AU needs to be fully committed to relevant human rights instruments

As the 27th AU Summit taking place here focuses on “2016: African Year of Human Rights, with a particular focus on the Rights of Women”, more needs to be done to live up to that theme. It would be elusive to protect and respect human rights across the continent without concrete enforcement measures to bring to account to those who grossly violate human rights. Equally, it is elusive to have peace and stability in Africa if human rights violators may go unpunished. As the slogan goes, ‘no justice no peace’. Africa, like other continents, is in the throes of gross violations of human rights, including those of women and girls. To ensure the effective protection and respect of human rights, the fight against impunity should be at the forefront of AU’sre-commitment in days ahead. It’s against that background, that AU established the African Court of Justice and Human Rights (ACJHR). This Court is to serve as the principal judicial organ of the AU, though it’s not yet functional. The African Union (AU) adopted the Protocol on amendments to the Protocol on the Statute of the African Court of Justice and Human rights (Malabo Protocol), which extends the jurisdiction of the ACJHR to crimes under international law and transnational crimes. If the ACJHR Protocol is ratified and domesticated, the Court will assume a prominent role of promoting respect for human rights on African soil. Like the UN Ad hoc tribunals and International Criminal Court (ICC), the ACJHR will have an international crimes chamber. This chamber will be specifically dedicated to the prosecution of individuals with the highest criminal responsibility on international crimes committed on the continent. Here, I intend to raise three fundamentally related questions: First, I ask why the ACJHR is designed to pursue this mission, and what the opportunities and risks are for doing so? Second, was the spirit behind the creation of this court for stamping out the reign of impunity with respect to international crimes? Third, did the ‘Merger Protocol’ intend to create a court that would act as a deterrent to gross violations of human rights across the continent? To the best of my knowledge, only five states, namely Libya, Mali, Burkina Faso, Congo and Benin, have ratified the ACJHR Protocol. What may, on the face of it, seem obvious the majority of States are unwilling to assent to the Protocol. Nevertheless, the development of the ACJHR is worth contemplating for its potential future impact in the human rights arena on the African continent.For the ACJHR court to enter into force, at least 15 countries have to ratify the Protocol. As such, the AU member states need to ratify the protocol, and this would reflect a strong adherence to protecting and promoting human rights, an obligation contained in the statutory framework of the organisation. While the ACJHR can play a vastly positive role in a continent persistently afflicted by the scourge of conflict and impunity for crimes under international law, there are a number of concerns and implications arising from the merger of jurisdictions. But nevertheless, massive ratifications are needed to operationalise the court. However, if the ACJHR Protocol does not secure minimum ratifications, it will never be implemented and, as a result, will clearly show a lack of commitment to observance of human rights. A similar spirit is needed as AU demonstrated in the establishment of the Extraordinary African Chambers, in partnership with Senegalese Government, to prosecute the former Chadian leader, Hissene Habre, who was recently convicted of crimes against humanity and sentenced to life in jail. Another important action needed is the implementation of the UN Security Council Resolution 1325 (October 31, 2000) for protection of the rights of women and girls, as one of vulnerable groups, especially in the armed conflict. In fact, the greatest danger to women’s rights is an armed conflict, where we have seen women killed and sexually abused. Today, UNSC 1325 is regarded as a landmark international legal framework that addresses not only the inordinate impact of war on women and girls, but also the pivotal role women should and do play in conflict prevention, conflict management, and conflict resolution. More precisely, States should ensure increased participation of women at decision-making levels in conflict resolution and peace processes, including all undertakings that affect their communities. In relation to peace-keeping particularly, Rwanda, like a handful of AU member states, sets an example where women have participated in peacekeeping operations in Africa and Haiti, which demonstrates the recognition of their role in addressing global pressing issues. Even if, in adopting resolution 1325, UN Security Council didn’t refer to any provision under the UN Charter—to express the weight it deserves as may be required in the eyes of international law—it is nevertheless binding given its paramount importance. This doesn’t, however, mean that the preceding resolution is the only instrument that embodies women’s rights, there’re several international, regional and sub-regional instruments that set out those rights. As such, there’s a greater need for political will to effectively implement all existing instruments, if AU is committed to the realization of women’s rights, as it’s at the top of the agenda of this 27th AU Summit. The writer is an international law expert.

Opinions

AU needs to be fully committed to relevant human rights instruments