Pan African Parliament at the Crossroads

Saki Mpanyane (ISS Today)—The Pan-African Parliament concluded its 8th Ordinary Session on the 26th October 2007, effectively marking the halfway point for the institution since its launch in 2004. An important question that needs to be posed is, given its mandate and the challenges it has encountered, what is the relevance of the Pan African Parliament (PAP)?

The Protocol to the Treaty Establishing the African Economic Community relating to the Pan African Parliament (PAP Protocol) outlines the objectives and functions for the new institution. PAP’s objectives and functions include, among others, the need to facilitate the integration of the African continent; promotion of the principles of human rights and democracy; encouraging good governance, transparency and accountability in Member States; promoting peace, security and stability; and the facilitation of cooperation and development in Africa. PAP is also expected to provide a critical voice and a platform for African people to articulate their needs and have a say in decision-making processes. It is on the basis of this mandate that PAP must be assessed.

A number of factors and challenges have been highlighted as having had a negative impact on PAP’s capacity to discharge its mandate and on its capacity to perform its functions as outlined in the PAP Protocol.

First, it is important to reflect on the context of PAP’s establishment, primarily its role and responsibility to facilitate the integration process of the African Economic Community. PAP forms the prospective legislature of the emerging continental architecture of the African Union as it moves towards integration. That process is to culminate in the establishment of the Union Government of Africa. As a result, all institutions of the AU, including PAP, are mandated and entrusted with responsibilities to contribute towards the process of continental integration.

However, an important factor relating to integration is that Regional Economic Communities (RECs) in Africa, which are to form pillars of this process, have not fared well. Most RECs are still nowhere near achieving their stated objectives of creating conditions conducive to regional integration. Some REC’s are non-functional. Furthermore, there is a proliferation of RECs and there is a dilemma of overlapping membership. It is not clear how PAP can or has contributed towards the resolution of these dilemmas.

Second, PAP is expected to contribute towards the emerging African Peace and Security Architecture (APSA) by promoting peace, security and stability. This includes the need to facilitate cooperation and development on the continent. PAP is expected to work closely with other African Union (AU) organs and structures responsible for peace and security. However, PAP finds itself hampered in discharging this responsibility, primarily because of its weak position relative to other AU structures and organs. PAP is particularly disadvantaged in that its role and decisions are largely those of an advisory and consultative body. As such, its decisions and resolutions do not carry much weight and cannot be enforced.

Furthermore, there is no interaction with these other AU structures during important PAP events such as committee hearings, briefings or sessions. Presently, PAP has no effective mechanism by which to influence the decisions made by other AU organs and structures. Indeed, it is not clear whether PAP is ever consulted or engaged when significant decisions relating to peace and security are made, despite PAP prioritising such matters and sharing a similar mandate. PAP therefore risks being irrelevant to the emerging APSA.

PAP has also not fared well regarding the promotion of good governance, transparency, accountability, and human rights. Significantly, PAP does not have the resources or capacity to monitor whether these principles are upheld and promoted.

Other important factors have also been highlighted as impacting on PAP’s inability to effectively and efficiently discharge its mandate. These include, among others, the fact that Members of PAP (MPs) are not directly elected, but are nominated by their respective national parliaments, resulting in a lack of independence. The issue of lack of legislative power is also highlighted as a problem, primarily because PAP’s resolutions and recommendations lack enforcement. Another factor relates to the fact that some MPs come from political systems that do not have democratic principles of holding the executive to account. As such, it is difficult to expect MPs coming from such systems to discharge the responsibility of holding others to account and exercising oversight.

In view of the aforementioned, what is the relevance of PAP and how can its position relative to other AU organs and structures be improved? It is true that PAP’s institutional position and lack of powers relative to other AU organs puts it at a marked disadvantage. It is further acknowledged that the institutional challenges facing PAP may be structural and may be beyond its capacity. However, it is the contention of this writer that, in spite of its lack of legislative powers, even without amending the Protocol PAP still retains enough scope and powers to be an effective and relevant institution.

For one thing, PAP can more effectively utilize its committee hearings by ensuring that issues, including controversial ones, are fully debated and decisions scrutinised. PAP must, furthermore, establishing a system of briefings and/or representation with other AU organs or structures. Alternatively it can request to make representation before these bodies as envisaged in various Protocols. PAP can also increase its relevance by seeking to contribute to the processes of AU peacekeeping missions. In particular, PAP can insist on the right to participate in decision-making before forces are deployed, and visit troops in the field after deployment. Finally, PAP committees must enhance their visibility by engaging civil society, undertaking visits to conflict regions, engaging affected communities, passing motions on any matter, and so on.
The ongoing failure by PAP to be relevant will only contribute to the delay of transforming it into a full legislative body, will confine it to a junior position in the emerging APSA. The challenge facing PAP in the last half of its term is, therefore, to fulfil its mandate and ensure it becomes relevant.

Saki Mpanyane, Senior Researcher: Regional Programme, ISS Tshwane (Pretoria)

<< Back to main