CHAPTER 2: LITERATURE REVIEW
2.9. Challenges of the APRM
Jiboku (2016) argues that there is no doubt that popular participation, which is the core principle of the APRM initiative, is limited by the lack of adequate information. Beyond that, some African governments have deliberately put in place measures to curtail the participatory activities of civil society groups whom they deemed to be meddling in governmental affairs, most notably when they focus on issues considered to be the exclusive preserve of the government. These impediments question the participatory and inclusive process associated with the APRM and the reality that the APRM Review Reports are reflective of the views of the people. The APRM as an African Union initiative, therefore, is affected by the leadership problems on the continent (Jiboku, 2016:3).
The APRM report and recommendations are not being effectively implemented by the concerned countries- it is recorded that in 2014, eleven years after the prelude of APRM, nine out of the twenty most corrupt countries in the world were in Africa (Bestoyin, 2019:171). This shows that the APRM has been unable to improve good governance in Africa over the years and this has been affecting every sector of the African economy. Despite the introduction of free trade ares, customs unions and common markets, the level of intra-African trade remains among the world’s lowest. Only about 10 percent of African trade is within the continent, compared with 40 percent in North America and 60 percent in Europe. Therefore, the APRM has not had any significant impact on Africa’s economic development. Although some African countries have experienced economic growth since the inception of APRM, the growth has not been enough to have a meaningful impact on poverty reduction (Bestoyin, 2019:172).
Furthermore, another example of participating countries ignoring APRM recommendations was encountered in South Africa, where the panel urged for action on crime, racism and xenophobia, as well as a review of South Africa's election system, attempts to strengthen parliament and anti- corruption measures (Bond, 2009:599). Mbeki questioned the findings of a report warning of South Africa's brutality and arrest of foreigners from other African countries some months before
the xenophobic attacks. Its South African nation Report indicated that xenophobia against other Africans is on the rise and needs to be addressed. Mbeki rejected that xenophobic tendencies existed in South Africa, pointing out that the country did not even have refugee camps. However, 62 people were slain in anti-foreigner violence in Alexandra, Johannesburg, a few months later (Bond, 2009:599). The process revealed the Panel's limitations in dealing with a powerful nation that might ignore its advise (Hebert & Gruzd, 2007).
Moreover, Kenya was peer assessed in the APR Forum's fifth summit, which took place in Gambia on June 30, 2006. (Obonye, 2012). Following the issuance of the APRM Country Review Report for that country by the APRM prominent individuals, this review was conducted.
Kenya needed to address critical and overarching issues of human rights and governance urgently as mentioned in the report. It stated that the nation needs to heal and that the proceeding of the country’s alleviation and reconciliation is unlikely to take place as long as society remains polarized (Obonye, 2012). The role of prominent members of the ruling party and high-ranking government officials in inciting ethnic violence was highlighted by the APRM eminent personalities. They expressed their dissatisfaction with the absence of investigations and convictions of many of the perpetrators, noting that many of the perpetrators have never been probed or convicted, and that others have continued to serve as senior officers (Obonye, 2012:445).
The research suggested leadership transformation which requires not just guiding reformation but also managing it in a way that provides broad ownership, legitimacy, self-directed sustainability and replication of change across the board. When it came to Kenya's evaluation, the APR Forum dismissed the Panel of Eminent individuals' findings (Obunye, 2012). Leaders of State and Government from cooperating countries did not raise these concerns with Kenyan President Mwai Kibaki in an attempt to forestall the disaster foreshadowed in the eminent’s persons' report. Kenya was plunged into massive post-election tribal violence less than two years after its review, resulting in the deaths of thousands of people. Scholars argued that had Kibaki's peers engaged him candidly about the impending ethnic-based violence, Kenya could have taken calculated measures to avoid this unfortunate outcome. The refusal to critically engage President Kibaki encouraged the public to wonder whether he should be impeached (Obonye, 2012:446).
Obonye (2012:446) contends that following President Kibaki, a number of leaders from Ghana, Ethiopia, South Africa and Nigeria addressed. Not even one of them made an enquiry to President Kibaki instead, they all welcomed the report and hailed Kenya for being honest, thorough and open. They promised to assist Kenya in its efforts to find solutions to its constitutional review and diversity issues. Presidents Obasanjo and Mbeki, Prime Minister Meies Zenawi expressed relief and promised to continue the process now that they had realized it was not a life or death crisis (Obonye, 2012:447).
Kenya was hailed as an outpost of civil rights and democracy in East Africa before the 2008 post-election violence. Its membership in the APRM was viewed as a step toward enhancing civil rights insulating apparatus and consolidating its democracy by adopting internationally agreed-upon best standards and practices (Obonye, 2012:447). The Kenya Report also suggested mediation and conciliatory involvement under the auspices of the African Union. However, the APRM made no attempt to mediate or conciliate as the national report urged (Obonye, 2012:447).
Questions regarding the commitment and sincerity of African governments in ensuring the success of the APRM and the integration of its policy frameworks into national policy processes have been raised by experts. The APRM is also confronted with capacity and operational challenges. The issue of funding the APRM is a principal challenge, some member states are handicapped with resources to implement NPoA. It is equally concerning that most of the APRM member countries are not adhering to the specified timelines for reporting on the progress made in implementing their NPoA (Jiboku, 2016:63)
These are areas in which civil society organizations plays crucial role not only in holding governments accountable to keeping their promises and implementing policies which touch on the lives of citizens but also in monitoring objectives of regional programmes such as the APRM.
The structures put in place at national and regional levels for engaging with the civil society are weak (Jiboku, 2016:63).
The APRM has been neglected and the quality of the panel of eminent persons has declined, after Presidents Olusegun Obasanjo of Nigeria and Thabo Mbeki of South Africa left office in 2007 and 2008 respectively, the APRM struggled to operate effectively (Nagar, 2016:15). These two presidents were viewed as the main champions of the mechanism. Moreover, the mechanism
is confronted with severe financial difficulties and is currently facing huge budget deficits. At a February 2016 APRM heads of state meeting, its newly appointed CEO expressed his concern over the non payment of annual subscription fees of $100,000 by member states. The APRM has been mainly relying on funding from South Africa and Nigeria (Nagar, 2016:15-16).