Second Review of the AFDB’s Independent Review Mechanism CSO Comments

A statement from 67 civil society organizations (CSOs) providing recommendations to strengthen the African Development Bank's (AfDB) Independent Review Mechanism (IRM) following a second review by a consultant.

• The CSOs argue that the IRM's independence is not sufficiently guaranteed and recommend prohibiting the CRMU Director and IRM Experts from working at the AfDB after their terms expire to avoid conflicts of interest.
• To improve transparency, the CSOs recommend that the AfDB include a clear section on information disclosure in the IRM Operating Rules and Procedures (ORP), committing to publishing all relevant complaint documents online in a timely manner.
• The CSOs oppose the limitation of the IRM's scope to only 'social and economic rights' regarding human rights violations, arguing that the mechanism should be able to measure compliance against all human rights violations as they are interdependent.
• The CSOs recommend that the IRM be empowered to trigger its own compliance reviews without a formal complaint, particularly in cases where it is dangerous for affected communities to file one.
• The CSOs disagree with a consultant's proposal to allow the CRMU Director discretionary power to extend time periods for investigations, citing the Bujagali hydropower project in Uganda as an example where a complaint filed in May 2007 remained unresolved seven years later.
• The CSOs identify significant barriers to accessibility, noting that from 1967 to the end of 2013, the AfDB approved over 4,500 projects, yet only 9 complaints have been received and registered by the IRM.
• The CSOs recommend removing restrictions that currently limit who can file a complaint, suggesting that any individual, group, or NGO (even those not directly affected) should be allowed to request a compliance review.
• The CSOs reject the consultant's recommendation that complainants must first raise issues with a local grievance mechanism before accessing the IRM, arguing that such mechanisms often have an inherent conflict of interest.

APA

Ayensu, E. (2014). Second Review of the AFDB’s Independent Review Mechanism CSO Comments. Natural Justice. https://naturaljustice.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/08/CSO-Comments-Second-AFDB-Review.pdf

Chicago

Ayensu, Edward. Second Review of the AFDB’s Independent Review Mechanism CSO Comments. Natural Justice, 2014. https://naturaljustice.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/08/CSO-Comments-Second-AFDB-Review.pdf.

Wikipedia

{{cite press release |last1=Ayensu |first1=Edward |title=Second Review of the AFDB’s Independent Review Mechanism CSO Comments |publisher=Natural Justice |date=30 August 2014 |url=https://naturaljustice.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/08/CSO-Comments-Second-AFDB-Review.pdf |access-date=17 August 2026 |via=Climate Insights Directory}}

BibTeX

@misc{ayensu2014second, author = {Ayensu, Edward}, title = {{Second Review of the AFDB’s Independent Review Mechanism CSO Comments}}, publisher = {Natural Justice}, year = {2014}, month = aug, url = {https://naturaljustice.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/08/CSO-Comments-Second-AFDB-Review.pdf}, urldate = {2026-08-17}, note = {Indexed by Climate Insights Directory} }