|
PART TWO Contents Resource Mobilization For NEPAD The Leadership And Management Structure Of NEPAD Preparation Of The Plan Of Action Milestones In The Preparation Of The Plan Of Action The Strategic Direction Of NEPAD During the 5th Extraordinary Summit of the OAU held in Sirte (Libya) from March 1to 2, 2001, President Obasanjo made a presentation on the MAP and President Wade presented the OMEGA plan. Then, the task undertaken by the four presidents was endorsed. It was also decided that effort should be made to integrate all the initiatives being pursued for the recovery and development of Africa. As the result, the MAP, the OMEGA Plan and the ECA Compact Initiative for Africa were merged to form the NEPAD initiative. Hence, “NEPAD is a mandated programme of the OAU/AU. Its Implementation Committee has to report annually to the AU Summit, the Chair of the OAU/AU, the secretary General of the OAU/AU and ex-officio members of the Implementation Committee.”1 So far, good progress has been made by way of ensuring that the NEPAD strategic framework document is brought before the appropriate sub-regional, continental and international institutions for endorsement and support. Further, some strides have been made by way of putting the necessary management structure in place. This means the critical task of the implementation of NEPAD has begun. For this reason, detailed, concrete and implementable proposals, programmes and projects were formulated and presented at the G8 Summits held in Kananski (Canada July 2002) and Evian (France June 2003). Likewise, the NEPAD proposals, programmes and projects were presented at the African Union Summits held in South Africa in July 2002 and in Maputto in June 2003.2 Resource Mobilization For NEPAD According to the NEPAD Programe of Action, resources are to be mobilized by increasing domestic savings and investments, improving the management of public revenue and expenditure, and by increasing capital inflows, via further debt relief, increased targeted flows of ODA, FDI and private capital.3 In view of this, the founding document of NEPAD contains both a strategic policy framework and a programme of action. Further, it is clear from the founding document that the Mandate for the initiative had its roots at the OAU Extraordinary Summit, held in Sirte (Libya) in September 1999. At the said Summit, President Mbeki and President Bouteflika were mandated to engage Africa’s creditors in the total cancellation of the debt of the continent. The above was followed by the South Summit of the Non-Aligned Movement and the G77, held in Havana, Cuba, in April 2000. The South Summit mandated President Mbeki and President Obasanjo to convey the concerns of the South to the G8 and the Bretton Woods institutions.4 The above mandates arose from the realization of the correlation between the two mandates and the fact that debt relief forms a critical aspect of the overall development agenda for Africa. Further, the OAU Summit held in Togo in July 2000 mandated the three presidents to engage the industrialized North in developing a constructive partnership for the regeneration of the Continent. As the consequence of the above, the mandated leaders raised the issue of partnership with the leaders of the G8 at their Summit in Japan in July 2000. Then, the task of developing the Millennium Partnership for the African Recovery Programme (MAP) began in all seriousness.5 Integrating the different initiatives was not easy. Even so, following extensive discussions the process of integration was realized. The result was the New African Initiative (NAI), which was presented to the OAU Summit on July 11, 2001 in Lusaka. This was unanimously endorsed and adopted by the Lusaka Summit. It became Declaration 1 (XXXVII). It was also subsequently reviewed and improved upon. After this a Heads of State and Government Implementation Committee was formed to push the initiative toward its implementation and to ensure follow-up with the G8 and other international partners.6 Given the above, it is clear that NEPAD is a mandated programme of the OAU/AU. Its Implementation Committee has to report annually to the AU Summit and the Chair of the OAU/AU and Secretary General as well as the ex-officio members of the Implementation Committee. Further, according to the agreed working principles of NEPAD, the AU Secretariat participates at all Steering Committee meetings. However, the management structure of NEPAD is not intended to be a new cumbersome bureaucracy. It is not expected to compete with OAU/AU structure. Besides it is designed to ensure follow-up and implementation during the phase of transition of the from OAU to AU. It is also seen as the set up for accelerating the implementation of the Abuja Treaty.7 The Leadership and Management Structure of NEPAD In view of the fact that it would be difficult for the Secretary-General to give adequate leadership and resources to NEPAD at a time when he was managing the transition of the OAU to the AU, the promoters of NEPAD decided to use resources of their own governments to move the initiative forward in the short term. For this purpose, three levels of management were proposed for the initiative. These included:
It is worthy of note that the above arrangements were transitional. The roles and functions of the Steering Committee and the Secretariat were to be transferred to the AU as soon as it was deemed that an appropriate organ with the necessary capacity was in place to effectively and efficiently continue the work of the implementation of NEPAD.17 Preparation of the Plan if Action The preparation of the plan of action was informed by a consideration of a number of key issues. These included the following: · The use of key African knowledge organizations as lead agencies. This, for instance, initially included organizations such as the ECA, ADB, etc.; · The deployment of the expertise and information of the OAU and its structures; · Collaboration with the RECs, especially in terms of identifying priority projects arising out of their regional indicative strategic development programmes; · The engagement of identified African experts; · The involvement of representatives of all sixteen states in the Implementation Committee; · The utilization of the expertise and information of global knowledge institutions like the Worlds Bank, IMF, UN Agencies, European Commission, etc.; · Taking full advantage of reports and recommendations generated by a number of consultative processes. This, for instance, included: The 2000 Dakar Education Conference and the 2001 Abuja Health Conference; · Using knowledge and experience from work already done, studies completed and projects and programmes already on the table in the various priority areas. This was done through a process of consultation with stakeholders and NEPAD was expected to fast-track the implementation process; and · Organizing workshops and conferences, both at regional and continental levels.18 Milestones in the Preparation of the Plan of Action The first meeting of the Heads of State (HoSIC) was planned for September 2001 in New York. But, this was postponed because of the terrorist attack of September 11, 2001. The meeting was therefore held on October 23, 2002 in Abuja and certain key decisions were made. These included agreeing on “NEPAD” as the name of the initiative. Further, the Committee approved the definitive final text of the founding document. NEPAD then replaced the New African Initiative (NAI), as this was merely intended to be a working title for the purposes of the OAU Summit. Furthermore, the Committee set up the management structures for NEPAD, as described above. A number of Task Teams were established by the Committee to develop specific projects and programmes for consideration at the meeting which followed. These included the following priority areas: · Capacity building on peace and security; · Economic and corporate governance; · Infrastructure; · Central bank and financial standards; and · Agriculture and market access. Apart from the above Task Teams, a sub-Committee on peace and security was established, focusing on conflict prevention, resolution and management (CPRM). President Mbeki is the Chair of the Sub-Committee. The leaders also agreed to set parameters for good governance (political and economic) and to consider an appropriate mechanism for "peer review". Much of the above priorities are about reducing the risk profile of doing business in Africa and on creating favorable conditions for investment. The above priorities were also identified, on the understanding that everything cannot be done at once. Nevertheless, this is not to say that other priorities will be neglected or excluded. These may, for instance, include ICT (Dot Force Initiative), Health (Global Health Fund), Debt (HIPC Initiative) which are being handled within established processes to which NEPAD itself cannot add real value at this time. However, progress in these matters will be closely monitored. Finally, the steering Committee was mandated to develop a strategic plan for marketing and communications at the national, sub-regional, continental and international levels.19 As alluded to earlier, the Second meeting of the Heads of State (HoSIC) was held in Abuja on March 26, 2002. At this meeting, the Committee underlined the centrality of the commitment to peace and requested the Sub-Committee on Peace and Security to focus on the following priority areas:
On the question of the enhancement of capacity for conflict prevention, resolution and management in Africa, the Committee extended its full support to the on-going efforts. It was also suggested that measures aimed at reviewing and enhancing the effectiveness of the African Union Central Organ be introduced. Besides, the organ was renamed as the Peace and Security Council. This was followed with a review of its mandate, membership and methods of work and funding. The need for greater coordination between the REC mechanisms for conflict prevention, resolution and management and the UN Security Council was also underscored. Furthermore, the process of the ongoing discussions and consultations on the establishment of a Council of the Wise to complement the efforts of the envisaged African Union Peace and Security Council was endorsed. On political Governance, the Committee considered and strongly supported the Draft Report on Good Governance and Democracy as well as an African Peer Review Mechanism. Essentially, the proposals adopted seek to ensure the implementation of objectives contained in such documents as the Constitutive Act of the African Union, the African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights, the Protocol on the Establishment of an African Court on Human and Peoples’ Rights and the Framework for an OAU Response to Unconstitutional Changes of Government, amongst others. However, it was also stressed that more detailed work was still needed on the African Peer Review Mechanism for presentation at future Implementation Committee meetings. This was expected to coincide with the Rome World Food Summit of June 2002.21 The Implementation Committee also reviewed the issue of Economic and Corporate Governance in Africa, with a view to promoting sound macro-economic and public finance management. It also addressed issues such as accountability among members, while protecting the integrity of their monetary and financial systems. This is consistent both with the Treaty Establishing the African Economic Community, the Constitutive Act of the African Union and the founding document of NEPAD. These, among others, visualize the harmonization of economic policies among African states. Eight Draft Codes and Standards For Economic and Corporate Governance for Africa were also approved to cover such areas as monetary, financial and fiscal policies; budget, debt management and transparency; corporate governance; and auditing and bank supervision. It was also recommended that an independent and credible African institution be formed. This was to be separate from the political processes and structures. Its task is to conduct the technical aspects of the Peer Review Mechanism. The Committee further decided that there should be one Peer Review Mechanism. Its aim is to bring the proposals submitted separately for the Peer Review Mechanisms under one overarching structure. This include the proposals made under Political and Economic Governance for the African Peer Review Mechanism.22 The Committee supported the main thrust of the Draft Plans of Action for the priority sectors. It also directed the Steering Committee to finalize these and other plans of action for presentation at subsequent meetings. These include the Plans for regional infrastructure projects, Health, Education, Agriculture, Market Access and Capital Flows. The presentation to the next meeting of the Committee was also expected to include Draft Plans of Action on Capacity-Building, Poverty Alleviation, Regional Integration, Gender Issues and Disaster Management. The Steering Committee was also mandated to work with the OAU/AU in rationalizing the CSSDCA initiative with NEPAD. Lastly, the Committee again emphasized the importance of marketing and popularizing NEPAD. In this regard, the NEPAD document was translated into all the OAU official languages for distribution. Brochures and pamphlets have also been developed and produced for distribution. The same is true of products made available to assist in the process of the promotion of NEPAD and the AU. Some of the promotional materials were intended for Radio and TV promotion. In addition to the above, NEPAD was also engaged in a collaborative work with the African Development Bank, the Economic Commission for Africa (ECA) and the Development Bank of Southern Africa. These agencies had agreed to provide technical support to NEPAD. They were also to serve as key implementation partners. Similarly, the Regional Economic Committees, which were drawn from the building blocks of the African Economic Community, were seen as critical in the planning process as well as in the implementation and full realization of NEPAD. The REC’s were to participate closely in the development and implementation of the detailed projects and programmes. To realize the above, a number of workshops were held. At the workshops discussions were held on the proposed programmes in the priority areas. For instance, a work-in-progress Workshop was held in South Africa in January 2002. This brought together all the major continental and international players. A series of engagements were also made with various RECs, the OAU, groups of African Ambassadors in many capitals and with stakeholder groups at specific events, such as the African Development Forum held in Addis Ababa in March 2002 and the African Scholars Forum held in Nairobi in April of the same year. 23 In addition to the above, a conference of continental experts was held in Pretoria on June 17 - 18, 2002. This conference which brought together leading scholars from the continent, inter alia, discussed the various facets of NEPAD ahead of the July, 2002 Summit. The conference was addressed by the South African President, Tabo Mbeki. It was also attended by the ministers of foreign affairs and Agriculture, MPs and other officials. It was coordinated by Dr. Addy Malloka, the Executive Director of the African Institute of South Africa (AISA). At the conference a committee of five eminent continental experts was selected to serve as an advisory body. This included representatives from the five sub-regions in Africa.24 As explained earlier, the draft programmes were considered by the Heads of State (HoSIC) on March 26, 2002. They were refined during April and May for submission to the Heads of State (HoSIC) on June 11, 2002 in Rome. The Heads of State then met in South Africa for the fourth time. Ahead of the Summit, the representatives of the Heads of State in each region were responsible for briefing and consulting their colleagues in their respective regions. In preparation for the June 2002 G8 Summit which was held in Canada detailed work on the projects and programmes was finalized. NEPAD also figured prominently at the World Summit on Sustainable Development held in South Africa in August, 2002 and in the course of the review of "the United Nations New Agenda for the Development of Africa (UN-NADAF)". Further, interaction on NEPAD was underweigh with the private sector and civil society organizations in Africa. This was necessary because NEPAD has to be anchored in the grassroots through its popularization by civil society.25 The Strategic Direction of NEPAD The full realization of the following issues is important for the strategic development of NEPAD. The concept of NEPAD partly stemmed from the meeting of G77 held in Havana, Cuba in June 2000. This had an impact on the G8 summit of Japan also held in 2000. Thus, it has to be seen within the context of South-South Cooperation. The above is important because the South-South Summit, Non align movement (NAM), the Ministerial meeting held in Cartagena in April 2000, The Africa-Europe Summit, and the UN Millennium Summit (2000) were all part of a process of developing solidarity in the South, and convincing the North of the need to enter into a partnership for development. It was also aimed to refocus the global attention on Africa’s needs and efforts to address the challenges facing it. A number of countries in the South have much to offer Africa and, conversely, success under NEPAD can have a major positive spin-off effect for countries in the South outside Africa. One area of concern is still the issue of the popularization of the AU and NEPAD. Despite the undertaking in Lusaka in 2001 on the popularization of NEPAD and the Constitutive Act of the AU in every state in Africa, this has not happened to the extent envisaged. Thus, it is essential that African private sector and civil society structures are continuously mobilized in support of NEPAD. They should be provided with opportunities to engage in a meaningful manner and acquire a sense of ownership of NEPAD. So far, efforts have been made to expand engagement in the NEPAD process. Nevertheless, the onus now rests on each state to address this as a matter of urgency and on a continuous basis. Given the above, African countries and sub-regional structures also need to make NEPAD the framework of their national planning. Such integrated planning should incorporate key issues such as the PRSP as well as the continental economic integration agenda of NEPAD and the AU. This is important for the continues implementation of NEPAD and for demonstrating concrete delivery and success stories.26 |
