Opinion by Olu. Ibekwe
It is expected that the report of the recently
concluded Pan-African Parliament (PAP) and Permanent Representatives Committee
(PRC) Retreat will be presented to the 42nd Ordinary Session of the Executive
Council for deliberation and further directives on the issues raised at the
retreat.
The 41st
Ordinary Session of the Council which took place in Lusaka, Zambia on 14-15
July 2022 (EX.CL/Dec.1174(XLI)) directed the PRC to hold a retreat with PAP to
address all the concerns and challenges that affect the delivery and operations
of the PAP and reiterated the need to urgently convene the said retreat and
report back to the Executive Council in February 2023. The retreat was held on
19 – 20 December, 2022 in Johannesburg, Republic of South Africa and February
2023 is here!
I had
in an earlier opinion article, reflected on the keynote address presented by
the Minister of International Relations and Cooperation of the Republic of
South Africa, Dr. Neladi Pandor.
Dr. Pandor who is also an
influential member of the Executive Council had during her speech, informed the
retreat participants that the AU was not set up to be a bureaucracy.
And
so, as the 42nd
Ordinary Session of the Executive Council sits to receive and consider the
report of the retreat, it is imperative to place on record, some of the issues
presented and deliberated on by the two sister organs as well as remind us of the
provisions of the Constitutive Act of the African Union and the Protocol to the Treaty
Establishing the African Economic Community Relating to the Pan-African
Parliament (PAP Protocol), and then
contribute to the discourse on how to address the challenges affecting the
delivery and operations of the continental parliament.
Based on
reports, the retreat deliberated on PAP’s role in achieving economic
integration in Africa as well as enlighten the other AU organs on the
deliverables of the PAP in the continental governance agenda, challenges faced
by the Parliament in the fulfilment of its mandate, the legal status of Members
of Parliament in the African Union (AU) architecture, and financial and
resource support required for PAP to effectively fulfil its mandate.
Review of the Constitutive Act and PAP Protocol.
Since the retreat was expected to hold
discussions on the role of PAP in the AU governance architecture, it will not
be out of order for me to begin with a review of the relevant provisions of
both the Constitutive Act of the AU and the PAP Protocol.
And as I observed in
my previous article, the Constitutive
Act established a codified framework under which the AU is to function by
clearly delineating the functions and powers of each of the organs of the Union.
And I might add that the Constitutive Act is the supreme law of the AU and is
the controlling authority for actions of the organs of the Union.
So, I begin the conversation with one
of the preambles to the Constitutive Act that expressed a determination by AU
member states “to take all necessary measures to strengthen our common
institutions and provide them with the necessary powers and resources to
enable them discharge their respective mandates effectively” (emphasis
added). This tells us that there was a determination by the founding fathers of
the Union to ensure that the AU organs are provided with the necessary powers
and resources to enable them discharge their mandate. We are talking of a Union
of strong institutions/ organs which are financially capacitated to discharge
their respective mandates their functions, as opposed to a Union run by a
strong individual!
Article 5 of the Constitutive Act lists
the organs of the Union with PAP as the third highest organ of the Union. The
Assembly of Heads of State is listed as the highest organ of the Union, followed
by the Executive Council as the second highest organ. Article 17 provides for
the establishment of the Pan-African Parliament to ensure the participation of
African peoples in the development and economic integration of the continent
and further provides that the composition, powers, functions and organization
of the parliament shall be defines in a protocol relating thereto. The adoption
and ratification of the PAP Protocol which was incorporated into the Constitutive
Act by reference, shows that the founding fathers of the Union intended that
PAP deserves operational independence.
I
also draw our attention to one of the preambles to the PAP Protocol which made
it clear that member states were conscious of the obligations and legal
implications of the need to establish the Pan-African Parliament; and also firmly
convinced that the establishment of the Pan-African Parliament will ensure the
full participation of the African peoples in the economic development and
integration of the continent.
In
the same vein, Article 2 of the PAP Protocol states that “Member States hereby
establish a Pan-African Parliament the composition, functions, powers and
organization of which shall be governed by the present Protocol.
The
point being made here and which the Executive Council should re-emphasize is
that the Pan-African Parliament is the third highest organ of the AU and deserves
to be accordingly respected and treated. Secondly, PAP should be allowed to
carry out its functions without interference and provided with the necessary
resources to enable it discharge its mandate without let or hindrance by any
other inferior organ. It is also important to re-emphasize that member states
of the AU did agree to establish a Pan-African Parliament whose composition,
functions, powers and organization are governed by the PAP Protocol.
To
further underscore the historical background behind the establishment of the
parliament, we should be reminded that the Assembly in the Durban Declaration
in tribute to the Organization of African Unity and on the launching Of The
African Union, ASS/AU/Draft/Decl. 2 (I) February 28, 2004 Sirte, Libya, stated:
“We
recommit ourselves to ensuring the early establishment of the Pan African
Parliament in order to provide the common platform for our peoples and civil
society formations to actively participate in discussions and decision-making
on the challenges facing our Continent; we undertake to implement appropriate
policies for the promotion of the culture of democracy, good governance, the
respect for human rights and the rule of law, and the strengthening of
democratic institutions which will consolidate the popular participation of our
peoples on these issues”
This
is an affirmation of the Article 17 of the Constitutive Act which provided that
the composition, powers, functions and organization of the Parliament shall be
defined in a protocol relating thereto.
The Assembly had
earlier at its Second Ordinary Session, 10 - 12 July 2003 in Maputo, Mozambique
underscored “the urgency of the
entry into force of the Protocol to the Treaty establishing the African
Economic Community relating to the Pan-African Parliament and the importance of setting up this organ
which will ensure the effective and full participation of African peoples in
the development and integration of the Continent” (emphasis added)
Also in the
Decision on the launching and the establishment of the Pan African Parliament
Doc. Assembly/AU/4 (III) the Assembly pledged its full support for PAP’s
efforts in fulfilling their mandate as provided for in the Protocol to the
Treaty establishing the African Economic Community relating to the Pan-African
Parliament wherein the seat of the Pan-African Parliament was decided to be in
South Africa.
With this
background, one begins to wonder what happened to all those proclamations by
the Assembly and why almost twenty years later, the vision of the founding
fathers of the African Union is being treated with ignominy by unelected
bureaucrats at the African Union Commission (AUC).
The 42nd
Session of the Executive Council is hereby called upon to, consistent with the
vision of the founding fathers of the Union, reaffirm the position of PAP as
the third highest organ of the AU whose composition, powers, functions and
organization are organization are defined in the PAP Protocol.
The legal status
of the members of PAP within the AU architecture
Another
issue raised by the parliamentarians during the retreat was the status of the
members of the continental parliament within the AU architecture. For me, Article
5 of the Constitutive Act which listed PAP as the third highest organ of the
Union, has provided the answer and guidance. The idea of some bureaucrats at
the AUC placing themselves above members of PAP is not only strange to the
Constitutive Act but untenable.
Under the current PAP Protocol, members
of PAP are elected from the National Parliaments of member states. Therefore,
the status enjoyed by the members of the national parliaments in their various
countries should not be diminished by reason of their designation to PAP.
On the contrary, their status ought to
be enhanced having been elevated to the continental parliament. For one,
members of the Executive Council who are the Foreign Ministers of the member
states had to go through confirmation by Parliament when they were nominated by
their President. Similarly, members of the PRC who are the permanent
representatives of the member states also had to be confirmed by their National
Parliament before designation to the AU. Above all, PAP is the organ that
represents the people of Africa which is why PAP is listed as the third highest
organ. PAP should accordingly be accorded all the privileges and respect
contemplated by the Constitutive Act. The Chairperson of the African Union
Commission should be directed to give meaning and effect to the provisions of
Articles 5 and 17 of the Constitutive Act.
PAP members also complained about lack
of Health Insurance coverage while the parliament is in session in South
Africa. They
argued that there is need for a complete harmonization of the benefits of MP’s
within the AU system with particular reference to the provisions of health
insurance coverage. They recalled that in the
past, MPs were provided with medical insurance but few years ago, this health
insurance benefit was removed.
Admittedly, lack of health insurance coverage while in South
Africa presents a challenge to MP’s as their ability to function efficiently will
adversely be affected. Members of PAP by virtue of their assignments travel regularly
to South Africa and elsewhere across the globe on missions. This is done
without the benefit of health insurance and its attendant risk and
consequences. But the staff who travel with the MPs are fully covered. Something
is not right. The Executive Council may wish to direct the restoration of
health insurance coverage to the MPs especially when they engage in AU related
activities outside their country of origin.
Submission of
the AU Budget to PAP before approval
The reluctance of the AUC to comply with Article 11.2 of the
PAP Protocol which required PAP to “Discuss its budget and the budget of the
Community and make recommendations thereon prior to its approval by the
Assembly” was another area of concern at the retreat.
If one may ask, what is the harm in submitting
the AU Budget to PAP prior to approval if not due to bureaucratic mentality?
Will presentation of the AU Budget to PAP prior to submission to the Assembly
not enrich the process and give it democratic legitimacy? This practice of AUC
bureaucrats looking down on PAP and the mentality that the AU can function
without PAP must not be allowed to continue.
Both Article
17 of the Constitutive Act and Article 2 of the PAP Protocol made it clear that
Member States of the Union established the
Pan-African Parliament whose composition, functions, powers and organization are
governed by the present Protocol. And the only way that African people and
civil society organizations can participate in how the AU is run, as per
Article 17 of the Constitutive Act, is through the Pan-African Parliament.
Is it not strange that we are at this
time, arguing about complying with the provision of the law which requires that
AU Budget be submitted to parliament before approval? We thought that the issue
of submitting the AU Budget to PAP prior to approval by the Assembly was resolved
during the tenure of Dr. (Mrs.) Zuma as the AUC Chairperson when she began to
submit the AU Budget to PAP prior to submission to the AU policy organs for
approval. The AU Budgets were indeed submitted to PAP until the expiration of
her tenure at the end of 2016. Did the PAP Protocol which member states of the
AU ratified, place the submission of the AU Budget to PAP at the discretion of
the AUC Chairperson?
As we all know, proceedings at the
Pan-African Parliament (both the plenary and Committee sittings) are open to
the public including the media and civil society organizations. And when we
insist that Article 11.2 of the PAP Protocol be complied with, it is because we
want the AU to open itself for public scrutiny in line with the principles of
open government. We want the Africa people to know how AU funds are
appropriated and how the funds are spent. Member states who fund the AU through
their contributions which I may add, are approved by their national parliament
as part of the national budget, need to know through their elected
parliamentarians, how their money is spent. Why then should the issue of how AU
funds are appropriated and spent, be left to AUC bureaucrats who operate
outside public view and scrutiny? Is this consistent with the vision of the
founding fathers of the AU in the establishment of PAP or are we sliding back
to the days of the Organization of African Unity (OAU) where we had a
Secretary-General?
And so, we want the Executive Council
to interrogate this matter and make necessary pronouncements so as to avoid
inter organ conflicts.
Budgetary
provision required for PAP to effectively fulfil its mandate
Another troubling issue raised at the
retreat was the budget of PAP which was shown to have steadily declined since
2017. The
table below shows the annual approved PAP budgets as a percentage of the total
AU Budget, for the fiscal years 2007 to 2022.
|
Year |
PAP Budget (US$) |
Total AU Budget (US$) |
Percentage of PAP Budget to AU (%) |
|
2007 |
12,626,303 |
132,988,152 |
9.49 |
|
2008 |
12,626,303 |
140,037,880 |
9.01 |
|
2009 |
13,478,924 |
164,256,817 |
8.21 |
|
2010 |
9,178,037 |
250,453,697 |
3.66 |
|
2011 |
9,717,661 |
256,754,447 |
3.78 |
|
2012 |
10,168,806 |
274,094,433 |
3.71 |
|
2013 |
10,372,000 |
278,226,622 |
3.73 |
|
2014 |
14,292,124 |
426,260,902 |
3.35 |
|
2015 |
29,521,837 |
446,874,036 |
6.61 |
|
2016 |
32,460,996 |
837,417,323 |
3.88 |
|
2017 |
22,020,159 |
850,808,583 |
2.59 |
|
2018 |
17,221,564 |
792,486,284 |
2.17 |
|
2019 |
18,510,115 |
726,321,924 |
2.55 |
|
2020 |
16,408,177 |
694,005,490
|
2.36 |
|
2021 |
11,887,700 |
726,826,039 |
1.64 |
|
2022 |
11,992,597 |
684,423,701 |
1.75 |
As
shown above, PAP’s budget of $12,626,303 in the year 2007 which
was 9.49% of the total AU budget, has steadily declined to where in 2022, PAP’s
budget is 1.75% of the total AU budget. Compare that with the total AU budget
which was $132,988,152 in 2007 and rose to $726,826,039
in 2021 representing an increase of $593,837,887 or almost 446% over the
period. Unfortunately, PAP’s budget which was $12,626,303 in 2007, reduced to $11,887,700 during
the same period!. The Executive
Council may wish to direct an investigation on why the PAP budget which was $12,626,303
in the year 2007, declined to $11,887,700 in 2021 at a time the total AU
budget rose from $132,988,152 in 2007
to $726,826,039 in 2021. Which other AU organ suffered
this level of budget cuts and is there a deliberate attempt to starve the
parliament of funds to carry out its mandate so as to diminish its relevance?
What message are we sending?
Any consideration of PAP’s budgetary
requirement must take into consideration, Article 14.2 of the PAP Protocol which
states that PAP shall meet in ordinary session at
least twice a year, and that each ordinary session may last up to one month.
Additionally, Rule 27 of the Rules of Procedure of PAP provides that Committee
Sittings of the Parliament shall hold at
least two times in a year and that each sitting may last up to two weeks. PAP also
hosts an annual Conference of Speakers of Regional and National Parliaments in
August as per Article 18 of the PAP Protocol.
PAP has disclosed that it takes about
$1.2 million to hold a session which means that the parliament needs almost $5
million to hold the four statutory sessions and committee sittings annually. It
is therefore imperative that budgetary allocation to PAP must thus be based on
the above considerations in addition to the fact that PAP has a maximum of 275
members and fifteen permanent committees. The fifteen committees which
constitute the engine room of the parliament must be funded to be able to
conduct committee business. The welfare of those members in terms of their
health insurance and other allowances must also be taken into consideration.
The implication of the above is that
PAP’s annual Program Budget should be at least $10 million given the statutory
responsibilities, expectations and obligations of the parliament all of which
should translates to a minimum annual total budget of $18 million.
And finally on this issue, we must appreciate
the fact that the budget of PAP after being drawn up, passes through scrutiny
by the Bureau and the Committee on Monetary and Financial Affairs of the
Parliament before presentation to the plenary for final approval. Is it not
absurd that unelected bureaucrats at the AU will outside public view and without
basis in the Constitutive Act, sit to review decisions or resolutions of the Parliament?
To be
continued.
Olu. Ibekwe is the Chairperson of the Steering Committee of the African
Parliamentary Press Network (APPN), a network of journalists and information
officers reporting from regional, sub-regional and national Parliaments in
Africa.
PAP – PRC Retreat:
Reflections on Dr. Naledi Pandor’s keynote speech
No comments:
Post a Comment
Disclaimer: Comment expressed do not reflect the opinion of African Parliamentary News