“African States and CSOs Consultation on the Arms Trade Treaty”

Why Should Africa Join the Arms Trade Treaty?

Opening Speech by Desire Assogbavi

Head of Oxfam International, Liaison Office to the African Union

Friday 15th May, 2014 – Radisson Blue Hotel, Addis Ababa

Your Excellences, Ladies and Gentlemen

Welcome and thank you for joining us today in this informal discussion on the ATT co-hosted by Oxfam and Control Arms with the Support of PAX

Arm violence is having a huge impact on our continent. The costs of this violence can be found not just in the many innocent people killed or injured by arms, but also in the impact on the society more broadly. It undermines economies, over-burdens healthcare systems, causes the displacement of entire communities and disrupt education for millions of children. Some of this violence is being perpetrated with an existing pool of weapons, fresh supplies of arms and ammunition, flood into Africa on an almost daily basis.

95% of the weapons being used in Africa’s conflicts are made outside the continent. Greater efforts must be made, to prevent the irresponsible transfer of weapons fuelling Africa’s conflicts and poverty… Today The universalization and the implementation of the  ATT is the solution.

A commentator noted that, bananas, tomatoes and bubble gum are more restricted in markets than the trade of AK-47. Africa should aim for a universal ratification of the Arms Trade Treaty, and for its robust implementation, through regional cooperation.

Although there are many continental and regional agreements on arms in Africa, the globalization of the arms trade will best be controlled through

the Arms Trade Treaty (ATT) that came into force in December 2014.

The ATT binds exporters and importers and put firm regulations on the global, regional and national circulation of arms to minimize the impact of conflicts.

The unregulated trade in arms aggravates poverty and undermines our development goals.

We believe that African nations can contribute to the effective regulation of arms through ratifying, acceding to and implementing the ATT. This will lead to more effective governance of arms and security forces, reduce corruption and arms diversion, and help prevent arms entering illegal markets.

In addition, such action will help build a global practice for the effective control of arms transfers, and force sceptic states like Russia, the US and China to comply with the ATT in order to continue sales to African ATT member States. Signing and Ratifying the ATT alone will not bring peace to Africa but it will build a voice against uncontrolled arms and limit the horrifying effects of conflicts.

Insecurity in connection to arms has been one of the prime concerns of the AU. The initiative and framework of Silencing the Guns by 2020, and its inclusion with the AU vision 2063,  illustrates a strong commitment to control flow and unauthorized use of arms in the continent.

Oxfam is keen to work with the AU on ensuring that Africa becomes a leader on arms control, not just within the continent but across the world.

Africa’s place in ATT global forums awaits to be maximised but this will not happen without joining the Treaty.

So today, we would like to:

1. Update you on the Arms Trade Treaty process
2. Discuss opportunities and challenges on the ratification and implementation of the ATT,
3. Draw roadmap to the first Conference of State Parties of August 2015

African States played an important role in the negotiations and the adoption of the ATT. Our continent insisted on the inclusion of ammunition in the treaty and supported calls for strong provisions based around international human rights and humanitarian law. Many African states played a pioneering role in making the ATT happen. Notably, Africa lobbying of China was decisive in achieving the inclusion of Small Arms and Light Weapons in the categories of arms controlled under the treaty. Forty seven African States voted in favour of ATT at the UN General Assembly.

However, despite this level of support, Africa is currently under-represented amongst ratifying States, with 10 States only having ratified the Treaty as of April 2015. In the course of consultations, with your support, we identify the reasons behind the modest number of countries ratifying the ATT and use this information to develop strategies to match each particular situation to contribute to your efforts towards a safer Africa.

If Africa remains largely outside the Treaty, the voices of the states and the voices of the people will not be heard in the current negotiations of key issues in the framework of the Preparatory Committees.

I would like to share with you some figures reflecting the cost of conflicts in Africa

The Cost of Peace Keeping Operations in Africa

MINUSCA: CAR: annual approved budget (07/2014– 06/2015): $628,724,400

• United Nations Multidimensional Integrated Stabilization Mission in Mali (MINUSMA): Approved budget: (07/2014– 06/2015): $830,701,700

1. United Nations Organization Stabilization Mission in the Democratic Republic of the Congo (MONUSCO): Approved budget (07/2014 – 06/2015): $1,398,475,300
3. African Union-United Nations Hybrid Operation in Darfur (UNAMID): Approved budget (07/2014 – 06/2015): $1,153,611,300
5. United Nations Mission in the Republic of South Sudan (UNMISS): Approved budget(07/2014 –Approved budget (07/2014 – 06/2015): $493,570,300

I am sure you would agree with me that Africa must join the ATT.

I thank you.

By Désiré Assogbavi

This article was published in GREAT Insights Volume 4, Issue 3 (April/May 2015).

The African Union Agenda 2063 recognises that people’s ownership and mobilisation is needed as one of the critical enablers to concretise the seven aspirations of what can be called the business plan of Africa. However, as the Agenda is being launched, citizens’ and civil society organisations’ space is being terribly challenged in a growing number of countries on the continent.

Active citizens for effective and prosperous states

The positive and inclusive economic development that we are aspiring to in Africa requires a vibrant civil society and citizens taking a participative stand in it. Active citizens are fundamental prerequisites for the effective states that we need to change in Africa in order to meet the 2063 outcomes. It is therefore important that the issue of closing of CSOs’ space is dealt with at all levels and now urgently at continental level with a strong role from the African Union (AU) itself.

In a prosperous and democratic society, state and vibrant civil society are two sides of the same coin and must complement each other. Civil society must be seen as a reservoir of social capital capable of contributing to all aspects of the country’s development including health, education, peace, security etc. The role and influence of civil society in national and regional policy making does not diminish the relevance of governmental or inter-governmental processes —rather it enhances it. Nor does it lessen the authority of governments. While civil society can help to put issues on the agenda, only governments have the power to decide on them. The constructive engagement of civil society can reinforce deliberations by informing them, sensitising them to public opinion and grass-roots realities, increasing public understanding of decisions and enhancing accountability.

On peace and security for example, because of its immersion within the society, civil society has vocation and the ability to contribute to peace building initiatives and social cohesion. Civil society has shown its capacity to organise collection, analysis and evaluation of first-hand information allowing the identification of the sources of potential tensions as well as emerging conflicts. Whereas traditional conflicts were well understood by diplomats and specialists in political science, adequately addressing new conflicts requires much more on-the-ground understanding, new skills of social and cultural analysis, the active involvement of communities and their leaders, links to vulnerable groups, bridges into mainstream development processes and new ways of working. Most of the time, civil society organisations have unique capacities in all those areas.

Increased control and undue restrictions on CSOs

Unfortunately, in a growing number of African countries, there is increased control and undue restrictions on the formation and the activities of CSOs.

A common trend on this is to use the issue of foreign funding received by national civil society groups while there are no alternatives proposed by the government. Governments raise a variety of other reasons to justify the restrictive regulations. Some of the concerns are understandable, especially those genuinely linked to security, terrorism, religious extremism and other unlawful activities, but the majority are not and rather reflect a wiliness to shut down legitimate claims for fundamental human rights. In some cases even criticisms and alternative proposals for economic development and social choices are not tolerated. This is happening not just in Africa but globally. Some governments perceive CSOs as economic saboteurs, inciters of violence, or an extension of political opposition parties or even agents of foreign interest. Unfortunately in many cases, reacting to the shrinking of CSOs space, the international community and partner countries balance their interventions in preserving fundamental rights with competing economic and security interests. This is an additional wakeup call for citizens, especially in Africa, that the fight for civic space must be grounded within the continent at national, sub-regional and continental level.

Civil society space at regional and continental level

Regional civil society and coalitions targeting regional and pan African institutions have an important role to play as a complement and a backup to national groups. They are less exposed to risks compared to national CSOs and in many cases they can really contribute, influence and pressurise member states through the regional and continental bodies on regional policy issues. Regional Economic Communities (RECs) react differently to CSO/non-state actor engagement. ECOWAS for example seems to be more open to CSOs than the other RECs but the general trend is more encouraging at regional than at national level.

Despite the recent polemic of the closure of the mid-year African Union Summit to observers including non-African countries but also CSOs, I have observed an increased participation of non-state actors, CSOs and coalitions in the policy process of the African Union over the last five years. Technical experts and ministerial policy debates have been incredibly opened to CSOs as observers all year long in between the bi-annual Summits of the AU. In 2014, the African Union Commission even authorised non-state actors to hold a Continental Conference on Agriculture and Food Security at the AU headquarters. At the same time, Addis Ababa-based country representatives and members of the Peace and Security Council have been open to meet and engage with various CSO groups to discuss important policy issues. Part of the mandate of Oxfam Liaison Office to the African Union is to support this engagement by CSOs.

My office, in the framework of its Active Citizenship programme sponsors over 100 CSOs representatives each year to engage with various organs of the AU. This includes an annual training on Understanding the African Union jointly conducted with the AU Commission. But despite its importance, regional and continental engagement should not replace national CSO spaces, but rather complement it.

Reopening CSOs at national level: The African Union must step in

African countries can only gain from their definitive move towards economic and social development in allowing a genuine participation of all stakeholders, but too many countries on the continent, members of the AU, have adopted and continue to adopt national legislations reducing civic space. It is then important that the AU steps in on this unfortunate trend to seriously question the shrinking of civil society space in a number of its member states and stop it. Agenda 2063 rightly said that the realisation of the agreed aspirations needs the “ownership and mobilization of African People (…) in their various formations”. This must start at national level. While discussions are currently happening on the implementation plan of Agenda 2063, the AU must consider adopting a special declaration to stop the closing of civic space in its member countries. The African Year of Human Rights (2016) declared by the Assembly of the Union is another opportunity for the AU to boldly free CSO spaces in its member states. This will be a precious gift to African citizens that will make them proud of the continental body. Of course the implementation of or the compliance to such a declaration by member states is another issue to question but this can be the starting point of a process towards a stronger policy framework and commitment of the AU members to ensure the realisation of Agenda 2063. The African Commission on Human and People Rights’ existing working group on CSOs’ space could also play an important and decisive role in tracking those hostile CSOs’ laws and bring them to AU policy organs. In fact, the AU task force in charge of the implementation of Agenda 2063 must take this issue seriously into consideration.

Désiré Assogbavi is the Resident Representative and Head of Oxfam International Liaison Office to the African Union.

The views expressed in this article are those of the author and do not necessarily represent the views of Oxfam.

By Desire Assogbavi, Head of Oxfam Liaison Office to the African Union

The Heads of State and Government of the 54 Member States of the African Union are gathering this week in Addis Ababa for the 24^th Ordinary Summit of the African Union. The year 2015 has been declared by the Assembly of the African Union as the “Year of Women Empowerment and Development towards Africa’s Agenda 2063”. Both bi-annual Summits of the AU will then be organized around this theme. In practice, the theme will be symbolically launched during this Summit but actual discussions on the theme will happen in June/July.

This week Oxfam has been following a number of significant issues dominating the AU Summit agenda reflecting the high expectations from African citizens.

Ebola Crisis: Ebola has already claimed more than 8,000 lives in Africa. Currently the AU response is on the right path. The recent move of the AUC Chairperson Mrs. Dlamini-Zuma to call for funds from the private sector within the continent is excellent, but there is a long way to go with the number of cases still increasing and West African economies being extremely hard hit. Beyond the transmission rates, the disease has caused a crisis across the non-Ebola health sector, and major concerns around food security, livelihoods, vulnerability and long term economic impacts are now surfacing. Will the AU take action to prioritize prevention of further infections?  Can the AU member States revive the AU’s Abuja Declaration by which they have committed to allocate 15% of their national budget on health? Beyond containing the epidemic, efforts are needed to begin building stronger and more resilient public health systems. The Assembly should call upon all member states to prioritise free public health care, and increase public expenditure on health care to achieve targets as a minimum.  We’ll be looking forward to seeing the AU Commission’s report this week on the crisis and what decisions are taken.

At a bare minimum, the Summit must strongly call on all member states to intensify their contribution to the fight Ebola. The setting up of the African Centre for Disease Control and Prevention must be speedy.  We need to improve our collective response and make sure this never happens again. This can only be realized through a partnership that includes communities, civil society alongside private sector. The Summit must encourage member states to work proactively to build this partnership.

African Union Agenda 2063: The drafted 50-year plan of the continental body is expected to be adopted during the January Summit. A previous decision taken in Malabo this year by the Executive Council strongly recommended to member states to consult nationally on this important plan but this had not happened in many countries.

There are some bold targets in this visionary document such as the eradication of poverty in one generation by 2025, the elimination of hunger and food security by 2025 including reducing imports of food by 50% and ensuring that women farmers access at least 30% of agricultural financing,            silencing all guns by 2020 to end wars, conflicts, human rights violations, gender based violence and genocide, achieve gender parity in five years in all public & private institutions, abolish visa requirements for all African citizens in all African countries in 3 years, doubling of intra-Africa trade  from 12% to 24% in seven years and by 50% by 2045, among other elements.

This vision is definitely a ground-breaking achievement for Africa. It will enable Africa to give direction to its citizens and all public and private actors in its territories. It will enable Africa to speak with one voice, and negotiate with clarity on what the continent seeks to achieve in all partnerships it engages in.

The milestones and targets articulated in Agenda 2063 are an important catalyst for communicating the urgency required to implement the plan – however much has to move/happen to meet some of the milestones. Are African governments really willing to resolve the immigration issues so that Africans can travel to any African country without requiring a visa in three years? The only regions that have achieved this are ECOWAS and EAC.

Alternative Sources of Financing the African Union: There is still no consensus among AU Members on how to stop or at least to reduce the current financial dependency of the African Union on external donors. Currently, external donors pay 72% of all AU expenses (including peace and security budget). Proposals made by President Obasanjo and a report of the UNECA are the following:

$2 hospitality levy per hotel stay and a $10 airfare levy on international flights originating in or out of Africa (Obasanjo) and a half a cent per SMS levy.

If adopted and implemented, these proposals will theorically generate over 1.8 Billion per year for the AU but how can all this be implemented in practice? Will these be collected directly from the sources or will Member States be able to gather these funds and asked to hand them over to the AU? Are there not more options available from other sectors to generate what funds are needed? Is the SMS option sustainable at a time when many people are moving to free social media such as Viber and What’s Up to communicate? And is the African Union Commission in its current configuration capable of absorbing more than its current budget? But the goal is admirable –   the African Union cannot continue to depend financially from outside donors and keep Africa’s Agenda on track. Something bold and major must be decided…

Presidency of the African Union for 2015: The Chairmanship of the AU shall normally go to Southern Africa for 2015 and the established tradition is that the region presents a candidate. It is vital that the selected Chairperson of the African Union symbolizes and reflects the shared values of democracy, respect for human rights and accountability adopted by the Union.

Citizens’ Participations: Observers (including citizens and CSOs) have been invited for this January Summit- this is great news!!!  In June last year, the African Union did not invite African non-state actors to the Summit held in Malabo, Equatorial Guinea. There is an unfinished discussion on whether observers should be invited to both the January and the July Summit of the Union. There are a growing number of member states that support the idea that observers are to be invited only to the January Summit in order to reserve the July Summit for closed discussions within member States only. CSOsare not in favour of any restriction of access to the Summit. This 24th African Union Summit must clarify this policy.

We should however note our appreciation that, in between the AU summits, other policy spaces including experts and ministerial meetings have been more and more open to non-state actors from civil society in recent years.

Peace and Security: The Summit will review the state of peace and security in the continent and will adopt decisions on each situation. Hot spots include South Sudan, Sudan, DRC, Somalia, CAR and Mali. It is also expected that terrorism including the situations in Nigeria and Kenya will come up. We are hoping for real progress on the situation in the Great Lakes region as it will be discussed in a special meeting on the DRC Framework Agreement at Heads of State level.

On DRC, there is a need for a credible, accountable disarmament, demobilisation, and reintegration process for FDLR which requires stronger action from the government. While working towards its goal of silencing the guns by 2020, the AU must intervene to ensure the protection of Congolese civilians during the recent political unrest.

A High Level dialogue, to include space for CSOs, under the auspices of the UN Secretary General’s Special Envoy for DRC and the Great Lakes must happen.

It is also important to cut the economic channels which allow FDLR and other armed groups to prolong their activities, in accordance with the UN arms embargo, and strengthen accountability mechanisms within the PSCF to ensure signatories uphold their responsibilities.

In Central Africa Republic, there is a concern that since the handover of peacekeeping to the UN, CAR seems to have fallen down on the AU agenda. This is a missed opportunity to ensure sustainable peace and stability in CAR. Atrocities are still being committed against civilians outside the capital of Bangui. AU must remain strongly engaged in CAR to bolster the UN’s intervention.

Illicit Financial Flows and unfair exploitation of mineral resources of Africa: Illicit outflows from Africa are estimated at almost$ 50-60 billion per year. This represents 1 billion per week leaving the continent through extractive industries, tax evasion and trade mispricing. President Tabo M’beki, Chair of the AU High-level Panel on Illicit Financial Flows from Africa is now confirmed to present a report on the issue on January 31st. This issue should be closely tied to AU positions on financing for the further development of the continent as it could mean solutions to numerous African problems.

Citizens are expecting African leaders to act boldly!

The African Union Summit Process in 10 Questions

The African Union Ordinary Summit is the gathering of all policy organs of the African union. Two ordinary Summits are held every year and each Summit consists of three 2-day meetings that always take place in the same sequence. Usually, there are 1 or 2 days breaks between these meetings. The Permanent Representatives Committee (all ambassadors representing their countries to the AU) meets first, followed by the Executive Council (Ministers of Foreign Affairs) and then the Assembly of Heads of State and Government.

When are the AU Summits Organized?

As a rule, the January Summit takes place at the AU headquarters in Addis Ababa, Ethiopia. The June – July Summit is held in a different Member State each year. The AU can also convene extraordinary Summits at the request of the Chairperson or a Member State with approval by a two-thirds majority of the Member States.

Who Participates in the AU Summit?

The AU Summit gathers up to 4,000 delegates, observers and media from the 54 African Countries, AU organs, partners countries, UN Agencies, other International Organizations and NGOs

How to Obtain Accreditation to the AU Summit?

Accreditation to a summit is a separate process from obtaining observer status with the AU. It is not necessary to have observer status to be accredited to a summit. Accreditation starts three months before a summit. If the summit is taking place elsewhere than Addis Ababa, the host government will usually establish a separate website with protocol information and application forms. This information is normally also posted on the AU website. There are different types of accreditations:

Delegate – Governments of Member States

Observer – NGOs, non-African governments, UN agencies

Staff – Host government, AU Commission and other AU organs

Media – national and international press

Special Guest

Security etc.

Civil society organisations wishing to obtain accreditation to a summit should request accreditation from CIDO (CIDO@africa-union.org) at least 3 months in advance of the Summit. Other AU Directorates and Departments may also forward the names of selected partner organisations to be accredited as observers. The Office of the Chairperson of the AU Commission, where CIDO is located, draws up the final invitation list. Two types of badges are required for the summits. One is a security badge bearing your photograph. The other type (conference badge) indicates the meetings which you can attend. Normally only 2 of the later are given per organization. The Security badge allows access to all open area where you can meet delegates for interactions.

What does Observer Status Mean at the AU Summit?

Observer status at a summit does not give speaking rights, or even the right to attend more than the opening and closing ceremonies of the Executive Council and Assembly sessions but productive lobbying and advocacy can be done in the corridors of the meeting venues and at the parallel side meetings. However, the AU Commission mentions on the invitation letters that observers can be authorized to participate in working sessions of the Council dealing with agenda items of which the AU Commission considers that they are concern.

The PRC and Executive Council meetings may be more productive to engage than the Assembly of Heads of State meetings.

 How Decisions are taken at the AU Summit?

Decisions of the African Union Executive Council and Assembly are normally the result of work done months before each summit by the Commission and other organs, and in decision-making processes within individual member states. The majority of proposals presented to the Assembly have already been largely agreed before they are tabled at a summit. Documents adopted by the Assembly usually start life as a policy proposal from one of the AU Commission’s departments, from another AU organ or from a Member State. These proposals are debated in an experts’ meeting, whose members are nominated by Member States, and then in a meeting called for the relevant Ministers from Member States to approve or amend the experts’ proposals. With the exception of decisions with implications for the budget which are then considered by the PRC, the final documents from the ministerial meeting will go directly to the Executive Council and/or Assembly for adoption.

A group composed of 15 AU member states, supported by the AU Commission, form the Drafting Committee. On the basis of the various reports and recommendations from policy organs and AU members and the AU Commission, the drafting committee prepares decisions for the Executive Council and Assembly normally prior to the Summit. This draft is of course deeply debated and can be widely differ from the actual decision adopted. Reaching consensus, which is the preferred method of the AU, is not always easy; as some Member States attempt to influence the process in order to safeguard their national interests.

Are there any influencing opportunities at the AU Summit for Non State Actors?

Normally, there is very little room to catalyse deep policy changes at the Summit level only. Engagement must start from the birth of the process described above. However influence may happen on current or on-going issues or issues on which countries have failed to reach strong consensus during the process. The AU Summit presents also important opportunities for networking for further engagements and for media work to raise and draw policy makers’ attention on important and current issues. It is also a unique opportunity for organizations, donors and other personalities operating on a wide range of issues from the whole continent and elsewhere to be at the same place at the same time. Non-State actors can hold policy influencing side events during the AU Summit and have their delegates present at the AU Commission, UNECA and in various hotels where official delegates stay. A number of pre-summit consultations are held by CSOs including women groups. ECOSOCC and CIDO are also supposed to hold a CSOs pre-summit event but this has not been consistent in recent years.

What is the criteria for CSOs Accreditation at the Summit?

Access to AU meetings is not automatic. It is based on rules and procedures of the AU. Due to space constraint, the AU Commission makes choices based on the timing of application, role envisaged in the Summit, activities related to the themes of the Summit, history of association and institutional relation with the AU etc. So, not all applicants are accredited. Over the last few years, the number of CSOs invited has been increasing.

 Which Other Meetings are Held during the Summit?

 Other AU organs also hold official side meetings during summits, such as:

– The Peace and Security Council

– The African Peer Review Forum/Mechanism

– The NEPAD Heads of State and Government Implementation

– Sub – Committee etc.

How is Media Work Organized at the AU Summit?

The AU Commission always set up a high-tech press centre offering 24-hour internet facilities, daily press briefings, and press kits. NGOs can also request to use briefing rooms of the Commission to hold their press events. The Department of Information and Communication of the Commission helps to invite the Medias to all press events held at the Commission. Press events are an excellent way to reach policy makers during the Summit.