policy-briefing-148-90af24c361bd9710.pdf

This policy brief by the South African Institute of International Affairs examines the gap between the African Union's (AU) normative commitments to democracy and human rights and the actual foreign policies of its member states. The author argues that strong sovereignty norms and a state-centric approach have hindered the domestication of human rights, leading to a state of 'stasis' or reversal in several countries. The brief recommends that the AU embrace global partnerships with civil society and that pivotal states like South Africa rejuvenate human rights as a core pillar of their external engagements to ensure continental stability.

• The African Union (AU) established a normative framework for democracy and human rights through its 2000 Constitutive Act, the African Governance Architecture, and the African Peace and Security Architecture, yet progress has been modest compared to the ambitions set in 2002.
• The primary obstacle to advancing human rights in Africa is the persistence of strong sovereignty norms within the foreign policies of member states, which have been mirrored in the AU's own institutional dynamics.
• While regular elections have occurred over the last 15 years, democratic consolidation is lacking; Freedom House's 2016 report classified 42 of 55 African states as either 'partly free' or 'not free'.
• Specific countries have experienced reversals in civil and political rights, including Burundi, Egypt, Rwanda, Uganda, and The Gambia. Six countries were listed among the top 10 'worst of the worst' in the 2016 Freedom in the World Report: Sudan, the CAR, Western Sahara, Equatorial Guinea, Eritrea, and Somalia.
• Economic decline may further jeopardize human rights, as limited fiscal space could lead governments to use repressive measures against citizens protesting for socio-economic rights.
• The AU's state-centric approach is criticized for excluding civil society from critical deliberations, such as the 2016 'African year of human rights' summit in Addis Ababa.
• The author recommends that the AU form global partnerships for capacity building and that 'pivotal states' like South Africa, as well as smaller successful states like Mauritius, Botswana, and Namibia, use their foreign policies to promote democratic norms.

APA

South African Institute of International Affairs (n.d.). policy-briefing-148-90af24c361bd9710.pdf. https://saiia.org.za/wp-content/uploads/2016/04/Policy-Briefing-148.pdf

Chicago

South African Institute of International Affairs. policy-briefing-148-90af24c361bd9710.pdf. n.d. https://saiia.org.za/wp-content/uploads/2016/04/Policy-Briefing-148.pdf.

Wikipedia

{{cite report |author=South African Institute of International Affairs |title=policy-briefing-148-90af24c361bd9710.pdf |url=https://saiia.org.za/wp-content/uploads/2016/04/Policy-Briefing-148.pdf |access-date=17 August 2026 |via=Climate Insights Directory}}

BibTeX

@techreport{southafricaninstituteofinternationalaffairsndpolicybriefing14890af24c361bd9710pdf, author = {{South African Institute of International Affairs}}, title = {{policy-briefing-148-90af24c361bd9710.pdf}}, institution = {South African Institute of International Affairs}, url = {https://saiia.org.za/wp-content/uploads/2016/04/Policy-Briefing-148.pdf}, urldate = {2026-08-17}, note = {Indexed by Climate Insights Directory} }