Latest News Archive

Please select Category, Year, and then Month to display items

Africa Month: Continental integration would be an effective means of accelerating economic growth

13 May 2021 | Story Dr Bright Nkrumah | Photo Supplied

DrBrightNkrumah_web read more — Dr Bright Nkrumah, Free State Centre for Human Rights, University of the Free State (UFS)

The year 2021 marks the 58th anniversary of the establishment of the Organisation of African Union (OAU) on 25 May 1963. The month of May is therefore celebrated annually as Africa Month. This piece, in essence, is a craving to respond to an often-articulated question: is Africa Month a moment of celebration or introspection? The former would have been preferred had the various freedoms offered by the organisation been more realistic and dealt with the concrete challenges bedevilling the continent’s population.

At the onset, it ought to be acknowledged that the organisation was not forged with the intent of improving the living conditions of its population but to safeguard the recently won independence and sovereignty of its member states. Against this backdrop, the notion of non-interference in the domestic affairs (Uti Possidetis Juris) of states became its guiding principle, thereby fostering a culture of silence on abuses perpetuate by African rulers against their citizens. Having said that there were notable illustrations of leaders such as Julius Nyerere, Kenneth Kaunda, and Samora Machel, who individually and collectively ‘invoked the notion of humanitarian intervention’ and waged crusades to relieve Ugandans from the jaws of Idi Amin.

Indeed, one of the significant achievements of the OAU during this era was the adoption of the African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights (Charter) in 1981. The instrument may be seen as a trumpeting of freedom, as it considers the rights and wellbeing of Africans sacrosanct and uncompromising. It is important and perhaps enthralling that all African states are parties to the Charter. While the large-scale ratification could enhance its moral force, it could also be used as a red herring to cover up various atrocities in hostile countries.

Where are we?

In 2002, African rulers meeting in Durban, South Africa, adopted the Constitutive Act, transforming the OAU into the African Union (AU). The new Act perhaps seems to be breathing fresh air into Africa’s rights struggle. In stark contrast to its forerunner, the Constitutive Act authorises the AU to intervene in a situation where citizens are threatened by grave danger perpetrated by their governments or external forces. Remarkably, article 3(k) calls for raising the ‘living standards of African people’. Going by these aspirations, one might speculate that Africans are in for a cheery and jolly ride.

Remarkably, while the Act addresses several aspects of the continent’s socioeconomic issues its operationalisation remains the captive of competing for national interests of AU states. Four key setbacks merit consideration here.

Instability: The landscape of Africa is punctuated by rulers’ embezzlement of public funds, ethnic privilege, and siphoning resources to one’s home village to the detriment of others. This bias tends to incite discontent and hostilities, even as one of the popular rhetoric of the infamous Boko Haram is to addressing Nigeria’s North-South resource disparity. By the same reckoning, hundreds of women and children have been displaced or killed from avoidable hostilities in geographical enclaves such as Cameroon, DR Congo, Mozambique, and Sudan.

Injustice: State security agencies and specifically the police force have evolved to be intimidators rather than the protective machinery they ought to be. More disturbingly, access to justice seems to be a pipe dream, as legal fees and prolonged trials make it burdensome for victims to seek remedies. As a common practice, many judicial systems across Anglophone, Francophone, and Lusophone countries are still modelled on ancient colonial systems, with lawyers and judges using convoluted legal jargon which frustrates rather than assists victims of abuse.

Poverty: 40% of the continent’s population lives in extreme poverty or on <$1 (approx. R14) per day. Indeed, this figure is sobering. A reader might agree that the New Partnership for Africa’s Development (Nepad) may be seen as the primary document for reversing this trend. The document has, however, been criticised as given superficial treatment to the basic entitlement of vulnerable groups, and without feasible strategies on issues of underdevelopment. It speaks to enhancing greater access to services, but segregates this aspiration from how the impoverished could access these essentials. Without a commitment to enforceable socioeconomic goods, such as health care, education, food, social security, the document may be seen as placing a stamp on the skewed access to resources already pervasive in local communities.

Covid-19: The onset of the pandemic calls for total marshalling of the continent’s fiscal and human resources. Sadly, the virus has claimed the lives of eminent cadres, teachers, and trade unionists who could have played a key role in this regard. South Africa alone has recorded more than 54,620 deaths, leaving behind hundreds of orphans. Still, the ramifications are likely to be more significant, altering the structures of society and putting a strain on the financial resources of weak states.

What ought to be done?

One golden thread running through these challenges is the weakness of the AU to forge effective institutions to restrain the excesses of states, monitor the government’s compliance with human rights obligations, and accountability. If the organisation seeks to improve human rights in Africa, it ought to revive debates towards Pan-Africanism and regional integration. At present, artificial borders erected by colonisers have created states which are simply not viable economic and political units. To this end, continental integration is the effective means of accelerating economic growth, uplifting the least developed countries, and domestically-based transformative development.

Opinion article by Dr Bright Nkrumah, Free State Centre for Human Rights, Faculty of Law, University of the Free State.

News Archive

UFS council elects Nwaila and Hancke

2005-03-15

Dr Charles Nwaila, Superintendent-General of Education in the Free State, was elected Vice-chairperson of the UFS Council and Judge Faan Hancke was re-elected as Chairperson today.

According to the Rector and Vice-Chancellor, Prof Frederick Fourie, the election of Dr Nwaila is an important achievement for the UFS as Dr Nwaila is a well known leader in education in the Free State.

Dr Nwaila pledged to work constructively with the UFS council and management to ensure that the UFS benefits all people of the province and the country.

The appointments are valid for a term of three years from 1 June 2005 to 31 May 2008.

The elections took place at the quarterly meeting of the UFS Council where a number of other key transformation steps were approved.

The Council approved a Strategic Plan for the UFS which reflects a renewed focus on transformation of the institution, calling it an important roadmap for the future of the UFS.

According to Prof Fourie, the Strategic Plan tried strike a balance between continuity and change, addressing the need to remain an excellent university in an ever-changing context and environment.

Prof Fourie said transformation had many aspects and dimensions and could not be reduced to an issue of numbers.

The Strategic Plan identifies five strategic priorities and corresponding challenges in the next phase of transformation.

The priorities are:

quality and excellence
equity, diversity and redress
financial sustainability
regional co-operation and engagement.
outward thrust

Prof Fourie said that besides the five strategic priorities the plan also reflected concrete actions and interventions to address them.

He said the renewed focus on transformation is embedded in the priorities and specific actions that are identified.

The Council congratulated the management for the roadmap and for the achievements that have already been achieved in terms of transformation.

In order to draft a comprehensive Transformation Plan that will give substance to certain aspects of the UFS Strategic plan – or roadmap – the Council approved the establishment of a Transformation Plan Team.

The team will consist of about 16 people, which includes the two coordinators, Prof Teuns Verschoor, Vice-Rector: Academic Operations, and Dr Ezekiel Moraka, Vice-Rector: Student Affairs.

According to Prof Verschoor, the team was chosen and approved by the Executive Management earlier for the individual contributions that they could make.

While the individuals do not represent particular constituencies on campus they are a very diverse group of persons in terms of race, gender and various sections of the campus and the satellite campuses.

Prof Fourie, said there was an urgency and importance attached to the work of the Transformation Plan Team.

He said that while the team must produce a plan within a tight deadline, the task must be carried out very well, which could mean different stages in the work of the team.

According to the Rector, the UFS must take the lead in best practice transformation, while not underestimating the complexity of the issues facing the UFS.

The full list of names will be finalized soon.

MEDIA RELEASE
Issued by: Mnr Anton Fisher
Director: Strategic Communication
Cel: 072 207 8334
Tel: (051) 401-2749
11 Maart 2005

Back

Economic and Management Sciences

Education

Health Sciences

The Humanities

Law

Natural and Agricultural Sciences

Theology and Religion

Open Distance Learning

Business School

We use cookies to make interactions with our websites and services easy and meaningful. To better understand how they are used, read more about the UFS cookie policy. By continuing to use this site you are giving us your consent to do this.

Accept