AFRICAN ACCOUNTABILITY

This report, published by the South African Institute of International Affairs in 2015, examines the state of governance and accountability in Africa. It analyzes both continental frameworks, such as the African Union's Agenda 2063 and the African Peer Review Mechanism, and domestic institutions, including parliaments, courts, and ombudsman offices, to identify the drivers of democratic progress and the persistence of authoritarian tendencies.

• The African Peer Review Mechanism (APRM), established in 2003 to improve governance across political, economic, corporate, and social areas, suffers from a gap between identification and action. While its reviews are considered comprehensive and honest, the implementation of National Programmes of Action (NPoA) has been deficient in most of the 35 member states that signed up as of November 2015.
• There has been a shift in African political discourse away from good governance and democracy toward economic development over the last decade. This trend is influenced by the rise of investors like China and Russia who do not prioritize human rights or democracy, as evidenced by bilateral trade between Africa and China increasing from $10.6 billion in 2000 to $198.49 billion in 2012.
• While the frequency of coups in Africa has declined since the 20th century—dropping from an average of 3.83 per year between 1946 and 1999 to 3.03 per year between 2000 and 2012—unconstitutional changes of government remain a threat. The African Union (AU) distinguishes itself from the former Organization of African Unity (OAU) by prohibiting governments that take power unconstitutionally from participating in Union activities.
• The African Union's efforts to act as a 'norm entrepreneur' through initiatives like Agenda 2063 require African governments to be willing to pool their sovereignty upward to the AU as a supranational authority to achieve its goals.
• Domestic accountability is often undermined by the imbalance of power between the executive and legislative branches. African parliaments frequently fail to utilize their constitutionally mandated oversight powers, resulting in strong presidents with extensive powers and weak legislative checks.
• Civil society is increasingly critical for public accountability, yet many African governments respond with hostility, attempting to regulate or undermine the sector. This muzzling of dissenting voices and whistle-blowers is identified as a threat to sustainable peace and democracy.

APA

Gruzd, S., & Turianskyi, Y. (2015). AFRICAN ACCOUNTABILITY. South African Institute of International Affairs. https://saiia.org.za/wp-content/uploads/2015/11/Extract_Accountability_Print-pdf-REV.pdf

Chicago

Gruzd, Steven, and Yarik Turianskyi. AFRICAN ACCOUNTABILITY. South African Institute of International Affairs, 2015. https://saiia.org.za/wp-content/uploads/2015/11/Extract_Accountability_Print-pdf-REV.pdf.

Wikipedia

{{cite report |last1=Gruzd |first1=Steven |last2=Turianskyi |first2=Yarik |title=AFRICAN ACCOUNTABILITY |publisher=South African Institute of International Affairs |date=2015 |url=https://saiia.org.za/wp-content/uploads/2015/11/Extract_Accountability_Print-pdf-REV.pdf |access-date=17 August 2026 |via=Climate Insights Directory}}

BibTeX

@techreport{gruzd2015african, author = {Gruzd, Steven and Turianskyi, Yarik}, title = {{AFRICAN ACCOUNTABILITY}}, institution = {South African Institute of International Affairs}, year = {2015}, url = {https://saiia.org.za/wp-content/uploads/2015/11/Extract_Accountability_Print-pdf-REV.pdf}, urldate = {2026-08-17}, note = {Indexed by Climate Insights Directory} }