For some, now is a critical juncture for the African Union Commission (AUC), while for many, it is simply another instance of repetitive rhetoric and empty promises. Some believe this is a time to decide whether to ‘be at the table enjoying the food or be on the menu and be eaten alive,’ while others believe expecting something great out of it is ‘like expecting snow to fall in Kinshasa.’ Both views come from concerned and informed scholars and citizens of the continent. Where does the AUC find itself?
The African Union Commission is set to elect its 5th Chairperson, Deputy Chairperson, and commissioners after exactly a moth. The Commission’s next Chairperson, who will succeed Moussa Faki of Chad after his two-term tenure ends next month, will be elected by the Heads of State and Government of member states at their 38th Ordinary Session of the Assembly in early February. The debate for the Chairperson’s position was held on December 13th among three finalist candidates.
The candidates await the votes of the Assembly members, cast through a secret ballot. A candidate to be the AUC’s Chairperson requires a two-thirds majority vote from the present members of the Assembly of 47 member states who are eligible to vote.
The central question is: Does the identity of the AUC Chairperson truly matter? Does this individual possess the authority to significantly influence the Commission’s operations and bring about meaningful change for a continent of 1.28 billion people? How much attention has been given to the debate process by member states, civil society organizations, international partners, and the broader African public? The Reporter Magazine sought insights from senior diplomats, distinguished scholars researching AU affairs at international universities, and representatives from civil society organizations.
Public Discourse: A Neglected Priority?
Fikir Getachew, a researcher at Amani Africa, a civil society organization actively engaging in the process of the upcoming AUC chairmanship election, believes this year’s election has received relatively better public attention compared to previous elections. ‘Previous elections were often neglected,’ she observed.
Amani Africa has engaged in interviewing the two of the three candidates running for the chairmanship position. “Our aim is to ignite more public engagement. We mainly wanted to know what the vision the individual candidates have about the AU and the continent” Fikir told the Reporter Magazine.
The civil society organization has conducted interviews with two of the three candidates vying for the Chairperson position. ‘Our primary objective was to understand the vision each candidate holds for the AU and the African continent,’ Fikir said.
According to Fikir, their attempts to interview Raila Odinga from Kenya has not materialized so far due to the ‘reservation’ of the candidate’s team.
The Reporter Magazine also sought the views of Salim Lone, a long-time election campaign and communications advisor to former Kenyan Foreign Minister Raila Odinga. We did not receive a response from him.
Coverage of the AU chairmanship election has been limited in most media outlets. However, for Fikir, this year’s election appears to have garnered more publicity than previous ones, which received even less attention.
“The fact that it is contentious, has likely contributed to increased public interest compared to previous elections,” Fikir noted.
It appears that the Kenyan press provides comparatively more coverage of the process. Kenya has demonstrated a greater interest in the AU chairmanship election compared to many other member states. Kenyan media outlets have provided significant coverage of the election, and President Ruto has even publicly endorsed the candidate, Raila Odinga who was once his fierce competitor in the nation’s national election and the one who finally challenged the result.
In contrast to Kenya, many other member states have demonstrated limited interest in the AU chairmanship election. “I think member states haven’t recognized the moment that Africa Union finds itself. They will find out when it is too late,” noted Professor Thomas Tieku, a negotiation and international organization expert who is also a professor of politics and international relations at the University of Western Ontario in Canada.
Media coverage of the election process in these countries has been notably sparse. A critical question arises: Why has the AUC chairmanship election received limited attention from many member states, while Kenya has demonstrated significant interest? What national interests might be served by having a national elected to this position?
Who are the key stakeholders in this election, and what are their interests? Why has the AU, despite its 23-year history, failed to achieve the same level of impact as its predecessor, the OAU, which played a crucial role in the decolonization process? These are critical questions that require careful consideration.
The Rewards of AU Chairmanship: What’s in it for the Nation?
Ambassador Grum Abay, a seasoned diplomat with extensive experience serving as Ethiopian Ambassador to several EU member states, believes that the primary motivation for many countries in supporting a candidate for the AU Chairmanship is more of a ‘prestige for countries to have one of their nationals lead the organization, and not because these or that person from this or that country can bring considerable change within the AU or serve their own countries’ interests in any practical manner while holding that position.
Professor Tieku outlines a few potential benefits for a country whose candidate is elected as Chairperson of the AU. He emphasizes that such an election can indirectly benefit the nation the candidate belongs to. Drawing on his own experience as a Ghanaian, Professor Tieku explains, “I am from Gahana and I would tell you that when Kofi Annan performed really well as a Secretary General, Ghanaians benefited tremendously. While it did not necessarily lead to increased employment opportunities at the UN, it significantly enhanced the international standing and reputation of Ghanaians,” he noted.
Such positive perceptions, according to him, translated into increased opportunities in international universities, NASA, and other prestigious institutions. “The impact on national image and global standing was truly remarkable,” he told the Reporter Magazine.
Professor Tieku questions whether all member states ‘see it that way’. He suspects that some may try to utilize it to ‘promote the small interests of their government’. He also emphasizes the potential for undue influence. Drawing a parallel to the UN Secretary-General position, he observes, the country that succeeds in getting its candidate elected tends to gain more aid. In addition, he observes opportunities for those countries. He noted, “When you have a chairperson, countries often want to do business with you. You watch carefully who the next chairperson is and you see Western countries trying to do business with you that government thinking that through the government they can influence that individual chairperson.”
Puppet of Member States or Champion of African Unity?
Limited public awareness of the AU and its operations is often cited as a contributing factor to the relatively low level of public attention paid to the AU chairmanship election. However, the underlying reasons are more complex.
Many question why they need to put attention to the election if the chairperson does not exercise no meaningful power to significantly influence the organization’s direction.
Babatunde Fagbayibo, professor of International Law at the University of Pretoria in South Africa, frequently contributes to academic journals and blogs on African Union (AU) affairs. The Reporter Magazine approached him via Zoom interview for his comments on the upcoming AUC chairmanship election and the power of the particular position. He contends that the real power within the AU does not reside with the Commission, the Pan-African Parliament, or the African Court of Human and Peoples’ Rights, but rather with the Assembly of Heads of State and Government making the expectation from the election less.
Ambassador Grum echoes the same sentiment. “Apart from issuing boring statements from time to time and jetting off to some meeting outside of the continent for the sake of representation, I have not seen a chairperson really engaged in any practical way serving the interests of the AU as such.”
Professor Babatunde recalls that the Pan-African Parliament expressed interest in being involved in the selection process, including potentially playing a role in choosing the next Chairperson. “Obviously, you and I now can tell that was not taken seriously by the heads of state. So far, we have not witnessed any involvement of the pan African parliament.” He believes the participation of the Pan African parliament would have provided an avenue for greater citizen engagement.
“Some argue, a particular chairperson might change things along the lines. What changes? We have had different chairpersons before,” he counter argues.
“What power does the AUC chairperson has?” He asks. “Regardless of who we bring to the position, if member states are not willing and ready to transfer significant power to the African union commission, s/he is not going to deliver anything?” he contends.
“Unfortunately, we keep missing the elephant in the room. All we are doing now is engaging in some sort of symbolic gestures. There is a need to move from symbolism to substance,” noted Professor Babatunde.
The statues of the African Union have given the AUC powers to initiate policies and to enforce the policies. “Of course it initiated lots of policies. But what is initiation without the ability to enforce it? It is this second pillar that remains problematic,”
He further contends, “Look at the AU’s reform effort. what part of the AU reform program says anything about empowering the AUC? Let’s ask ourselves serious questions.”
According to him, one can easily understand the legislative and the executive powers reside in the AU assembly when reading the substantive parts of the AU Constitutive Act making the assembly the supreme lawmaking body of the organization.
“In fact, there is really no part of the AU laws that says that AUC can sanction a member state for not abiding.”
“There is no way you can expect a chairperson to exercise powers that s/he does not have. A power in terms of enforcing,”
His view appears to be shared by many and remains a dominant perspective regarding the AU. However, there are dissenting voices with differing viewpoints Thomas Tieku is worth mentioning in this regard.
Professor Tieku, an expert on African Union (AU) affairs, maintains a more optimistic view regarding the potential impact of the AU Chairperson compared to many other analysts.
While acknowledging the limitations imposed by the Assembly’s authority, Professor Tieku points to the AU Constitutive Act, which grants the Chairperson the authority to initiate policy.
However, Professor Babatunde argues that the AU’s effectiveness is hindered by the concentration of power within the Assembly of Heads of State and Government, limiting the Chairperson’s ability to implement meaningful reforms. He emphasizes that the AU’s ability to compel member states to comply with its rules and decisions remains a significant challenge.
Professor Tieku argues that the failure of the AUC to achieve its full potential can be attributed, in part, to the limited impact of past Chairpersons.
He contends, “There seems to be a misconception within the AU that it is not an implementation agency. I believe this is a misinterpretation of the Chairperson’s role.”
Professor Tieku emphasizes the need for proactive leadership, stating that Chairpersons must actively ‘sell’ their vision for the AU to member states to ensure the successful implementation of its policies and programs.
The negotiation expert further argues, “Research tells us that governments in every part of the world only implement policies from international organizations when you get civil society mobilize domestic constituencies in pushing their government to do it. That is where the missing link is. That is not where we have not done well. “
Pre-Election Process
In accordance with the decision made at the 22nd extraordinary meeting of the Executive Council in March 2024, the Chairperson’s position will rotate to the East African region for the 2025 election, while the Deputy Chairperson’s position will be held by a candidate from North Africa. The remaining six Commissioner positions will be distributed among the other regional blocs. Accordingly, Kenya, Djibouti, and Madagascar presented candidates for the Chairperson position.
While the candidate from Mauritius withdrew from the contest, the remaining three candidates are preparing for the election. For the Deputy Chairperson position, six candidates were initially nominated. However, only four candidates will continue in the contest. Two male candidates are no longer qualified, as the rules mandate that the Deputy Chairperson position be held by a woman in this term, given that all candidates for Chairperson are male. These rules were established in March 2024 to promote the principles of regional rotation, gender equality, merit, and inter-regional representation.
The last few Deputy Chairpersons have been men, with the exception of the current incumbent, Monique Nsanzabaganwa, a Rwandan economist and diplomat.
Similarly, a panel of eminent Africans composed of five individuals one from each region was already set up in February 2024 to oversee the preselection process.
For the six Commissioner positions, a total of 35 candidates have been presented. This represents a significant decrease compared to the previous election cycle, where 89 candidates vied for the same positions.
Equity vs Merit: The Impact of Rotation Among the Blocs
The rationale given for the new approach of rotating among blocs was, according to the AU, meant to ‘promote the principles of regional rotation, gender, merit and inter-regional rotation.’ However, some experts question the validity of this approach, arguing that it may hinder the selection of the most qualified candidates based on merit.
For Prof Tieku, the decision ‘compromises meritocracy by potentially excluding some of the most qualified and suitable candidates’ from contesting for the two top posts of the African Union Commission (AUC) and may ‘add further layers of politicization’, as regions are likely to rotate these roles internally.
“Internal rotation system often prioritizes government loyalists or regime pets over quality leaders. Evidence from similar systems in organizations like the Economic Community of West Africa (ECOWAS) suggests that rotational arrangements tend to produce weak candidates, encourage cronyism and weaken rather than strengthen the organization in the long term,” Professor Tieku stated his worries.
He fears that this system inadvertently ‘risks turning the competition for the Chairperson and Deputy Chairperson into an audition for the most favored regime loyalist rather than the most qualified and capable chief executives of the AU Commission.’
For the international negotiation expert, the exclusion of the African diaspora, recognized as the AU’s “sixth region,” also raises serious concerns about the fairness and inclusivity of the current rotational system for leadership positions.
Is Pan- Africanism no Longer Feasible?
Needless to argue about, Pan-Africanism played a key role in the decolonization of Africa. However, for many, it seems to have diminished since the establishment of the African Union (AU). While the concept of Pan-Africanism remains powerful ideal, some argue that it has become more of a rhetorical tool for elites and politicians than a tangible force driving meaningful change in the lives of ordinary Africans. However, witnessing the tangible manifestations of Pan-Africanism on the ground sounds elusive.
Professor Babatunde observes a significant disconnect between the rhetoric of Pan-Africanism and its practical implementation, particularly concerning the concept of ‘integrative Pan-Africanism.’
“Regional integration has not given us enough tangibles to mobilize members,” he asserted.
Babatunde told The Reporter Magazine that he conducted a survey to examine what identity means for regional integration. “I wanted to examine if people who say ‘I am an African’, say it because they have benefited from regional integration or just from emotional perspective? The conclusion of my research was that it is more from an emotional perspective,” he said.
Ambassador Grum shares the view that the African Union (AU) has fallen short of its potential. “Particularly in the last couple of decades,” he observes, “the AU has a talking shop and nothing more”.
He acknowledges that his assessment may appear overly pessimistic but he maintains. “I might sound to be negatively disposed towards the AU, but I have not seen anything worthwhile to change my views in a positive light.”
A crucial question arises; is pan Africanism no longer feasible? or is there a need to re- Imagine it considering the changing global landscape?
Professor Babatunde emphasizes the need for a critical self-assessment, stating, “What kind of African Union do we exactly want, I mean beyond the rhetoric. We really need to answer that serious question.”
For professor Tieku, Pan-Africanism remains a powerful and relevant ideal, capable of uniting Africans and empowering them to collectively address the challenges they face today and, in the future.
The Price of Dependence on External Funding
The issue of funding remains a critical challenge for the African Union (AU). Over 60 percent of its budget is reliant on external funding sources. This dependence, coupled with the lack of political will from member states to adequately support the AU, has continued dragging it behind its potential to achieve its objectives.
Amb Grum is among those diplomats who see less political will from the assembly to fix key problems. “An organization that cannot even meet it’s budgetary requirements is obviously a failed one. Take the case of conflicts in the continent. It’s almost non-Africans that cater to finding solutions to these while the AU is conspicuously out for lunch,” Ambassador Grum said.
Professor Babatunde bitterly criticizes the lack of genuine commitment from member states and poses a critical question: “If member states are unwilling to adequately fund the AU, unwilling to take its mandates seriously, and unwilling to abide by its rules, then why was the organization established in the first place?”
Experts emphasize the urgency of African unity. “If we don’t get ourselves ready, we will be on the menu to be eaten alive rather than being at the table enjoying the food. We can’t even do it as individual countries.” Professor Tieku warns.
Professor Babatunde on his part emphasizes the need to replace what he calls ‘outsourced Pan-Africanism’ with a real one that Africans drive. He asserts, “We need to take control of the Pan-Africanism project. It is really important that we stop an outsourced Pan-Africanism.”
Professor Tieku, on his part, asserts that individual African nations cannot make it alone by themselves. He noted, “Sometimes, countries such as Nigeria and South Africa overrate themselves as if they are super powers. These are just tiny states in terms of political configuration. We need a united kind of continent. When a united Africa speaks, people listen.”
In fact, Professor Tieku has a different view regarding the relationship between external funding and influence on the AU’s decision-making. He notes, “What researches are telling us that there is no correlation let alone causation between external funding and decision making at the African Union.”
Professor Tieku, who possesses in-depth knowledge of the AU’s inner workings, cites specific instances where external actors have attempted to exert undue influence on the organization. He mentions US government efforts to facilitate the execution of a ‘war criminal’ during the South Sudanese conflict and the aggressive lobbying by certain ambassadors from influential countries to compel the AU to adopt LGBTQ+ rights policies, efforts that were ultimately unsuccessful due to AU resistance.
But many disagree. Professor Babatunde argues that the issue goes beyond explicit manipulation. He asserts, “it is not even an expressed manipulation. It is some sort of implied disrespect.”
He further emphasizes the potential consequences of this dependence, stating, “What happens when these donors begin to say that ‘why do we put money into the AU?”
“We have already begun to see some of these. Take the European Peace Facility, some of the money that was supposed to come to fund peace and security initiatives on the continent is now moved to Ukraine. We need to ask ourselves serious question,” he noted.
Professor Tieku acknowledges the indirect impact. “African Union Commission in Addis Ababa often tend to anticipate areas where donors are likely going to fund. And tailor policies towards that direction just like the way civil society organizations do,” he told The Reporter Magazine.
The Ideal AUC Chairperson Africa Needs
The most critical point is now, “What kind of AUC chairperson does Africa Need? Many have specific expectations for the ideal candidate for the AU Chairmanship.
“Over the years, there have been reforms at the African Union level on how the chairperson of the commission should be identified and elected. There have been talks like we need someone who is a Pan-Africanist and competent,” said Professor Babatunde.
However, he remains skeptical about the AU’s ability to achieve its full potential, particularly given the limited authority vested in the Chairperson.
“Are the member states willing to put their money where the mouth is? In light of giving meaning to the expression that ‘the AUC is the engine room of the AU’, are we willing to give it more powers? We know the answer. That is like expecting snow to fall in Kinshasa. It is in fact in their interest to keep it as weak as possible,” he noted.
Professor Tieku, who strongly believes in the potential impact of the Chairperson, hopes that the continent elects a leader who can effectively fulfill the demands of this critical role.
“We need a chairperson with a gravitas, with personality, with a diplomatic skill; a chairperson with aspirations to put Africans at the table; so that we can participate in terms of the new norms, power structures, and institutions developed,” he said.
According to Tieku, the continent does not need a chairperson who is going to learn on the job. “We have had enough of them,” he noted.
