President Thabo Mbeki on Sunday stalled South Africa’s self-assessment process under the African Peer Review Mechanism (APRM) for six months, citing technical problems, which civil society has dismissed as ‘nonsenseâ€. Mbeki was due to present the country’s self-assessment report and programme of action to the continent’s heads of state at the African Peer Review Forum on the sidelines of the African Union summit in Addis Ababa this week.
His decision stalls a process that had been rushed to meet a nine-month time frame and which, as a result, failed to consider tens of thousands of surveys that should form an integral part of the APRM process.
Uncertainty lingers over what transpired during Sunday’s forum, but it has emerged that the strategic partners in the process were asked to leave the forum before South Africa was discussed. The strategic partners are the United Nations Development Programme, the United Nations Economic Commission for Africa and the African Development Bank. Strategic partners normally participate in all meetings, said one of the delegates who was excluded from Sunday’s meeting and spoke on condition of anonymity.
He said he was unsure why the chairperson decided to exclude them and could not confirm rumours that South Africa had asked for them to be removed.
Department of foreign affairs spokesperson Ronnie Mamoepa said it was Mbeki’s prerogative not to present the report if he felt it was not ready and that the president chose not to present it as it ‘was in draft formâ€.
The department of public service and administration has reportedly said the government submitted a revised programme of action on January 15, but on Sunday the old programme of action was included among the documents for Mbeki’s presentation.
The previous programme came under attack for not addressing the criticisms contained in the controversial report produced by an eminent panel last year.
Mbeki’s intervention reflects the government’s gradual takeover of a programme that was initially promoted as a collective effort and which the APRM rules say must be independent.
Zanele Twala, executive director of the South African NGO Coalition, who sits on the national governing council of the APRM, said she was unaware that the government had submitted a second programme of action.
‘Procedurally it should have been developed collectively with civil society organisations,†she said, adding: ‘We may be happy with it, but I haven’t even seen it.â€
She said she had received a letter on January 25 from Minister of Public Services and Administration Geraldine Fraser-Moleketi, who also chairs the governing council, saying Mbeki would present the country’s report on January 28.
If the report was incomplete and still in draft form, she questioned why the government would confirm that it was due for presentation. Twala concluded that the decision not to present the report must have been based on developments in Addis Ababa.
‘My concern is, why do we rush the process if at the end of the day, we are going to postpone it?†Twala said.
Civil society has long criticised the APRM for attempting meaningful consultation within too short a period.
Paul Graham, executive director of the Institute for Democracy in South Africa (Idasa), said Mbeki’s delay was ‘not necessarily a bad thingâ€. Idasa was involved in compiling reports for South Africa’s country report. The delay reflects the fact that the APRM is a lengthy process, said Graham, who recommended that it be streamlined so it does not cease to be fundamentally useful.