Changes and Continuities in Africa Since 1960s

CHAPTER ONE

BACKGROUND OF AFRICAN HISTORIOGRAPHY

Historiography of post-Colonial Africa

Beginning in the late 1940s with the retreat of the European colonial powers and the
establishment of independent nations in ensuing decades, a deeper interest in exploring their own
past quickly emerged among African populations, stimulated by reaction to decades of education
in an alien imperial historiography. With this came an urgent need to recast the historical record
and to recover evidence of many lost pre-colonial civilizations. At the same time, European
intellectuals’ (especially British, Belgian, and French) own discomfort with the Euro centrism of
previous scholarship provided for the intensive academic study of African history, an innovation
that had spread to North America by the 1960s. Foundational research was done at the School of
Oriental and African Studies (SOAS) in London by scholars such as Roland Oliver (cofounder in
1960 of the Journal of African History), by the American economic historian Philip Curtin, and
by the Belgian Jan Vansina (an authority on oral tradition). Francophone scholars have been as
influential as Anglophones, in particular the Parisian social historian, Catherine Coquery-
Vidrovitch (b. 1935). But African historiography has not been the sole creation of interested
Europeans. African universities have, despite the instabilities of politics and civil war in many
areas, trained their own scholars and sent many others overseas for doctoral training (South
Africa has been rather exceptional in having a number of powerful research-intensive
universities). The pioneering Nigerian historian Kenneth Onwuka Dike (1917–1983) studied at
Durham, Aberdeen, and London, and SOAS alone has produced several African-born scholars,
including the Ghanaian Albert Adu Boahen (b. 1932). Boahen in turn participated in the
important early summary work of postcolonial historical writing, the UNESCO General History
of Africa, directed by a “scientific committee” two-thirds of whom were Africans and written by
over three hundred authors including the Kenyans Ali Mazrui (b. 1933) and Bethwell Allan Ogot
(b. 1933), Joseph Ki-Zerbo (b. 1922) of Burkina Faso (formerly Upper Volta), and the Nigerian
J. F. A. Ajayi (b. 1929). Francophone African historians had until recently an especially close

1
relationship with French universities, notes Matthias Middell, though African history generally is
less prominent within France than in the English-speaking world.

African historiography has also proved a fertile field for the application of various
interdisciplinary approaches, including archaeology and linguistics. In particular, it has
welcomed the application of social science theories such as “modernization,” “dependency,” and
the above-mentioned “underdevelopment.” It has also provided a forum for Marxist concepts
such as “modes of production” and “capital”; the work of Walter Rodney (a black radical
historian assassinated in Guyana in 1980) has been especially significant in this regard. At the
same time, the early focus on political history and the establishment of chronology has been
displaced to a considerable degree by an interest in social, economic, and cultural issues,
reflecting historiographical trends elsewhere in the world. In recent decades, “Africa” has proved
too unwieldy an umbrella term, and the field has segmented into thematic subfields such as
slavery and gender; postmodernism has also begun to make itself felt as the colonial and early
postcolonial periods are revisited by a fresh generation. The popularity of African history has
waned somewhat among North American students, but it remains firmly established as an area of
research, sometimes conjoined with Afro-American studies.
CHAPTER TWO
INTERNAL AND EXTERNAL ROOTS OF AFRICAN NATIONALIST MOVEMENTS

2.1 . The Road to Independence

The Second World War was a turning point in the modern history of Africa. Before it broke out,
the pace of change in Africa since the establishment of colonial rule at the end of the nineteenth
and the beginning of the twentieth century had been steady and unhurried. After the war, the
momentum increased until it became uncontrollable. The war greatly increased the number of
Africans who were politically conscious. Soldiers from all over Africa were recruited by Britain
and France. They went into action in Ethiopia, North Africa, and Italy, and against the Japanese
in Burma. Most of the Africans who became soldiers had never before left their native lands or
even their own home districts. On active service, despite the dangers and the hardships, they
were well fed and clothed, and comparatively well paid. They learned to see their own countries
in perspective from the outside and to appreciate that conditions there left much to be desired.

2
Many of them learned to read newspapers, to listen to bulletins, and to take an interest in
international affairs. When the war ended in 1945, the world of 1939 had changed almost beyond
recognition. Italy, Germany, and Japan had been in turn defeated, but at a terrible cost to the
victors, especially those whose territory had been occupied and ravished, but also Britain, which
had spent all its reserves and run deeply into debt in fighting the war in the west alone for two
years before the United States joined in. Even though Britain and France remained in nominal
control of vast empires, it was clear that political, economic, and military leadership had passed
from the western European countries to the two superpowers, America and the USSR, both of
which were in principle committed to the anti-imperial cause. This in turn created conducive
environment for anti-colonial struggle which was facilitated in the 1950`s and 1960`s.
The 1960s witnessed the unprecedented proliferation of independent states on the continent of
Africa. Although nationalism and calls for independence grew in West Africa throughout the
first half of the 20th century, it was not until after WWII that the winds of real change began to
sweep the region. In 1957 Ghana became the first country in West Africa to gain independence,
with the reluctant blessing of Britain. In 1960 Benin, Cote d‘Ivoire, Nigeria, Togo, Senegal and
several other countries won their independence. Most other countries became independent in the
following few years. Only recidivist Portugal held firm, not granting independence to its
colonies.
The dramatic events of 1960 (17 African countries achieving their independence) would have a
far-reaching effect for decades to come – unifying the newly independent states around a
common commitment to self-determination, and giving moral purpose and political direction to
African foreign and regional policy.
The period immediately following independence was a time of unbridled (uncontrolled)
optimism (brightness) for Africa and Africans. For the first time in centuries, political power was
in the hands of Africans themselves. Inspirational figures such as Kwame Nkrumah in Ghana
and Leopold Senghor in Senegal came forth. In the main, many African governments have had to
accommodate their perceptions and preferences to the constricting realities of nation – nation
building. With more states gaining political independence and coming of age, the new realities in
the post-decolonization era focused on how best to address the wave of rising popular
expectations.

3
With the arrival of the younger generations on the political scene, it was inevitable that they
should look for other symbols of legitimacy. The major task was the widening chasm (rift)
between public aspirations and the capability of the state to deliver the expected goods.
Following the process of decolonization, the masses expected the state to propound and deliver a
formula for prosperity and increased economic growth.
On the surface, the African states that became independent dominions in the 1960s mirrored the
classical states of the modern state system to which they were birthed. As the ‗inheritance elite‘
– those who took the reign of power from the colonial rulers – eagerly prepared to take their
newly independent states into the United Nations, these new states were accorded, in principle,
equal status in community of states. There was an implicit assumption that the same principles
that guided the formation of the modern state also applied to African states. The notion of a
‗compact, in which people submitted their sovereignty and paid taxes to the state in return for
protection under an agreed political order, was assumed to apply. Thus, presumably, the state
would periodically choose their leaders and the terms under which they would be governed as
part of part of a seamless process of state reproduction.
The dominant narrative was one of popular sovereignty and this was an attractive proposition to
peoples emerging from about a century of foreign domination. The concept of civilian control
mirrored the western model handed down at independence. Observers enthusiastically assumed
that these inherited systems would produce strong legitimate civilian institutions, maintaining
democratic control over a professional military and security establishment, which would in turn
accept a subordinated role to and elected civilian elite. These assumptions would turn out to be
deeply faulty. In reality, African security in the early post-independence years was the product of
a colonial legacy, as was the model of governance Africans inherited.
It is worth noting that developments in Africa coincided with the period when the Cold War
seemed to have reached its apogee, and in certain regions of the world was already taking on an
explicit and pronounced military character, as in Vietnam and the Congo. It was indeed
fashionable for the leaders of the new African states to argue that in the Cold War African states
belonged to neither camp, but only to Africa. President Nyerere of Tanzania, one of the more
perceptive leaders of contemporary Africa, declared that the fledgling African states must
struggle all the time to stay out of the greater power competition. In realty however, the newly
independent African states failed to mange to escape the flame of the cold war.

4
There were intense competitions between the USA and Russia along with their allies in Africa,
as it happened in other parts of the world. Superpower competition in Africa was motivated
primarily by expansion of global political, economic and military influence. Most of European
powers granted independence to their African colonies in the late 1950s and the 1960s, opening
the region to influence by the Soviet Union and the United States. Both powers looked to African
countries in order to control vast mineral resources, to place military bases in strategic locations,
and to increase overall global influence. The cold war effect began to be felt when African
leaders tried to exploit the situation by inviting the competing powers involvement to counter
any advantage gained by their African adversaries in the opposing cold war camp. The former
Portuguese colonies of Mozambique and Angola provide examples of this. Both achieved
independence in 1975 with Soviet bloc-leaning governments, and both governments were
opposed by rebel groups that sided with the West in order to receive military aid from the United
States and its allies.

2.2. Pan-Africanism, inter-state relations and the birth of continental and regional
organizations

The idea of Pan-Africanism was intended to challenge the main activities of European
imperialist domination, namely, the slave trade, European colonization of Africa and racism.
These activities were at their height in the late 19th century. In actual fact one of the largest single
factors that contributed to the ultimate task of the conceptualization of the idea of Pan-
Africanism by African intellectuals such as William Edward Burghardt DuBois, Joseph Casely-
Hayford (a Gold Coast journalist), George Padmore (born in Trinidad), Alex Quasion-Sackey (a
Ghanaian diplomat) and others was the Berlin Conference of 1885 at which Africa was carved
up and apportioned amongst European powers. The conference was followed by military
conquest of African Lands, which eventually brought the continent under European domination.
It need to be mentioned that it is rather interesting to note that amongst factors that provided
foundations that developed the meaning and content of Pan-Africanist thought was the education
that Africans gained from the countries of their colonizers and exposure to ideals of equality and
civil rights some of the first exponents of the ideology experienced in Europe and North
America.

5
Pan-Africanism is thus predominantly a modern movement. It is the reaction of the most
advanced, most intensively Europeanized Africans and Afro-Americans to contact with the
modern world. Its representatives have been African of Afro-Americans who in many cases have
had an academic education in Europe, America or West Africa, or who were exposed for a long
time to modern influences in their own country. They embraced the European and North
American principles of equality and democracy and on this basis elaborated their own ideology
of emancipation from white supremacy. As a phenomenon that evolved out of a situation of
anomaly whereby African people were expected to derive their identity from being a negative
image of others it is difficult, perhaps even impossible, to provide a clear and precise definition
of Pan-Africanism. This can be ascribed to the fact that the Pan-Africanism movement as a
vehicle of protest that accommodated diverse dehumanizing experiences of people of African
origin and descent it has no single founder or particular tents that can be used as a definition.

However, from the notions that were advocated by the first proponents of the thought and from
ideas that floated around in the late 18th and 19th centuries, in an attempt to capture what
constituted the form and content of what represented the core of the meaning of the Pan-
Africanism ideology, explains the thought as a complex phenomenon that was at that time
understood as:

1. Intellectual and political movements among Africans and Afro-Americans who regard or have
regarded Africans and people of Africa as homogenous. This outlook leads to a feeling of racial
solidarity and a new self-awareness and causes Afro-Americans to look upon Africa as their real
homeland‘, without necessarily thinking of a physical return to Africa.

2. All ideas which have stressed or sought the cultural unity and political independence of
Africa, including the desire to modernize Africa on a basis of equality of rights. The key
concepts here have been respectively the ‗redemption of Africa ‘and ‗Africa for Africans.

3. Ideas or political movements which have advocated, or advocate, the political unity of Africa
or at least close political collaboration in one form or another. The four themes that can also be
said to have contributed in the conceptualization of Pan-African thought and practice are:

1. Pan-Africanism: A Universal Expression of Black Pride and Achievement: In a process to

subjugate and dominate people of African origin and descent European imperialism alienated

6
and marginalized African cultural heritage. As a result, specifically during the epoch of
transatlantic enslavement, people of African descent deemed it right to defend black culture and
propagate the notion of a distinct black contribution to humanity and civilization‘. Two of the
chief exponents of the notion of black pride are the Negritude poets, Aime Cesaire and Leopold
Sedar Senghor. Around 1934 Cesaire and Senghor found a journal of their own, named
L‘Etitudiant Noir, which they used as a vehicle to propagate their literary conception of
Negritude the stress on all African elements, especially the cult of Black Womanhood, the
rejection of modern civilization of the wild African landscape‘. In South Africa the notion of
Negritude was express through the Black Consciousness Movement that was led by Steven
Bantu Biko. Biko explained the Black Consciousness ideology as ‗an attitude of mind and a way
of life, the most positive call to emanate from the black world for a long time‘, which in essence
is about the ‗realization by the black man of the need to rally together with his brothers, around
the cause of their oppression the blackness of their skin as a group to rid themselves of the
shackles that bind them to perpetual servitude.

2. Pan-Africanism: A Return to Africa by people of African Descent Living in the Diaspora: As

a way of protest against the merciless shipment of people of Africa to Europe and the Americas
Martin R. Delaney, born in the United States; he was an author, journalist, explorer, soldier,
politician and the unrivaled political and legal theorist of his time, started a movement that
encouraged people of Africa descent in the Diaspora to return to Africa. What set Delaney apart
was the fact that, in contrast to most of his colored fellow-countrymen he was proud of his black
complexion and for this reason he always rejected vehemently the doctrine of the inferiority of
the colored people‘. Between 1831 and 1832 he visited Africa, which he referred to as the land
of my ancestry‘, and two years later he published his call for Afro-Americans to emigrate from
the USA‘. Though the National Emigration‘s re-emigration project was not a success it was of
historical significance in that amongst other things, it also produced the clearest and politically
best-founded statement of Pan-African ideas to be made during the nineteenth century‘.
Delany‘s theory reigned as the dominate ideology of Black Nationalism for the last three
centuries. His ideas have influenced historic Black leaders like Marcus Garvey and Malcolm X.

3. Pan-Africanism: A Harbinger of Liberation: The brutal occupation of Africa by European

powers, especially after the Berlin Conference in 1885 became totally unacceptable to the people

7
of African descent and a host of their intelligentsia. This epoch was characterized by activities of
physical exploitation of Africa accompanied by the ideological torture of racism. It is no small
wonder therefore that given a history of such awful treatment that the clarion cries of freedom
and liberation have echoed throughout the recent history of black experience‘. One of the chief
exponents of this expression was Frantz Fanon whom Ackah describes as ‗the revolutionary
Pan-Africanist, from Martinique‘- who took the liberation call personally to heart and to show
his commitment he became physically involved in the struggle to end colonial rule by the French
in Algeria just after the Second World War.

4. Pan-Africanism: The Political Unification of the Continent: Closely linked to the theme of the
liberation of the African continent is the clarion call for the unity of Africa in the form of
political and economic unification, which became the theme of Pan-Africanism‘, Kwame
Nkrumah became the chief exponent of this expression, he believed that the only way to resolve
the problems of imperialism and neo-colonialism in Africa was the form of unitary socialist
government‘. This expression gave birth to the Organization of African Unity (OAU). The first
Pan-African Conference of 1900 was a milestone in the ideological development of Pan-African
thought and practice. The discourse that emerged from the Conference continued in the years to
come as persons of color around the world became increasingly aware of their shared struggles.
Furthermore, the meeting served as a forerunner of a series of similar conferences.

The conference was held from the 23 to 25 July 1900 in London. It was the first ever held to
propagate these ideas, and it was attended by a small group of men and women who were
Africans and Afro-Americans from the New World, who met to discuss the position of their
respective groups and the defense of their interest. The idea of such a meeting was the brainchild
of Henry Sylvester-Williams, who was a West Indian barrister. This conference was the
beginning of a structural, ideological concept of Pan-Africanism, precisely because at this
conference freedom was not asked. They actually asked for a means of preparing African people
to enter the modern world. Thus, the conference marked the launching of the first phase of the
Pan-Africanism movement in the broader sense a period of nationalist gestation in Africa when
ideas were being evolved by African, Afro-American and Afro-West Indian intellectuals.

8
Amongst other things this conference aimed at the following:

1. To act as a forum of protest against the aggression of white colonizers;

2. To appeal to the missionary and abolitionist tradition of the British People to protect Africans
from the depredations of Empire Builders;
3. To bring people of African descent throughout the world into closer touch with each other and
to establish more friendly relations between the Caucasian and African races;
4. To start a movement looking forward to the securing of all African races living in civilized
countries, their full rights and to promote their business interests.

It is clear from the above that the conference represented the first organized efforts outside of
Africa to protest against Western European domination and degradation of the African people.
The desire for the unity of Africans and peoples of African descent was clearly expressed. In
essence the meeting put the term Pan-African into circulation and stressed the need for equity
between the races.

W.E.B. Du Bois played a significant role in shaping Pan-African thoughts and practice in the
years that followed the first Pan-African conference of 1900. W.E.B. Du Bois was among the
attendees of the 1900 Pan-African conference. He was known and recognized as an Afro-
American leader, journalist, historian and sociologist. Du Bois felt that black people in the New
World, in order to free themselves from racial discrimination and rampant racism, must reclaim
their African roots and become proud of their heritage. He believed that people neither proud of
who they are not aware of where they came from could not successfully combat negative
stereotypes being heaped upon them by other racial groups. It was unfortunate that in the United
States, the Pan-African movement was marked by intense and bitter rivalry between Du Bois and
Marcus Garvey, despite agreement on the basic premise of their struggle (namely, that the lack
of racial pride among black people was one key ingredient missing in the struggle for racial
equality). Unlike Du Bois, Garvey was a racial purist; he had deep disdain for blacks, like Du
Bois, who had a mixed racial heritage, and he felt that the best way to redress the tribulations of
black people was to return to Africa. Garvey founded the Universal Negro Improvement
Association (UNIA) in Jamaica in 1914 and moved it to the United States in 1916.

9
Following the first Pan-African conference in 1900 between 1919 and 1927, Du Bois organized
four Pan-African Congresses that became known as the Du Boisan Congresses. The congresses
are:

I. The first Pan-African Congress: Paris (1919)

This congress was held from the 19 to 21 February 1919 in Paris to coincide with the peace
conference taking place in the French capital that year marking the end of World War I. The
conference saw this as an auspicious moment to confront the delegates attending the peace
conference with grievances of black people; many of the delegates came from countries with
colonies in Africa, and may from countries with big populations of people of African descent.
The conference drew up a series of recommendations:

i. The need to abolish slavery and capital punishment for black people.

ii. The need for African participation in the development of the colonized countries as soon as
possible.

iii. The need for international laws to protect black people.

iv. The right of Africans to be educated.

v. The need for African land to be held in trust, the need to prevent the exploitation of the
Africans by foreign companies.

II. The second Pan-African Congress: London, Brussels and Paris (1921)

The 1921 Pan-African conference was conducted in three sessions held in London, Brussels, and
Paris, respectively. The first session reiterated the same demands as the 1919 conference.
However, this time, the demands were backed by an eloquent assertion concerning the inherent
equality of human beings. The second session was moved to Brussels and immediately ran into
controversy. The Belgian press alleged that the conference was communist inspired. The session
was finally allowed to meet, albeit briefly, only to endorse the resolutions and statements already
passed at the London session. The third session then moved on to Paris, where it was chaired by
Monsieur Blaise Diagne of Senegal, attracting a large number of Africans from the French
colonies. Here, once again, the demands for reforms were affirmed, and in addition, Du Bois was

10
chosen to present yet another petition to the League of Nations asking the League to look into the
treatment of people of African descent the world over and to set up a mechanism for
ameliorating their appalling conditions. These sessions were held in the capitals of three
European countries with colonies in Africa in order to sensitize them to the situations obtaining
in their colonies.

III. The third pan-African congress: London – Lisbon, 1923

The 1923 Pan-African conference was held at a time when DuBois‘rivalry with Marcus Garvey‘s
organization was at its height. Attendance was much smaller than at the previous Pan-African
conferences although the session in London was addressed by prominent British socialists like
Lord Olivier and Professor Harold Laski. In addition to reiterating previous calls for colonial
reforms, this session also called for due process (including jury trials) for Africans accused of
crimes in the colonies and for an end to lynching in the United States. Because of studies and
reports indicating that forced labor and virtual slavery existed in Portuguese African colonies,
Du. Bois and his colleagues decided to hold the second session of the 1923 conference in Lisbon.
The hope was that the session might be able to link up with, and provide some support to, the
few Africans who were studying in Portugal.

IV. The fourth pan-African congress: New York, 1927

The 1927 Pan-African conference was held in New York. The congress featured 208 delegates
from twenty-two American states and ten foreign countries. Africa, however, was represented
only sparsely by delegates from the Gold Coast, Sierra Leone, Liberia, and Nigeria. Similar to
previous Pan African congresses, participants discussed the status and conditions of black people
throughout the world.

V. The fifth pan-African congress: Manchester, 1945

Elaborate preparations went into the 1945 Pan-African conference, to be held in Manchester,
England. More Africans were involved in it than ever before, London being the center for a very
large number of African students studying in Britain at the time. As the grand old man of Pan-
Africanism, Du Bois was clearly an important figure at the 1945 Manchester Congress. But at
this time he was 73; and leadership of the pan-African movement had passed into younger hands.

11
It had also passed largely into non-Afro-American hands. But, if the leadership of the Pan-
African Congress of 1945 was passing way from Afro-Americans, it is also clear that, although
West Indians were very influential at it, Africans themselves assumed prominent positions of
leadership, notably Kwame Nkrumah, Jomo Kenyatta and the South African writer, Peter
Abrahams. For the first time, African political parties, trade unions, youth leagues, and students
‘associations sent representatives. The roster of attendees included those representing the
National Council of Nigeria and the Cameroons (NCNC), the Labour Party of Grenada (West
Indies), the West Indies People‘s National Party, the Nigerian Youth Movement, the Nyasaland
African Congress (Malawi), the African National Congress (ANC) of South Africa, and the Gold
Coast Farmers‘ Association.

The deliberations of the conference were wide ranging in scope. Reports were presented on
conditions of black people in Africa, the United States, the West Indies, and Britain. Some
resolutions reaffirmed demands made by previous conferences but not yet implemented by the
colonial powers; others expressed the solidarity of the people of African descent with other
oppressed and colonized people, particularly the Vietnamese, Indonesians, and Indians who
were, at the time, actively involved in their own freedom struggles. This Pan-African conference
was important in several ways: As already noted, it was the best attended by Africans from the
continent. Many of those who attended went on to lead their countries to independence,
becoming presidents, prime ministers, or cabinet ministers. It marked the transformation of the
Pan-African movement from a protest movement seeking moderate reforms including the right to
form trade union, to be paid a decent wage, to vote for representatives in local councils, to obtain
health care and housing, etc. to a tool of African nationalist movements fighting for self-rule.
The idea of independence was echoed throughout all the discussions at the conference.

Pan-Africanism began as a protest movement against the racism endured by black people in the
New World, slowly evolved into an instrument for waging an anti-colonial struggle dedicated to
bringing about African rule in Africa, and ended up as a dream or inspiration for African leaders
and intellectuals who hoped that perhaps in the future, African states might be federated as the
United States of Africa. Indeed, Pan-Africanism was the inspiration behind the efforts of Dr.
Kwame Nkrumah, when, soon after becoming prime minister of the newly independent state of

12
Ghana in 1957, he immediately set about to convene in 1958 in Accra what might be called the
sixth Pan-African conference. He called it the All-Africa People‘s Conference.

Chapter Two
2. The road to the formation of the Organization of African Unity (OAU)
2.1. The All-African People’s Conferences: towards the OAU

These conferences began in 1958 under the leadership of Kwame Nkrumah and independent
Ghana. They had two aims: to support the anti-colonial struggle in every part of the continent,
and to strengthen the idea of Pan-African Unity. The first conference organized by Nkrumah was
a meeting at Accra, in 1958, between the eight states then independent: Egypt, Ethiopia, Ghana,
Liberia, Libya, Morocco, Sudan, and Tunisia. A second Accra conference followed in December
1958. This was a meeting of governments but of nationalist parties. An All-African People‘s
Organization (AAPO) was formed with headquarters in Accra. It called for all-African liberation
and steps towards an eventual Commonwealth of Free African States. Anti-colonial and ant-
racist, AAPO was a channel through which the old ideas of Pan-African unity might develop in
new forms and with new force. Other AAPO conferences were held in Tunis in 1960 and at
Cairo in 1961. An All-African Trade Union Organization was launched. These AAPO
conferences, and other meetings of that time (including a second conference of independent
states, then numbering twelve, at Addis Ababa in June 1960), were, in fact, useful steps towards
a continent-wide Organization. Several ideas powered the formation of the OAU. One of them
was that Africa‘s independent nations must remain outside the big-power blocs into which the
rest of the world was mostly divided. Otherwise, Africa‘s nations would soon lose their new-
found independence. This was the idea or policy of non-alignment. Non-alignment as a world
movement took shape first at a meeting in Bandung, Indonesia, during 1955, attended by
representatives of 17 Asian governments and 6 African governments (Egypt, Ethiopia, Liberia,
Libya and the non-yet-independent governments of Ghana and Sudan). Later, most independent
African governments joined the movement.

A different source of co-operation has been of great value in these years. As African colonies
won their independence, each new state became a member of the United Nations. Their delegates
naturally worked together in the General Assembly of the UN, and in its various committees.

13
Soon they formed important grouping. This encouraged them to act together, and to pursue a
common diplomacy on matters of concern to them. But conflicts of opinion also divided the new
governments.

2.1.1. Sub-regional groupings prior to the Addis Ababa summit of 1963

Prior to the creation of the OAU in 1963, independent Africa was divided into different political
groups: Casablanca, and Monrovia. The Casablanca group comprised eight countries that first
met in the Moroccan city of Casablanca in January 1961: the Algerian provisional government,
Egypt, Ghana, Guinea, Libya, Mali, and Morocco. Seven other countries were invited to the
meeting but they declined, namely: Ethiopia, Gambia, Liberia, Nigeria, Togo, Tunisia, and
Sudan. The group adopted the African Charter of Casablanca, which affirmed their determination
to promote the triumph of liberty all over Africa and to achieve its unity. The Casablanca group
disapproved of the UN policy on Congo, especially because of the way the Prime Minister,
Patrice Lumumba, was treated. The group supported the Algerian independence struggle and
advocated political unity for Africa as a prerequisite for economic cooperation. Nkrumah insisted
that for economic unity to be effective, it must be accompanied by political unity. He posited that
the two are inseparable, each necessary for the future greatness of the continent, and the full
development of its resources. The type of entity envisaged by the Casablanca group was a federal
government based on the mobilization of resources along socialist lines. This group also
supported Morocco, which had laid territorial claims on Mauritania. The Monrovia group
consisted of 20 states, which attended a conference in the Liberian capital, Monrovia, in May
1961: Benin, Burkina Faso, Cameroon, Central African Republic, Chad, Congo (Brazzaville),
Cote d‘Ivoire, Ethiopia, Gabon, Liberia, Libya, Madagascar, Mauritania, Niger, Nigeria,
Senegal, Sierra Leone, Somalia, Togo, and Tunisia. The Monrovia on Mauritania, which, they
believed, had a right to independent statehood. They also supported the UN policy on Congo.
The Monrovia group agreed on several principles, which were later re-issued as the ―Lagos
Charter of the Organization of African and Malagasy States after a meeting of the same countries
(including Congo-Kinshasa) in Lagos, Nigeria, in January 1962. The five principles they
endorsed later formed the basis of the OAU Charter:

1. Absolute equality and sovereignty of African states.

14
2. The right of each African state to exist and not to be annexed by another.

3. Voluntary union of one state with another.

4. Non-interference in the domestic affairs of African states.

5. No state to harbor dissidents from another state.

Fortunately for Pan-Africanism the breach was never total. Tunisia‘s determination that France
should evacuate the Bizerta naval base won her support from both groups. The re-emergence of a
united government in the Congo, acceptable to both, removed a major cause of dissension.
Increasingly, powers on both sides, notably Guinea from the Casablanca group and Ethiopia
from Monrovia group, began to seek reconciliation and look for areas of cooperation. Gestures
were made, such as the cancelling of the 1962 All-African Peoples Conference, obnoxious to the
Monrovia group as likely to promote interference in their internal affairs. Algerian independence
and the overthrow by the UN of the Katangese regime removed major stumbling blocks. By the
beginning of 1963, a meeting of all independent African states was possible, with every chance
of the creation of a unified Pan-African state Organization as a result.

2.1.2. The Birth of the OAU

The African leaders gathering in Addis Ababa in the month of May 1963 were aware of the fact
that they were being observed from outside the continent by skeptical spectators, full of doubts
about the capacity of Africans to stand up again and speak firm, with one voice. More than a
simple diplomatic conference, their meeting was the very first official manifestation of the
sovereign personality of a new, free and independent Africa. After a lot of negotiation and
compromise, a final agreement was reached on the establishment of a new umbrella organization
that would subsume the erstwhile competing blocs. Thus was born the Organization of African
Unity (OAU).

After much acrimony, the Charter of the Organization of African Unity was adopted and ratified
by a majority of states attending the conference on May 25, 1963. At Addis Ababa, African
states adopted only those principles of the law of nations directly concerning Africa. These
principles have direct bearing in the African continent and are accepted as such by the African

15
states. The principles deal with interstate problems and Africa‘s relations with the non-African
world. These principles are:

1. The sovereign equality of all member states;

2. Noninterference in the internal affairs of states;

3. Respect of the sovereignty and territorial integrity of every state and its inalienable right to an
independent existence;

4. The peaceful settlement of disputes, through negotiations, mediation, conciliation, or

arbitration;

5. Condemnation, without reservation, of political assassinations and subversive activities

carried on by neighboring states, or all other states;

6. Absolute devotion to the cause of total liberation of African territory not yet independent; and

7. The affirmation of a policy of nonalignment in respect of all political blocks.

2.1.3. Structure of the OAU

Four main bodies were created in the Charter.

The Assembly of Heads of States and Government

The Assembly is the supreme organ of the OAU with functions mainly to debate issues of
common concern in order to create a uniform policy for the organization and the continent as a
whole in the international sphere. It met at least once a year, or could meet in an extraordinary
session at the request of a member and approved by 2/3 of the assembly. The basic purpose of
the Assembly was to discuss matters of common concern to Africa with a view to coordinating
and harmonizing the general policy of the Organization. The Heads of States secondary power
was the coordination of the other bodies of the OAU. The Charter says that the body must review
the structure, functions, and acts of all the organs and any specialized agencies which may be
created in accordance with the present Charter‖.

16
Council of Ministers

The Council of Ministers is composed mainly of Foreign Ministers or ministers designated by

the governments of the member states. Resolutions could be adopted by a simple majority, and it
met twice a year in ordinary session. The Council was responsible to the Heads of States,
meaning the Assembly could choose to review and reject the resolutions. The Council had
several responsibilities. First, it was entrusted with the responsibility of preparing conferences of
the Assembly. Secondly, the Council was entrusted with the implementation of the decisions of
the Assembly‖. Third, the Council served as the mediator between the Heads of States and the
rest of the Organization. The Charter dictates that the Council was to coordinate inter-African
cooperation, so the Council had to work out the activities of the many committees in order to
harmonize policy so that it was possible and consistent. It was also given the catch-all power of it
shall take cognizance of any matter referred to it by the Assembly‖. Lastly, the Council had
oversight over the various bodies.

Commission of Mediation, Conciliation and Arbitration

The Heads of States recognized that it was necessary to have a venue for settling disputes that
arose between the independent states. Article XIX states that the member states pledge to create
the Commission of Mediation, Conciliation and Arbitration, consisting of 21 members elected by
the Assembly for a period of five years and eligible for reelection.

The Secretariat

The General Secretariat was the last of the principal institutions envisioned in the Charter. It was
one of the most significant as it was the only body with a permanent membership and structure.
The Charter was relatively vague about the structure of the Secretariat. Article XVIII stipulated
that officials and civil servants were to have one allegiance, to the OAU. It reads that the
personnel of the OAU shall not seek or receive instructions from any government or from any
other authority external to the Organization.

After its establishment in Addis Ababa, the OAU provided assistance for the grassroots national
liberation movements in the following ways

17
1. It gave ideological support. Not a single OAU member has ever supported a movement in
favor of colonial oppression. This meant that even the most radical of states in Africa could seek
and find allies on the rallying point against colonialism.

2. It provided diplomatic support through international forums like the UN

3. Material support for the military and humanitarian aid for the civilians was provided through
the Liberation Committee‘s budget.

4. Most importantly, the OAU offered unity within the liberation movements. As a result the
role of OAU in the decolonization of Africa is commendable.

The other aspect of OAU weakness reflected in the mission of maintaining peace in Africa. The
concept of domestic non-intervention allowed for the replication of the politics of the status quo.

The OAU was given no power to take collective measures against any one member or against an
outside aggressor. Inevitably, the nation‘s decision-making is affected by the fact that
imperialism is still obviously present on the continent, especially because most of the aid coming
into the continent is coming from external sources. After the colonizers had lost its influence on
the continent, the Cold War crept in.

Some of the weaknesses of OAU were demonstrated at two levels: the charter‘s failure to make
clear the OAU‘s relationship with sub regional organizations, formal known as Regional
Economic Communities (RECs); and the OAU‘s failure to pursue vigorously the economic goals
and principles stipulated in its Charter.

2.2.5. The transition from OAU to African Union (AU)

By the early 1990‘s, the end of the Cold War and the resulting removal of superpower support
coupled with the increased economic challenges facing of the continent as a result of
globalization compelled African leaders revisit the structural weaknesses of the OAU. At the
same time, it became increasingly evident that the West and the UN Security Council were no
longer interested in continuing to fund the African political apparatus, with the failure of
structural adjustment programs. As a result, the African continent was faced with a debt crisis, in

18
a time of slow world economic growth. It soon became evident that economic integration was a
prerequisite to dealing with the problems plaguing the continent.

In 1980, the OAU had launched the Lagos Plan of Action (LPA). It served as the blueprint for
the structure of real economic independence for Africa and the precursor to economic integration
to come, yet made no immediate changes to the economic system. In the OAU Summit of 1990,
the political leaders came together and made the declaration on the Political and Socio-Economic
Situation in Africa and the Fundamental Changes Taking Place in the World‖ which provided a
framework in which African leaders renewed their pledge to cooperate with each other to quickly
and peacefully end conflicts. The pledge sought to address the major factors that should guide
Africa‘s economic goals, mainly changing East-West relations, the socioeconomic and political
changes happening in Eastern Europe and the move towards a monetary union in Western
Europe.

At the institutional level, it was proposed the establishment of an African Congress whose
members would be elected for four-year terms and which would decide by absolute majority of
foreign policy, defense, economic issues, finance, external trade and civil and consular matters;
and African Council, which would be the supreme executive body, reporting to the Congress and
empowered to propose federal laws by an absolute majority; a Federal executive body, reporting
to the Congress and empowered to propose federal laws by an absolute majority; a Federal
Executive council, fifteen specialized Federal Commissions which would be subject to the
Union; a Federal Supreme Court; and African Monetary Fund; an African Central Bank; and an
African Investment Bank. Here, too, Africa was plagued by deep-rooted differences. There were
supporters of a new grouping and those who considered that the Organization of African Unity
needed to be maintained while conceding that it needed to be strengthened so as to become a
relevant instrument that could take up the various challenges of globalisation. A compromise was
finally found during the summit of the Organization of African Unity held in Sirte, in September
1999, in the form of the Sirte Declaration establishing the African Union (9 September 1999).

The African Union Treaty was adopted on 11 July 2000 in Lome, Togo. In particular, the treaty
provided for the dissolution within a year of the Organization of African Unity, which would be
replaced by the African Union. The Constitutive Act of the African Union rests on two pillars.
The first is an aspiration which has, over time, evolved into something other than what its

19
proponents intended the realization African unity through a continental organization. The second
pillar springs from the realization that existing organizations have shown their limitations in
terms both of the realization of Pan-Africanism and of the management of Africa‘s problems.
The Constitutive Act entered into force on 26 May 2001, following its ratification by two-thirds
of the Member States of the OAU. Upon its entry into force, the Constitutive Act abrogated and
superseded the OAU Charter. However, in terms of the same provision, the Charter, and thereby
the OAU, remained operational for a transitional period of one year, following a decision
adopted to that effect by the Assembly at its thirty-seventh ordinary session in Lusaka, Zambia,
on 10 July 2001. Thus, the thirty-eighth ordinary session of the Assembly held in Durban, South
Africa, on 8 July 2002, was the last summit of the OAU. This summit marked the demise of the
OAU after 39 years of existence, and was immediately followed by the inaugural session of the
new organization (AU), which was held at the same venue on 9-10 July 2002.

AU‘s objectives, as contained in the Constitutive Act, are to do the following:

1. Achieve greater unity and solidarity among African Countries and the peoples of Africa

2. Defend the sovereignty, territorial integrity, and independence of its member states

3. Accelerate the political and socioeconomic integration of the continent

4. Promote and defend African common positions on issues of interest to the continent and its
peoples

5. Encourage international cooperation, taking due account of the Charter of the United Nations
and the Universal Declaration of Human rights

6. Promote democratic principles and institutions, popular participation, and good governance

7. Promote and protect human people‘s rights in accordance with the African Charter on Human
and People‘s rights and other relevant human right instruments

8. Establish the necessary conditions, which enable the continent to play its rightful role in the
global economy and in international negotiations

20
9. Promote sustainable development at the social and cultural levels, as well as the integration of
African economies

10. Promote cooperation in all fields of human activity to raise the living standard of African
people

11. Coordinate and harmonies the policies between the existing and future RECs for the gradual
attainment of the objectives of the union

12. Advance the development of the continent by promoting research in all fields, in particular
in science and technology

13. Work with relevant international partners in the eradication of preventable diseases and
promotion of good health in the continent.

In addition to its inclusion in the Constitutive Act, the commitment to democracy, respect for
human rights and the rule of law is also one of the fundamental principles upon which the New
Partnership for Africa‘s Development (NEPAD), adopted in 2001 as an integral part of the AU,
is based.

Organs and Institutions of AU

Structures of the African Union
Organs established or proposed under the Constitutive Act:
 Assembly of Heads of State and Government (and its Chairperson)
 Executive Council of Ministers
 Permanent Representatives Committee
 Commission of the African Union
 Economic, Social and Cultural Council
 Pan-African Parliament
 Court of Justice
 Specialized Technical Committees
 Financial institutions: African Central Bank, African Investment Bank and African
Monetary Fund.

Institutions and initiatives established by other treaties, protocols or agreements:

21
  Peace and Security Council
 African Commission on Human and Peoples ‘Rights
 African Committee of Experts on the Rights and Welfare of the Child
 African Court on Human and Peoples‘ Rights
 New Partnership for Africa‘s Development (NEPAD)
 African Peer Review Mechanism

Related institutions:

 Regional Economic Communities

 The eight RECs recognized by the AU:
 The Arab Maghreb Union (UMA)
 The Common Market for Eastern and Southern Africa (COMESA)
 The Community of Sahel-Saharan States (CEN-SAD)
 The East African Community (EAC)
 The Economic Community of Central African States (ECCAS)
 The Economic Community of West African States (ECOWAS)
 The Intergovernmental Authority on Development (IGAD)
 The Southern Africa Development Community (SADC)
 Funding of the African Union

There are three main sources of revenue for the AU. They are:

 Contributions by Member States according to a scale of assessment approved by the Executive

Council

 Additional voluntary contributions by Member States to the solidarity fund

 Funds made available by external partners

The African Union is supposed to represent a new political, legal and institutional order for
Africa. As such, it holds out a lot of promise for the citizens of Africa as providing a new frame
work within which to pursue to the decades-old project of deepening their unity and cohesion in
the economic, political and social spheres. It is important to consider historical antecedents and
context in which the AU has been established in discussing prospects. These antecedents and

22
context point towards an ideal that has a longer history and is widely shared by most Africans:
that of forming a stronger and more cohesive institution to enable them to confront the
challenges of the 21st century. This explains why, despite the initial misgivings, cynicism and
outright hostility in some quarters and despite the deplorable lack of grassroots involvement in
the initial debates, the idea of the AU now appears to have been positively embraced by both the
political leadership and common citizenry in almost all countries. The African Union is not, of
course, a panacea for all of Africa‘s economic and political problems. Yet, the gradualist
approach of consolidating economic integration, as a way of firming up the foundation for
subsequent political integration, is the most rational and realistic. Experience from other regions
of the world, especially Europe, has amply demonstrated that regional integration is a long and
complex process. The project of reconstructing and consolidating African unity has not yet
resulted in the political union of the continent; the establishment of the AU to replace the OAU
represents a modest, but important, advance in the long-standing efforts to establish an integrated
African economic and political space. Only time will tell whether the legal and institutional
framework established under the Constitutive Act provides the African continent and its people
with a durable foundation for enhanced political cooperation and economic integration. Despite
its acknowledged failures, the OAU provided Africans with a framework for the coordination of
their shared political objectives, at least as regards some of the cardinal and overarching
concerns of the past decades: decolonization, the fight against apartheid and racist minority rule,
and as a vehicle for forging a common socio-economic agenda. It also made an admirable
contribution to post-colonial institution-building and international law-making. But the problems
that Africa continues to face today, for example deepening poverty and economic decline, HIV -
AIDS and other pandemic diseases, the challenges of globalization and continued threats to
peace and security and the full enjoyment of human rights by all, require new approaches,
strategies and institutional frameworks. African States must empower the AU to make it a
credible institution that can enable them to confront these enduring problems in an effective
manner.

23
 Chapter Three
Regional Economic Communities (RECs)
3.1. Introduction
The Regional Economic Communities (RECs) are regional groupings of African states. The
RECs have developed individually and have differing roles and structures. Generally, the
purpose of the RECs is to facilitate regional economic integration between members of the
individual regions and through the wider African Economic Community (AEC), which was
established under the Abuja Treaty (1991). The 1980 Lagos Plan of Action for the Development
of Africa and the Abuja Treaty proposed the creation of RECs as the basis for wider African
integration, with a view to regional and eventual continental integration. The RECS are
increasingly involved in coordinating AU Member States’ interests in wider areas such as peace
and security, development and governance.
The RECs are closely integrated with the AU’s work and serve as its building blocks. The
relationship between the AU and the RECs is mandated by the Abuja Treaty and the AU
Constitutive Act, and guided by the: 2008 Protocol on Relations between the RECs and the AU;
and the Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) on Cooperation in the Area of Peace and
Security between the AU, RECs and the Coordinating Mechanisms of the Regional Standby
Brigades of Eastern and Northern Africa.
The AU recognizes eight RECs, the:
 Arab Maghreb Union (UMA)
 Common Market for Eastern and Southern Africa (COMESA)
 Community of Sahel–Saharan States (CEN–SAD)
 East African Community (EAC)
 Economic Community of Central African States (ECCAS)
 Economic Community of West African States (ECOWAS)
 Intergovernmental Authority on Development (IGAD)
 Southern African Development Community (SADC).
In addition, the Eastern Africa Standby Force Coordination Mechanism (EASFCOM) and North
African Regional Capability (NARC) both have liaison offices at the AU.

24
Structure
The Protocol on Relations between the RECs and the AU provides a coordination framework
between the AEC and the RECs. This framework has the following two elements.
1. Arab Maghreb Union (UMA)
UMA is not a signatory to the Protocol on Relations between the RECs and the AU.
2. In October 2013, on the sidelines of an AU Extraordinary Summit, IGAD and EAC Foreign
Ministers decided to explore the possibility of merging these two RECs.
Committee on Coordination
The Committee provides policy advice and oversight of implementation of the Protocol (article
7). It is also tasked with coordinating and monitoring progress made by the RECs in meeting the
regional integration goal stages detailed in article 6 of the Abuja Treaty.
The Committee comprises the Chairperson of the AU Commission, Chief Executives of the
RECs, Executive Secretary of the UN Economic Commission for Africa (UNECA), President of
the African Development Bank (AfDB) and Chief Executives of the AU financial institutions.
Under article 8 of the Protocol, the Committee must meet at least twice a year. It is chaired by
the Chairperson of the AU Commission. Committee decisions are taken by consensus or, when
consensus cannot be reached, by a simple majority of the members present and voting.
Committee decisions are forwarded to the Executive Council as policy recommendations.
Committee members may be accompanied to meetings by experts and advisers.
Committee of Secretariat Officials
The Committee prepares technical reports for consideration by the Committee on Coordination
(article 9 of the Protocol). It comprises AU Commission senior officials responsible for
community affairs, as well as UNECA and AFDB senior officials.
The Committee meets at least twice a year, prior to Committee on Coordination meetings, and is
chaired by the AU Commission. Committee decisions are reached by consensus or, when
consensus is lacking, by simple majority vote (article 9).
Secretary-General: Habib Ben Yahia, Tunisia (appointed by the Council of the Presidency on
1 February 2006)
Purpose
The Arab Maghreb Union (UMA) was established under the Marrakech Treaty of 1989 with the
primary purposes of: strengthening ties between the five member states; promoting prosperity;

25
defending national rights; and adopting common policies to promote the free movement of
people, services, goods and capital within the region.
Article 3 of the Treaty provides that the Union’s objectives are to promote:
• Close diplomatic ties and dialogue between Member States while safeguarding their
independence
• Mechanisms for Member States’ industrial, commercial and social development including
through common sectorial programs.
• Measures to support Islamic values and the safeguarding of the National Arabic identity
through mechanisms such as cultural exchange, research and education programmes.
Structure
UMA is a political-level body supported by a secretariat whose headquarters are located in
Rabat, Morocco. The structures set out in the Marrakech Treaty are:
• Council of the Presidency, which is the supreme decision-making organ
• Council of the Prime Ministers, which coordinates policy
• Council of Foreign Ministers, which prepares Presidency sessions and examines Follow-up
Committee proposals
• Follow-up Committee, a national officials-level committee tasked with implementing
UMA decisions
•Four Special Ministerial Committees, which deal with thematic areas
• General Secretariat, which is the executive for the Union and Consultative Council
• A consultative council, which is composed of legislative representatives from each country and
tasked with sharing opinions and recommendations on draft Council of the
Presidency decisions.
In addition, the Marrakech Treaty provides for a range of other institutions including the:
Judicial Authority, composed of two judges from each state, and with the authority to interpret or
rule on issues relating to UMA; Maghreb University and Academy; and Investment and External
Trade Bank.
Meetings
The Marrakech Treaty provides for the Council of the Presidency to meet once a year in ordinary
session and in extraordinary session as required. The Council of the Presidency is the only

26
decision-making body. Decisions are taken unanimously. Under the Treaty, the Presidency
should rotate every year although it has not always done so.
In recent years, the UMA institutions have met infrequently. The most recent meeting of the
Council of the Presidency took place in 1994.
Members (5)
Algeria Libya Mauritania, Morocco and Tunisia
2. Common Market for Eastern and Southern Africa (COMESA)
Chairperson: Joseph Kabila, DR Congo (appointed on rotation in February 2014 for a one-year
term) Secretary-General: Sindiso Ndema Ngwenya, Zimbabwe (reappointed by the COMESA
Authority in November 2012 for a second five-year term)
Purpose
The Common Market for Eastern and Southern Africa (COMESA) was established in 1993 by
the COMESA Treaty, which has the primary purpose of creating a free trade region. Article 3 of
the Treaty provides that the aims and objectives of COMESA are to: attain sustainable growth
and development of Member States; promote joint development in all fields of economic
activity; cooperate in the creation of an enabling environment for foreign, cross-border and
domestic investment; promote peace, security and stability among the Member States; and
cooperate in strengthening relations between the Common Market and the rest of the world.
Evolution
Regional trade integration was first proposed in 1978 by the Lusaka Declaration of Intent and
Commitment to the Establishment of a Preferential Trade Area (PTA) for Eastern and Southern
Africa, which entered into force in 1982. The Common Market envisaged in the PTA was
created in 1993 under the COMESA Treaty.
Structure
COMESA is accountable to the Heads of State and Government of its 19 Member States. Its
structure includes the Council of Ministers, responsible for policy making; 12 technical
committees; and a series of subsidiary advisory bodies. Overall coordination is managed by
the COMESA Secretariat, which is based in Lusaka, Zambia. Several other institutions promote
sub-regional cooperation and development, including the COMESA:
• Trade and Development Bank of Eastern and Southern Africa (PTA Bank) in Bujumbura,
Burundi

27
Clearing House in Harare, Zimbabwe
• Association of Commercial Banks in Harare, Zimbabwe
• Leather and Leather Products Institute (LLPI) in Addis Ababa, Ethiopia
• Re-Insurance Company (ZEP-RE) in Nairobi, Kenya
• African Trade Insurance Agency in Nairobi, Kenya
• Competition Commission in Lilongwe, Malawi
• Regional Investment Agency in Cairo, Egypt
• Monetary Institute in Nairobi, Kenya
•Federation of Women in Business (FEMCOM) in Lilongwe, Malawi
• Alliance for Commodity Trade in Eastern and Southern Africa (ACTESA) in Lusaka, Zambia
• Business Council (CBC) in Lusaka, Zambia
In addition, a Court of Justice was established under the Treaty to deal with issues pertaining to
COMESA. The Court became operational in 1998.
Meetings
COMESA Heads of State and Government meet at an annual summit to make policy decisions
and elect representatives. COMESA may also hold extraordinary meetings at the request of
any of its members. Summit decisions are reached by consensus. The office of Chairperson is
held for one year in rotation among the Member States. The Summit discusses business
submitted to it by the Council of Ministers (which meets twice each year) and any other matter
that may have a bearing on COMESA. The most recent summit took place from
26 to 27 February 2014 in Kinshasa, DR Congo.
Members (19)
Burundi Madagascar
Comoros Malawi
DR Congo Mauritius
Djibouti Rwanda
Egypt Seychelles
Eritrea Sudan
Ethiopia Swaziland
Kenya Uganda
Libya

28
Zambia Zimbabwe

3. Community of Sahel–Saharan States (CEN–SAD)

President: Idriss Déby Itno, Chad (appointed by the 12th Conference of Heads of State and
Government in July 2010). Secretary-General: Ibrahim Sani Abani, Niger (appointed by the
Conference of Heads of State and Government during an extraordinary session in February
2013)
Purpose
The Community of Sahel–Saharan States (CEN–SAD) was formed in 1998 with the primary
objective of promoting the economic, cultural, political and social integration of its Member
States. Article 1 of the Treaty establishing the Community provides that the aims and objectives
of CEN–SAD are to:
• Establish a comprehensive economic union with a particular focus in the agricultural,
industrial, social, cultural and energy fields
• Adopt measures to promote free movement of individuals and capital
• Promote measures to encourage foreign trade, transportation and telecommunications among
Member States
•Promote measures to coordinate educational systems
• Promote cooperation in cultural, scientific and technical fields.
Structure
CEN–SAD is governed by its Conference of Heads of State and Government. The organisation’s
structure includes the:
• Executive Council, which meets at ministerial level to implement Conference decisions
• Special Ministerial Councils, which deal with thematic issues
• General Secretariat, which is the Community’s executive body
• Economic, Social and Cultural Council (ESCC), which follows Executive Council directives
• Sahel–Saharan Investment and Trade Bank.
Meetings
The Conference of Heads of State and Government meet once a year in ordinary session, rotating
among Member State capitals. It can meet in extraordinary session at the request of one Member
State.

29
The organization’s most recent Conference of Heads of State and Government was held in
February 2013 in Ndjamena, Chad. The CEN–SAD Executive Council met in March 2014 in
Khartoum, Sudan. The same meeting decided that Morocco would host the next CEN–SAD
Conference of Heads of State and Government. The date was to be set separately.
Members (29)
Benin Kenya
Burkina Liberia
Faso Libya
Cabo Verde Mali
Central African Republic Mauritania
Chad Morocco
Comoros Niger
Côte d’Ivoire Nigeria
Djibouti São Tomé and Príncipe
Egypt Senegal
Eritrea Sierra Leone
Gambia Somalia
Ghana Sudan
Guinea Togo
Guinea Bissau Tunisia
4. East African Community (EAC)
Chairperson: Uhuru Kenyatta, Kenya (elected on rotation in November 2013 for a one-year term)
Secretary-General: Richard Sezibera, Rwanda (appointed on 19 April 2011 for a five-year term)
Purpose
The East African Community (EAC) was initiated in 1999 as the regional inter-governmental
organisation of the five East African countries. Article 5 of the Treaty for the Establishment of
the East African Community states that the objectives of the community shall be “to develop
policies and programmes aimed at widening and deepening co-operation among the Partner
States in political, economic, social and cultural fields, research and technology, defence,
security and legal and judicial affairs, for their mutual benefit”. The EAC countries established a

30
Customs Union in 2005 and a Common Market in 2010. EAC aims to create a monetary union as
the next step in integration and ultimately become a political federation of East African states.
Evolution
The EAC was first formed in 1967 but collapsed in 1977 because of political differences. In
1993, the Agreement for the Establishment of the Permanent Tripartite Commission (PTC) for
East African Co-operation was established, and, in 1996, the Commission’s Secretariat was
launched. In 1997, leaders directed the PTC to upgrade the Agreement establishing the
Commission into a treaty. This Treaty entered into force on 7 July 2000 following its ratification
by the original three partner states – Kenya, Uganda and UR of Tanzania. Rwanda and
Burundi acceded to the EAC Treaty on 18 June 2007 and became full members of the
community from 1 July 2007.
Structure
The EAC is overseen by the Summit of Heads of State and Government, which gives general
direction on the Community’s goals and objectives. Its structure also includes the Council of
Ministers, which is the main decision-making institution; 14 ministerial-level sectoral councils;
East Africa Legislative Assembly; East African Court of Justice; and Coordination Committee.
The Coordination Committee is responsible for regional cooperation and coordinates the
activities of the sectoral councils. The Secretariat, which is the EAC executive organ, ensures
that regulations and directives adopted by the Council are properly implemented.
Meetings
The Summit meets at least once a year and may hold extraordinary meetings at the request
of any of its members. Summit decisions are reached by consensus. The office of Chairperson is
held for one year in rotation among the partner states. The Summit discusses business submitted
to it by the Council (which meets twice a year) and any other matter that may have a bearing on
the EAC.
Members (5)
Burundi Uganda
Kenya UR of Tanzania
Rwanda
South Sudan was granted observer status in November 2012, pending consideration of its
application for full admission.

31
5. Economic Community of Central African States (ECCAS)
Chair: Idriss Déby Itno, Chad (appointed in October 2009; reappointed in January 2012 for a
further term scheduled to end in November 2014)
Secretary General: Ahmad Allam-Mi, Chad (appointed by the Chairperson on 29 July 2013 for a
four-year term, renewable once)
Purpose
The Economic Community of Central African States (ECCAS) was formed in 1983 by the
Treaty Establishing the Economic Community of Central African States. It has the primary
objectives of promoting Member States’ economic and social development and improving
people’s living conditions. Article 4 of the Treaty provides that the Community’s objectives are
to:
• Achieve collective autonomy
• Raise the standard of living of its populations
• Maintain economic stability through harmonious cooperation.
The 1999 Malabo Heads of State and Government Conference set out four priority fields for the
organization. These are to: develop capacities to maintain peace, security and stability as
essential prerequisites for economic and social development; develop physical, economic and
monetary integration; develop a culture of human integration; and establish an autonomous
financing mechanism for ECCAS.
Evolution
The ECCAS Treaty was signed in October 1983 in Libreville, Gabon, and entered into force in
December 1984. Following internal crises in many member states, ECCAS ceased activities
between 1992 and 1998. ECCAS was revitalized by a Heads of State and Government decision
at the 1998 Summit in Libreville.
Structure
ECCAS is governed by its Conference of Heads of State and Government, which is the supreme
organ. Its structure also includes the:
• Council of Ministers, which oversees policy implementation
• General Secretariat, which fulfills the Community’s executive functions
• Court of Justice, which has the jurisdiction to rule on the legality of decisions, directives and
regulations of the Community

32
• Technical specialized committees, which formulate policy recommendations in thematic areas
• Consultative Commission, which operates at expert level to support research and
implementation of ECCAS programmes and decisions.
ECCAS also has three specialized agencies, the:
• Energy Pool of Central Africa
• Commission of Forests of Central Africa
• Regional Committee of the Gulf of Guinea Fishing.
Meetings
Under article 14 of the ECCAS Treaty, the Conference meets annually. The Council meets twice
a year in ordinary session, once prior to the Conference. It can also meet as required in
extraordinary session.
Members (10)
Angola Chad
Burundi Congo
Cameroon DR Congo
Central African Republic Equatorial Guinea
Gabon
São Tomé and Príncipe
6. Economic Community of West African States (ECOWAS)
Authority Chairperson: John Dramani Mahama, Ghana (elected by the ECOWAS Assembly in
March2014 for a one-year term) Commission President: Kadré Désiré Ouedraogo, Burkina Faso
(appointed by the Authority of Heads of State and Government in February 2012 for a four-year
term)
Purpose
The Economic Community of West African States (ECOWAS) was established by the
ECOWAS Treaty in May 1975 with the primary objective of promoting economic integration in
“all fields of economic activity, particularly industry, transport, telecommunications, energy,
agriculture, natural resources, commerce, monetary and financial questions, social and cultural
matters”.
Article 3(1) of the ECOWAS Treaty provides that the aims of the Community are to:
• Promote cooperation and integration in the region, leading to the establishment of an economic

33
union in West Africa in order to raise the living standards of its peoples
• Maintain and enhance economic stability, foster relations among Member States and contribute
to the progress and development of the African continent.
Structure
ECOWAS is governed by its Authority of Heads of State and Government. The Authority
Chairperson is usually elected for a one-year term. ECOWAS’s structure includes the:
• Council of Ministers, which oversees policy implementation
• Commission (Secretariat until 2006), which carries out all executive functions
• Community Parliament, which represents all the peoples of West Africa
•Economic and Social Council, which considers economic and social matters
• Community Court of Justice, which interprets the ECOWAS Treaty and adjudicates on matters
arising out of obligations under ECOWAS law
• Fund for Cooperation, Compensation and Development
• Six specialized technical commissions
• Bank for Infrastructure and Development.
In addition, the private sector organizations Ecobank (Ecobank Transnational Inc. (ETI)) and
Ecomarine International (shipping) are associated with the ECOWAS system. ECOWAS also
oversees 12 specialized agencies the:
• West African Health Organization (WAHO)
• West African Monetary Agency (WAMA)
• West African Monetary Institute (WAMI)
• ECOWAS Youth and Sports Development Centre (EYSDC)
• ECOWAS Gender Development Centre (EGDC)
• Water Resources Coordination Unit (WRCU)
• ECOWAS Brown Card
• West African Power Pool (WAPP)
• Inter-Governmental Action Group against Money Laundering and Terrorism Financing in
West Africa (GIABA)
• West African Regional Health Programme (PRSAO)
• ECOWAS Centre for Renewable Energy and Energy Efficiency (ECREEE)
• ECOWAS Regional Electricity Regulatory Authority (ERERA).

34
Meetings
The Authority of Heads of State and Government meet at least once a year. It may also meet in
extraordinary session.
Members (15)
Benin, Liberia
Burkina Faso Mali
Cape Verde Nigeria
Côte d’Ivoire Gambia Senegal
Ghana Sierra Leone
Guinea Togo
Guinea Bissau
7. Intergovernmental Authority on Development (IGAD)
Chairperson: Hailemariam Dessalegn, Ethiopia (elected by the IGAD Assembly in January 2013)
Head of Secretariat: Mahboub Maalim, Kenya (appointed by the IGAD Assembly on 14 June
2008 for a four-year term; reappointed in July 2012 for a second four-year term)
Purpose
The Intergovernmental Authority on Development (IGAD) was established in 1996 to
represent the interests of states in the Eastern Africa region. Under article 7 of the Agreement
establishing IGAD, its aims and objectives include promoting joint development strategies;
harmonizing Member States’ policies; achieving regional food security; initiating sustainable
development of natural resources; promoting peace and stability in the sub-region; and
mobilizing resources for the implementation of programmers within the framework of sub-
regional cooperation.
Evolution
IGAD is the successor to the Intergovernmental Authority on Drought and Development
(IGADD), which was founded in 1986 to address the recurring droughts and other natural
disasters that had caused severe hardship in the region. The revitalised Authority’s mandate
increased to include promoting greater regional political and economic cooperation as well as
addressing peace and security issues. It also implemented a new organisational structure.
Structure
The IGAD Assembly of Heads of State and Government is the organisation’s supreme

35
policy-making organ, determining its objectives, guidelines and programmes. IGAD’s structure
also includes the Council of Ministers, which formulates policy, approves the work programme
and the Secretariat’s annual budget, and the Committee of Ambassadors, which facilitates the
Council’s work and guides the Executive Secretary (head of the Secretariat). The Council is
composed of the Ministers of Foreign Affairs and one other minister designated by each Member
State. The Executive Secretary is appointed by the Assembly to run the organization’s day-to-
day affairs.
Note
1 Ethiopia was initially elected for a one-year term but as of 1 September 2014 remained as
Chair.
Other bodies include the:
• Inter-Parliamentary Union (IPU–IGAD), which came into existence after its establishing
Protocol, came into force in November 2007. It is composed of IGAD Member States’ Speakers
of Parliament.
• Civil Society Forum, which was established in 2003 to resuscitate the interface between the
IGAD Secretariat and non-governmental and civil society organizations in the region.
• Partners Forum (IPF), which was formed in January 1997 to replace and formalize IGAD’s
relationships with the ‘Friends of IGAD’, a group of partners working closely with the
Secretariat.
Meetings
The Assembly Summit meets at least once a year and may hold extraordinary meetings at the
request of any of its members. Summit decisions are reached by consensus. The office of
Chairperson is usually held for one year in rotation among the Member States. The Summit
discusses business submitted to it by the Council (which meets twice each year) and any other
matter that may have a bearing on IGAD. The Committee of Ambassadors convenes as often
as the need arises.
Members (8)
Djibouti Somalia
Eritrea South Sudan
Ethiopia Sudan
Kenya Uganda

36
8. Southern African Development Community (SADC)
Chairperson: Robert Mugabe, Zimbabwe (elected by the SADC Assembly in August 2014 for a
one-year term)
Head of Secretariat: Tomaz Augusto Salomão, Mozambique (appointed by the SADC Assembly
in August 2005 for a five-year term; reappointed in July 2010 for a second five-year term)
Purpose
The South African Development Community (SADC) was formed on 17 August 1992.
Under article 5 of the Treaty establishing SADC, as amended in 2001, its objectives include:
promoting sustainable and equitable economic growth and development; promoting
common political values and systems; consolidating democracy, peace, security and stability;
achieving complementarity between national and regional strategies; maximising productive
employment and use of resources; achieving sustainable use of natural resources and effective
protection of the environment; and combating HIV/AIDS and other diseases.
Note: Eritrea’s membership is currently in suspense.
Evolution
SADC is the successor to the Southern African Development Co-ordination Conference
(SADCC), which was established in 1980 in Lusaka, Zambia. The transformation of SADCC
into SADC in 1992 redefined the basis of cooperation among Member States from a loose
association into a legally binding arrangement and formalised the intention to spearhead the
economic integration of the Southern Africa region.
Structure
SADC is accountable to the Summit of Heads of State or Government. Its structure includes the:
Heads of State-level Troika Organ on Politics, Defence and Security Cooperation, which is
responsible for policy direction on regional peace and security issues between summits; Council
of Ministers, which is responsible for the implementation of summit policy decisions;
Secretariat, which is the executive body for SADC and headed by the Executive Secretary;
Tribunal (based in Windhoek, Namibia), which interprets provisions of the SADC Treaty;
Standing Committee of Officials, which offers technical advice to the Council of Ministers; and
SADC national committees (SNCs), which deal with thematic issues. Decision-making
is by consensus, except in the Tribunal, SNCs and Secretariat.

37
Meetings
The Summit meets at least once a year and may hold extraordinary meetings at the request
of any of its members. Summit decisions are reached by consensus. The office of Chairperson is
held for one year in rotation among the partner states. The Summit discusses business submitted
to it by the Council (which meets twice each year) and any other matter that may have a bearing
on SADC.
Members (15) Mauritius
Angola Mozambique
Botswana Namibia Seychelles
DR Congo South Africa
Lesotho Swaziland
Madagascar UR of Tanzania Zambia Zimbabwe
Malawi
Other Regional Bodies Related to the AU
International Conference on the Great Lakes Region (ICGLR)
Chairperson: Eduardo dos Santos, Angola (elected by the ICGLR Assembly in March 2014 for a
two-year term).Executive Secretary: Ntumba Luamba, DR Congo (since December 2011;
appointed by the ICGLR Heads of State and Government).
Purpose
The International Conference on the Great Lakes Region (ICGLR) is an inter-governmental
organization of the countries in the region. It was established in 2003 to address the regional
dimension to conflicts affecting the Great Lakes and give momentum to efforts to promote
sustainable peace and development. The AU is an ICGLR formal partner. The AU Commission
provides technical, diplomatic and financial support to the ICGLR. It also works in cooperation
with the ICGLR in the framework of its activities.
Evolution
In November 2004, the ICGLR Heads of State and Government unanimously adopted the
Declaration on Peace, Security and Development in the Great Lakes Region, in Dar es Salaam,
UR of Tanzania. In 2006, the Pact on Security, Stability and Development was signed in
Nairobi, Kenya. The Pact included the Dar es Salaam Declaration and associated Programmes of
Action and Protocols. This marked the end of the ICGLR preparatory phase and start of the

38
implementation period. The ICGLR Executive Secretariat was established in May 2007 in
Bujumbura, Burundi.
Structure
the Heads of State and Government Summit is ICGLR’s supreme organ and is chaired
by a member country’s Head of State or Government in rotation. ICGLR’s executive organ
comprises member countries’ Foreign Affairs Ministers. Other important structures include the
National Coordination and Collaboration Mechanism and the Executive Secretariat.
Meetings
The Summit is held every two years. An extraordinary session may be convened at the request of
a Member State and with the consent of the majority of Member States present and voting. The
executive organ meets in ordinary session twice a year. It may also meet in extraordinary session
on the request of a Member State and with the consent of a majority of the 12.
Member State

39
Angola Rwanda
Burundi South Sudan
Central African Republic Sudan
Congo Uganda
DR Congo UR of Tanzania Zambia
Kenya

40