OLC Distances Itself from Alleged Attempt to Undermine PAP’s Rule-Making Powers

A key moment of institutional clarity emerged during the recent workshop of the Pan-African Parliament’s (PAP) Permanent Committee on Rules, Privileges and Discipline, as the African Union’s top legal authority reaffirmed the limits of its role in PAP’s rule-making process. The Lead Counsel in the Office of Legal Counsel (OLC) of the African Union Commission, Prof. Hajer Gueldich, publicly dissociated her office from any attempt to override the Parliament’s sovereign rule-making powers as enshrined in Article 11.8 of the Protocol to the Treaty Establishing the African Economic Community Relating to the Pan-African Parliament (PAP Protocol).

Answering questions from the members of the Committee, Prof. Gueldich reiterated that the OLC’s role is strictly advisory. She affirmed that while her office may offer legal opinions and draft recommendations, it is ultimately the PAP that holds the exclusive authority to adopt, amend, or reject rules in accordance with its Protocol. The intervention came amid rising concerns that the OLC’s draft revisions were being used to reopen settled questions already resolved by the Parliament in its November 2024 alignment of the Rules of Procedure with the Protocol.

Staff Influence and Procedural Missteps

What emerged during the workshop was a revealing insight into how certain draft rules, attributed to the OLC, may have originated instead from a PAP Secretariat staff member who previously prepared a controversial “Gap Analysis” rejected by the Committee in 2022. According to Prof. Gueldich, several proposals were presented to her team by the staff member under the impression that they reflected institutional consensus within PAP—an assertion later found to be inaccurate. She expressed surprise that many of the recommendations were recycled from previously dismissed documents and noted her office had relied on the staff’s representation of those proposals as being PAP-endorsed.

In fact, it came to light that this individual was the only staff member involved in both the earlier and current review processes, and had advanced several positions without consultation with the PAP Bureau—the body that, under Article 12.5 of the Protocol, is mandated to lead such institutional engagements. These unilateral actions created the perception of a Secretariat-driven agenda to subordinate the Parliament’s leadership and undermine its political oversight role.

Misinterpretation and Overreach

Some of the most contentious proposals—such as the insistence on a fixed three-year tenure for the PAP Bureau—contradicted both the PAP Protocol and the Parliament’s November 2024 Resolution PAP.6/PLN/PLN/RES/07/NOV.24 aligning the Rules with the Protocol. The insistence on resurrecting these rejected ideas, especially in contradiction to Executive Council Decision EX.CL/Dec.1242(XLIV) (February 2024), was viewed as undermining the Council’s clear instruction: a limited legal clean-up, not a full-scale rewrite.

Further scrutiny revealed attempts to dilute the President’s leadership authority in the Rules without reference to any AU values or legal justifications for such redistribution of powers. In an apparent last-minute move, a staff member from the OLC reportedly introduced an outdated and misinterpreted 2009 Executive Council decision to suggest a historical basis for the disputed three-year term—despite clear precedent and legal opinion to the contrary.

Committee Response and Way Forward

Following the revelations, the Committee thanked Prof. Gueldich for her candor and reaffirmation of the limits of the OLC’s advisory role. It was agreed that any remaining issues requiring legal clarification would be formally communicated to her office. The Committee announced that it would reconvene on July 14 to conclude its review process. A consolidated report would be submitted to PAP’s internal structures and subsequently discussed with the Permanent Representatives Committee (PRC) Sub-Committee on Rules, Standards and Verification of Credentials and Procedures, which has been tasked by the Executive Council with finalizing the alignment exercise. The final version of the Rules will then be submitted to the PAP Plenary for formal adoption.

This episode underscores the importance of respecting institutional mandates and reaffirming the separation of advisory and legislative functions within the AU system. The PAP, through its Plenary, remains the sole organ empowered to adopt its Rules of Procedure, and any alignment process must proceed in a manner that safeguards this foundational principle.