To be fair, the leaders only filled a vacant post since, according to AfCHPR rules, the President is elected by his peers, altogether, eleven judges from all over Africa, who usually meet in Arusha, Tanzania, the seat of the court for their sessions only.
The President though, is the only Justice of the Court who takes up permanent residence in Arusha to run the day to day activities of the court, a very important AU organ for the continent’s integration effort.
Admittedly, there was nothing wrong for the continental leaders replacing a judge at the AfCHPR as no country should ever feel a sense of entitlement for occupying any post at the AU itself and its organs.
However, it was the outcome of the vote that stirred my interest. Justice Ramadhani who has led the court for the last six years, got least of votes in his favour out of the 54 AU member states. It becomes more intriguing when one looks at his replacement.
Justice Ramadhani was replaced by a candidate from the Summit host, Rwanda, which ironically, has pulled out of Article 64(1) of the court’s charter that allows individuals, and not just governments and civil society, to also seize the court.
In fact, Rwanda’s decision early this year, caused a procedural question as the charter has only provisions for depositing a Declaration in accordance with Article 64(1) but no procedures on how to pullout.
I think guidelines on how to handle the Rwandan case and others similar to it, are still pending in AU’s policy organs. Rwanda was among only eight AU member states, including Tanzania that have deposited a Declaration.
So by voting out Justice Ramadhani were the leaders sending out a message that they don’t want any more people oriented progress at the AfCHPR? Or was it simply that Tanzania was out-manoeuvred by Rwanda in diplomatic circles? I think both scenarios are possible.
There is so far no valid explanation as to why the vast majority of African states have not deposited a Declaration given that most of them signed and ratified the AfCHPR charter more than 16 years ago.
While lobbying is the name of the game in international diplomacy and throughout history, Tanzania has been very good at it.
However, it now appears that those could be bygone days for the country. Tanzania is a founding member of the 14-member Southern Africa Development Community (SADC) and the six-member East African Community (EAC), which Rwanda and Burundi joined in 2007.
By simple arithmetics, Tanzania goes to AU meetings with potential backing of nearly 20 sister and brotherly nations, which is almost half of all the African countries. Therefore, it defeats the imagination that a candidate from Tanzania in a regional meeting would end up getting least votes.
Sadly, it’s not easy to know which countries sided with it as voting is done electronically by merely pushing a button with results generated automatically as numbers only at the end. But what is almost certain is that Tanzania was in Kigali ditched by most, if not all, the SADC members.
SADC is unique since it binds together countries with a common history for the liberation struggle for southern Africa, which Tanzania, under Mwalimu Julius Nyerere so ably steered. I’m not suggesting that those countries should forever remain indebted to Tanzania.
In fact, Tanzanians have never demanded payment for their role in the liberation of southern Africa and never should they. But to be slapped in the face is a different matter. It hurts. Again, I do not want to lay any blame on anyone.
Tanzania went to Kigali in the wake of a new government in Dar es Salaam following the country’s general election last October. It is quite possible that some areas of foreign policy, including the AfCHPR post, were overlooked by the new administration.
The case is only a clarion call for Dodoma (the country’s new capital) to put its diplomatic act together and fast. The country has always been a super power in diplomatic terms and the record speaks for itself.
Equally important also is whether AfCHPR judges should continue to be politically appointed by the heads of state and government or that the Charter should be amended to provide a new formula for getting them based on merit so that their independence and security of tenure are guaranteed.
Meanwhile, Justice Ramadhani (76) who left the AfCHPR on September 5, this year, will not lack work to do. He is among a few very lucky persons.
Apart from being a high calibre jurist capable of sitting on any US Circuit Court, Justice Ramadhani is also a military general, ordained minister and pianist in his Anglican Church. Maybe, it is time for him also to shepherd the Lord’s flock.
.jpeg?itok=vCj6bCRe)
