encompasses approximately 26 villages and over 70,000 residents across three districts (Ngorongoro, Monduli, and Longido). Under Tanzanian domestic law, no Game Reserve can be established or maintained on village land. The threatened upgrade would therefore proceed in violation of both international human rights law and Tanzania’s own legal framework.

Recommendations Inconsistent with Documented Human Rights Violations

The land commission endorsed the 2022 Loliondo evictions by recommending that the Pololeti Game Reserve continue to operate as a game reserve, even though the displacements were characterized by documented human rights violations, including beatings, shootings, sexual violence, arbitrary arrests, livestock seizures, and the prolonged incarceration of community members and leaders. The Commission acknowledged community complaints about the impacts of the evictions and yet advised the Government to retain the reserve’s status. These violations have been documented by Human Rights Watch, Amnesty International, and the African Commission on Human and Peoples’ Rights, and are inconsistent with Tanzania’s obligations under international law.

The relocation commission, for its part, found that the relocation exercise was not participatory; that relocated Maasai were placed on land already occupied by others; that land was allocated only to individual male household heads, excluding women and members of polygamous households; and that denial of social services, discrimination, and disenfranchisement were imposed on the Maasai community. The Commission reported that only 1,678 of approximately 23,000 households — 7.3% — had relocated by the time of its assessment, and characterized the process as based on “inducement” rather than voluntary consent. Despite these findings, the Commission recommended that relocation continue and that legislation be amended, without recommending any accountability for the Government officials responsible.

The cumulative effect of the Commissions’ recommendations, encompassing the NCA, Loliondo, and Lake Natron, constitutes a pattern of targeted displacement of a single Indigenous community that is inconsistent with Tanzania’s obligations under the International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination (ICERD) and UNDRIP.

Failure to Assess Tourism Impacts: A Scientific and Methodological Gap

The Commissions’ reports address ecological challenges in the NCA without acknowledging the well-documented environmental impacts of expanding tourism infrastructure. This omission is scientifically untenable. The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), the Intergovernmental Science-Policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services (IPBES), and the International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN) have all affirmed that Indigenous pastoralist practices, including Maasai rotational grazing, seasonal land management, and traditional fire management,  are essential contributors to biodiversity, ecosystem health, and climate resilience.

According to the Ngorongoro Conservation Area Authority’s own data cited in the land commission report, NCA visitor numbers rose from 592,498 in 2015 to 884,484 in March 2025, with revenues increasing from TZS 60 billion to TZS 223 billion over the same period. The number of hotels, tourism facilities, and vehicles accessing the crater floor continues to expand rapidly, yet the Commissions treat these as ecologically neutral factors while presenting Maasai presence as the primary conservation threat. This selective framing is inconsistent with the evidentiary standards expected of an independent commission and raises concerns that the underlying rationale for relocation is the reallocation of Maasai lands for commercial tourism rather than conservation.

It is also notable that while Tanzanian authorities have suppressed traditional Maasai fire management practices, the NCA Authority has independently adopted prescribed burning as a range management tool, an irony that underscores the unacknowledged contribution of Maasai stewardship to the very conservation goals the Commissions cite as justification for removal.

The UN Special Rapporteur on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples has repeatedly (see UN Special Procedures communications database) called on Tanzania to halt relocation efforts and engage in good faith consultations with the Maasai. The European Parliament, in its December 2023 resolution, condemned the forced evictions and called on Tanzania to recognize and protect Maasai rights to self-determination, land, and FPIC. On 17 April 2026, UN human rights experts again urged Tanzania to ensure transparency and respect for Indigenous Peoples’ rights in Ngorongoro.

IPLP further calls for the immediate cessation of enforcement operations that followed the Commissions’ submission to the President. According to the Maasai International Solidarity Alliance (MISA), on 15 March 2026 — three days after the reports were presented — NCA rangers arrested three Ngorongoro residents in the Ndutu area and ordered them to vacate their land to accommodate tourism expansion. These developments indicate that implementation of the Commissions’ recommendations is already underway, making the case for immediate suspension all the more urgent.

IPLP’s Recommendations to the Government of Tanzania

In light of the foregoing, IPLP respectfully urges the Government of Tanzania to:

• Suspend implementation of the Commissions’ recommendations pending an independent review that complies with international human rights standards, including the full and meaningful participation of Maasai Indigenous Peoples and respect for their right to FPIC;
• Formally recognize the Maasai as Indigenous Peoples in accordance with UNDRIP and the jurisprudence of the African human rights system, which has explicitly identified the Maasai as Indigenous Peoples, and adopt constitutional and legislative reforms to reflect this recognition;
• Ensure meaningful consultation and participation of Maasai Indigenous Peoples in all conservation and land-related decision-making processes, in full compliance with international FPIC standards;
• Ensure accountability for Government officials responsible for the human rights violations documented in connection with the Loliondo evictions, consistent with Tanzania’s obligations under ICERD and UNDRIP;
• Refrain from proceeding with the upgrade of Lake Natron Game Controlled Area to a Game Reserve, in light of the area’s legal status as encompassing registered village land and the Commission’s failure to consult affected communities;
• Commission an independent ecological assessment of the NCA that includes a full analysis of tourism impacts, consistent with the evidentiary standards required by international conservation bodies including UNESCO, IUCN, and IPBES; and
• Adopt a rights-based, co-managed conservation model that recognizes and incorporates Maasai land rights and traditional ecological knowledge, consistent with successful models implemented in Canada, New Zealand, Australia, and Sweden, and with the recommendations of the UN Special Rapporteur on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples.

About the IPLP Program

The Indigenous Peoples Law and Policy (IPLP) Program at the University of Arizona James E. Rogers College of Law is a leading global academic institution dedicated to advancing Indigenous Peoples’ rights through legal research, litigation support, capacity-building, and policy advocacy. IPLP leads the Indigenous Rights and Protected Areas Initiative and has collaborated extensively with Indigenous communities, States, and international organizations across five continents. The Program has hosted two former UN Special Rapporteurs on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples and maintains active engagement with international human rights mechanisms, including the UN Permanent Forum on Indigenous Issues (UNPFII) and the Expert Mechanism on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples (EMRIP). For more information: https://law.arizona.edu/academics/programs/indigenous-peoples-law-policy