Abiola Idowu-Ojo is the executive secretary of the African Commission on Human and People’s Rights (ACHPRs). In this interview with ENE OSHABA, she speaks on her career progression at the AU and urges states to ratify the Maputo Protocol in order to achieve the continent’s vision.
Could you start by giving us a brief overview of your role at the African Commission on Human and Peoples’ Rights and the responsibilities you hold?
I started as a Senior Legal Officer at the African Commission in 2012, after having previously worked with the Commission in 2006 and 2007. So, when I joined as a regular AU staff member, it wasn’t a completely new environment for me.
Since then, I transitioned to the role of Acting Deputy Secretary, eventually becoming the Acting Secretary last year. I was confirmed in this role in June of this year. Therefore, the office is familiar territory—one in which I have served for over 12 years as regular staff and for about another two years in a different capacity.
This is a place where I have grown and gained a thorough understanding of both its achievements and its challenges. This insight allows me to approach my responsibilities with perspective, enabling me to identify how best to support the work of the Commission. My primary responsibility is to lead the Secretariat, ensuring it is appropriately organized and resourced to support the mandate of our commissioners.
Our commissioners are elected officials who serve on a part-time basis and are not based in Banjul; they remain in their respective countries and continue with their regular jobs. Yet, they are expected to serve the continent on an ongoing basis, as human rights issues arise every day. My role, therefore, is to ensure the Secretariat operates effectively to identify and address these issues, allowing us to support the commissioners in their responses, whether at the country level or through thematic initiatives.
This role is a significant responsibility, as our mandate covers 54 out of 55 African states, with just 10 lawyers, me as secretary, and a few additional administrative staff. It is indeed a large workload for such a small team, but with the experience I’ve gathered over the years and by the grace of God, it has been a relatively smooth journey, I would say.
With 54 African countries under the Commission’s mandate, what are the major human rights’ issues you encounter? Are there common challenges across the continent, or are they unique to each country?
Yes, so while all 54 countries are not exactly the same, there are several common issues found across the continent.
One significant challenge is the lack of space for human rights defenders to freely express themselves and carry out their work. This is a widespread problem, which is why the mandate of the Special Rapporteur on Human Rights Defenders is one of the busiest at the African Commission. In most contexts, governments do not welcome criticism, and this resistance is a frequent human rights issue throughout the continent.
Another common challenge is the restriction on freedom of association, especially for NGOs. For these organisations to organise, register, and operate effectively, they often face various restrictions. Sometimes, funding is limited, and in other cases, the conditions under which they can register are strictly regulated. This presents an ongoing challenge for civil society.
The rights of women—why we’re gathered here today—are also a critical issue in various contexts. Many countries have reservations about the Maputo Protocol for different reasons, but even in those without explicit reservations, issues around the rights of women and girls remain widespread.
The education of girls, the treatment of pregnant girls in schools, and the sexual and reproductive health rights of young girls are concerns in numerous African countries. This often stems from cultural factors where the girl child is seen as subordinate to the male child, affecting her opportunities and rights.
These issues, sadly, are all too common across the continent.
You mentioned several issues affecting women specifically. What steps is the African Commission taking to address these concerns?
To start with, the African Charter is intended for everyone. However, one significant step the African Commission has taken is to establish a special mechanism dedicated to addressing issues faced by women and girls, recognising the need for focused attention. We have a Special Rapporteur on the Rights of Women for this purpose.
This role has been held by several esteemed African women who are deeply committed to this cause. Currently, the Special Rapporteur is Commissioner Jeanette Ramasula Eselanjayi from The Gambia, who is doing extensive work. The Special Rapporteur engages with member states through country promotion missions. She conducts on-the-ground assessments, sometimes accompanied by colleagues and other times independently.
For instance, in Namibia, she recently visited alone. In other cases, she goes with other commissioners and meets with various government officials, ranging from the highest authorities to local government representatives. She also visits prisons to observe the conditions, especially those affecting women.
Following these missions, she issues what we call country reports, or promotion mission reports, which include recommendations for addressing the specific situations she encountered. More broadly, she monitors developments related to women’s rights in Africa on an almost daily basis.
If pressing issues arise in a particular country, she issues letters of urgent appeal, addressed to the presidents of the relevant countries, when trends that negatively impact women’s rights are identified. If the matter is already publicly known, she issues a press statement, adding the Commission’s voice to the ongoing discussion, reminding states of their obligations under the African Charter, and providing specific recommendations for resolving the issues.
This monitoring is a continuous process, happening daily. Additionally, during the Commission’s sessions, after the public segment, the Commission convenes private proceedings. In these, we assess the current context based on information from public sessions and stakeholders. If there are women’s rights issues that need particular attention, the Special Rapporteur leads the drafting of resolutions, targeting specific issues.
For example, recently there was a resolution on sexual and gender-based violence in the context of the conflict in Sudan, a matter of great concern to the Special Rapporteur. She led the drafting of this resolution, which was then issued to remind the relevant states and actors of their obligations under the African Charter, with specific recommendations on addressing these issues.
Through these steps, we aim to provide guidance on potential solutions, ensuring that authorities are informed about how to address the issues. However, one recurring concern raised by civil society organizations (CSOs) is that, at times, governments do not fully report issues or fail to implement agreed actions but still report compliance.
Is this a fair assessment? I would say both yes and no. The African Commission is a supranational body with no country-level presence, making it reliant on various actors, including CSOs and National Human Rights Institutions (NHRIs), to gather information. While we do conduct promotion missions, we can’t cover all 54 state parties simultaneously. Thus, we depend heavily on these stakeholders to inform the Commission on states’ reports.
To support this, we developed guidelines for shadow reporting. Even before these guidelines, the Commission has always invited CSOs and NHRIs to provide alternate reports when state reports are presented. These shadow reports are considered, and state delegations are questioned on this information without revealing the sources.
Recently, we developed guidelines specifically for shadow reporting on women’s rights. It’s essential for stakeholders to take this responsibility seriously, as human rights are a collective duty. The Commission is limited in its reach, but it strives to connect with various stakeholders. Over 540 NGOs hold observer status, enabling them to provide critical information on the situation within countries and thematic areas.
There is often the concern that governments may not fully report on certain issues or follow through on commitments. In your experience, how accurate is this assessment, and how does the Commission ensure transparency and accountability from states?
If implementation falls short in certain areas, the Commission heavily relies on national-level actors to monitor and report back. At the same time, when the Commission receives reports, it expects accurate information from states. If there are discrepancies, the alternate reports provide a means to highlight them. We also verify facts through public sources before issuing recommendations.
Yes, the Commission is aware of the widespread issue of limited implementation, whether in case decisions or mission report recommendations. As a result, we are developing an implementation framework to better track how states respond to the Commission’s recommendations. Political will remains a challenge across the board, not just for the Commission, but globally. As sovereign entities, states require mechanisms for tracking non-implementation, understanding its causes, and finding ways to facilitate effective implementation across different contexts.
Could you expand on the importance of accurate state reporting, and how it ultimately benefits the countries involved?
Absolutely, we do that. The Commission has guidelines for state reporting, with specific questions detailing how we expect states to respond to reports on various aspects and provisions of the Charter.
In fact, to help states better understand what information we require, beyond the generic reports, we are now developing more specific questions or guidelines on various issues. For instance, as I mentioned, we currently have guidelines on women’s rights under the Maputo Protocol.
We also have guidelines, for example, on the governance of extractive industries, including mining, oil, and gas exploration, because we noticed that states were not necessarily providing the information we needed. Where we identify gaps, the Commission creates what we call “soft law” or supplementary instruments to guide states on the specific information we need. This also helps those holding states accountable, such as CSOs and everyday citizens, to identify and advocate for areas where states may be falling short.
Lastly, when we receive state reports, we review them at the Commission level and then draft specific, context-driven questions. If we identify issues not addressed in the reports, or if we receive shadow reports highlighting particular concerns that require clarification, we send a list of questions to states for their response before they present their reports in the Commission sessions.
During these sessions, states are also asked further questions. Sometimes, they may be requested to provide additional information even after the session, before we adopt our conclusive observations. All these steps aim to verify the information provided by states.
As I mentioned, those on the ground are best positioned to keep the Commission informed. Additionally, as part of our state reporting guidelines, there is an obligation on states to ensure that the reporting process includes all critical stakeholders, including national human rights institutions and NGOs.
If national reporting processes are not as inclusive as they should be, the actors at the national level, such as CSOs, community-based organisations, and national human rights institutions, should inform the Commission.
How would you assess the current implementation of the Maputo Protocol? What message do you have for African nations regarding their commitment to the Protocol and the broader empowerment of women across the continent?
I would say that our women are a critical component of the continent. They make up the largest portion of the population, and we cannot move forward if we don’t bring our women along.
The Maputo Protocol helps member states better understand and appreciate how they can empower African women. Without empowering African women, we are leaving a significant percentage of the continent’s population behind. If we truly want to achieve the Africa we envision, attain the Sustainable Development Goals, and move forward as a continent and as a people, we must prioritize empowering African women.
The Maputo Protocol contains a number of progressive provisions on how women’s rights can be upheld and strengthened in various contexts, and it is context-specific, addressing the unique circumstances of the African continent.
Therefore, I encourage member states to domesticate the Maputo Protocol. Additionally, for those who have ratified it, it is essential to report on its implementation to the African Commission. Only through reporting and sharing their measures can we identify gaps.
The reporting process is not merely about pointing fingers; it’s also an opportunity for dialogue. It allows us to see how things are progressing at the national level. What policies and frameworks have been put in place to ensure women’s rights are upheld? If there are challenges, how can we assist? Through these conversations, best practices sometimes emerge from the reports.
We can then reference these best practices to advise states that may have gaps, suggesting strategies they can consider. Therefore, it’s crucial that states also report. And finally, for those who have yet to ratify, we must acknowledge that we cannot progress without our women. ‘Please, ratify the Maputo Protocol.’
