Why the African Peer Review Mechanism Must Remain Voluntary

This policy briefing argues that the African Peer Review Mechanism (APRM) must remain a voluntary association to maintain its credibility and effectiveness. The author contends that mandatory accession would undermine the process by introducing countries lacking the political will or open societies necessary for robust, honest governance reviews.

• The APRM is currently a voluntary process with 35 of the 54 African Union (AU) member states having acceded. The author argues that making participation mandatory would be a mistake because the mechanism's relevance depends on the "perceived credibility and desirability of its processes and reports".
• There is a strong correlation between a country's level of political openness and its active engagement with the APRM. Data indicates that participants are generally rated as 'freer' than the AU average, and two-thirds of 'free and partly free' countries have completed a first review, compared to only about one-fifth of 'not free' member countries.
• The APRM process imposes significant financial and administrative burdens that may be prohibitive for countries with severe developmental challenges. Costs include a minimum annual subscription of $100,000 and review outlays ranging from $1 million to $3 million.
• The APRM has struggled with implementation timelines and periodic reviews. While originally intended to be completed in six to nine months, no country has achieved this timeframe, and no country has yet produced a second review despite the goal of periodic reviews every five years.
• The credibility of the APRM is threatened in closed societies where government domination can lead to non-credible reviews. The document cites the Algerian process as being hindered by "structural problems experienced by Algeria, which are linked to the quality of political governance" and notes similar concerns regarding Ethiopia.
• The author recommends that the APRM focus on consolidating its system among genuinely committed members to create a "caucus of excellence" within the AU, rather than prioritizing the expansion of membership.

APA

Corrigan, T. (2015). Why the African Peer Review Mechanism Must Remain Voluntary. South African Institute of International Affairs. https://saiia.org.za/wp-content/uploads/2015/03/Policy-Briefing-130.pdf

Chicago

Corrigan, Terence. Why the African Peer Review Mechanism Must Remain Voluntary. South African Institute of International Affairs, 2015. https://saiia.org.za/wp-content/uploads/2015/03/Policy-Briefing-130.pdf.

Wikipedia

{{cite report |last1=Corrigan |first1=Terence |title=Why the African Peer Review Mechanism Must Remain Voluntary |publisher=South African Institute of International Affairs |date=March 2015 |url=https://saiia.org.za/wp-content/uploads/2015/03/Policy-Briefing-130.pdf |access-date=17 August 2026 |via=Climate Insights Directory}}

BibTeX

@techreport{corrigan2015why, author = {Corrigan, Terence}, title = {{Why the African Peer Review Mechanism Must Remain Voluntary}}, institution = {South African Institute of International Affairs}, year = {2015}, month = mar, url = {https://saiia.org.za/wp-content/uploads/2015/03/Policy-Briefing-130.pdf}, urldate = {2026-08-17}, note = {Indexed by Climate Insights Directory} }