PAP’s Advisory and Consultative powers should extend to the election of AUC Chairperson and Deputy Chairperson

Opinion by Olu IBEKWE

As the tenure of the current elected officials of the African Union Commission (AUC) comes to an end next year, the process of electing a new Chairperson and Deputy Chairperson as well as the Commissioners of the Commission is expected to commence soon. To ensure a more robust procedure, there is need to enhance the democratic legitimacy of the process, taking into consideration, the advisory and consultative powers of the Pan-African Parliament (PAP).

The call for a review of the process is consistent with the practice in similar supra-national bodies like the European Union (EU) where the European Union President and other members of the European Commission are nominated by the European Council and then subjected to a vote by the European Parliament. But since PAP can only exercise advisory and consultative powers under the current protocol, the Parliament should be empowered to hold hearings and then make recommendations to the Assembly for approval.

Under the current procedure adopted as part of the AU Reforms by the Eleventh Extraordinary Session of the Assembly of Heads of State and Government (Assembly) of the African Union (AU), 17 - 18 November 2018 (Ext/Assembly/AU/Dec.1(XI)), the Assembly is responsible for the election and appointment of the Chairperson and Deputy Chairperson of the Commission while the Executive Council is responsible for the election and appointment of the commissioners. The Assembly also approved that the election of the Chairperson of the AU Commission should be enhanced by a robust merit-based and transparent selection process.

To achieve the objective of a merit-based and transparent selection process, candidates for the position of Chairperson of the Commission are expected to participate in a public debate to be broadcast live on the AU website during which they shall present their visions and ideas on the implementation of Agenda 2063.

The Assembly also approved the establishment of a “Panel of Eminent Africans”, to be composed of five (5) eminent personalities, one per region to oversee the pre-selection of candidates for senior leadership positions in the AU Commission. Member states are to propose their nominations for the Panel of Eminent Africans to the Commission which shall then present such nominations to the Assembly for approval.

The question is, if candidates for the position of Chairperson of the Commission are to participate in a public debate to be broadcast live on the AU website during which they shall present their visions and ideas on the implementation of Agenda 2063, will it not be better for such debate to take place during a plenary session of the Pan-African Parliament? And if the intention is to have a robust merit-based and transparent selection process, will the selection process not be enriched by the participation of African parliamentarians in line with their advisory and consultative powers?

Article 11 of the Protocol to the Treaty Establishing the African Economic Community Relating to the Pan-African Parliament (PAP Protocol) on the Functions and Powers of the Parliament, states that the Pan-African Parliament “shall be vested with legislative powers to be defined by the Assembly. However, during the first term of its existence, the Pan-African Parliament shall exercise advisory and consultative powers”. In this regard, PAP may “examine, discuss or express an opinion on any matter, either on its own initiative or at the request of the Assembly or other policy organs and make any recommendations it may deem fit relating to, inter alia, matters pertaining to respect of human rights, the consolidation of democratic institutions and the culture of democracy, as well as the promotion of good governance and the rule of law”.

And as we know, the establishment of the Pan-African Parliament is informed by a vision to provide a common platform for African peoples and their grass-roots organizations to be more involved in discussions and decision-making on the problems and challenges facing the Continent.

If that is the case, it then follows that PAP is central to Africa’s integration agenda and should invariably be empowered to play this role. And if African representatives are expected to make significant contribution to democracy building in Africa, then the process of electing and appointing the senior leadership positions in the AUC should be amended to make room for legislative input.

This will give meaning and effect to the provisions of Article 11 of the PAP Protocol which granted PAP the power to “examine, discuss or express an opinion on any matter, either on its own initiative or at the request of the Assembly or other policy organs and make any recommendations it may deem fit”.

Accordingly, the procedure for electing the AUC officials should be amended to provide that while the “Panel of Eminent Africans” may accept nominations from member states and pre-qualify them, names of the prequalified persons should be forwarded to the Pan-African Parliament. The Parliament will then invite them to appear before a televised plenary to be interrogated on their visions and ideas for the Union.

Requiring the candidates to appear before PAP for a public hearing will result in a better appreciation of the role and importance of the Pan-African Parliament in the AU governance architecture which presently, seem to be lacking.

It is also important to remind us of the statement of 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, where the Assembly stated that:

“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”.

With the above declaration by the Assembly in mind, one could posit that the events of the last few years on how the AU has been run, has made it imperative that candidates for the position of the AUC Chairperson should appear before the third highest organ of the Union to ensure that they are not only knowledgeable about the AU but also appreciate the vision of the founders of the Union in establishing the Pan-African Parliament.

For instance, the founders envisioned that the PAP should be strengthened and provided with the necessary powers and resources to enable it to discharge its mandate. But the AU appears to be turning into a bureaucratic organization which is run according to the whims and caprices of the AUC Chairperson. The protocol that established PAP, gave the Parliament some level of operational autonomy. Unfortunately, that Protocol is arguably treated with ignominy with the result that PAP is seen not as an important, independent AU organ but as a department under the supervision of the AUC Chairperson.

The reasons for such an opinion are evident. According to records, PAP’s budget which was about 9% of the total AU budget when the current AUC Chairperson took office in 2017 is now less than 2% of the AU budget. The AUC appear to be in charge of the administration of PAP including staff recruitment contrary to the provisions of both the PAP Protocol and the AU Staff Rules and Regulations. The AU Budget which had begun to be sent to PAP as required by the PAP Protocol appeared to have stopped when the current Chairperson took office.

Another case in point was circumstances that led to the suspension of parliamentary activities at PAP in 2021. It is on record that as at 01 June 2021 when the Chairperson directed an indefinite suspension of parliamentary activities over disagreement in the application of the principle of rotation, there had been a number of previous Executive Council decisions that settled the issue in dispute (rotation) dating back to 2016. There had also been an opinion by the Office of Legal Counsel on the issue all of which pointed to the fact that rotation was a settled matter within the AU organs and institutions. One would therefore have expected the Chairperson to have reminded the parliamentarians that rotation was a settled issue as far as the AU was concerned.

The Executive Council decision of October 2021 on the crisis merely reaffirmed those previous decisions and even after the Council resolved the issue during its October 2021 session (and reaffirmed in February 2022), the Chairperson appeared still reluctant to implement the decision. Instead, the issue of rotation and the venue for the session was reopened where a committee led by one of the Chairperson’s appointees began to hold court where some members of the parliament appeared. The said appointee also had the temerity to issue reports and recommendations that in effect, revisited the decisions of the Executive Council on the issue of rotation and venue for the session with impunity. It took the intervention of the Bureau of the Assembly for PAP to be reopened to hold Bureau election in June 2022 at the seat of the parliament in South Africa and on the basis of rotation, more than seven months after the October 2021 Executive Council decision to reopen PAP as a matter of urgency!

To kick start the process, PAP may wish to adopt a resolution requesting the Assembly to revisit the decision of the Eleventh Extraordinary Session (Ext/Assembly/AU/Dec.1(XI)) and amend the election process to require that candidates short-listed by the Panel of Eminent Africans, should appear before PAP plenary to be questioned on their vision and ideas about the Union including the implementation of Agenda 2063. This will enhance the democratic legitimacy of the election process.