African Union's Tenuous Pledge to Democracy in EU's Southern Region: Shift from Laissez-Faire to Action?
The African Union (AU), a regional body with a mandate to promote democracy and uphold human rights, has found itself under scrutiny due to its inconsistent responses to political upheavals in several countries. A recent study has revealed a pattern of selective enforcement in the AU's responses, shaped by internal divisions, external pressures, and a prioritization of stability over democratic principles.
The study, which analysed the AU's responses to the 2011 and 2019 uprisings in Tunisia, Egypt, Libya, and Sudan, raises concerns about the AU's credibility and the effectiveness of its democracy support mechanisms. The AU's responses to these uprisings were characterised by a pattern of selective enforcement, with the organisation often deviating from its own formal commitments to constitutionalism and anti-coup norms, and prioritizing stability over democratic principles.
Despite the AU's formal commitment to constitutionalism and anti-coup norms, as outlined in its African Charter on Democracy, Elections and Governance (ACDEG) and the principle of non-indifference, the organisation has been inconsistent in its practical application. The AU's responses varied in effectiveness and timeliness across the different countries, with some receiving immediate and robust support, while others were met with delayed or insufficient responses.
The study suggests that this pattern of selective enforcement is attributed to internal divisions within the AU, as well as external pressures. The AU's responses to these uprisings have raised questions about its commitment to democracy and human rights, and underscore the need for the AU to address its internal divisions and external pressures in order to more effectively support democracy and uphold human rights.
The AU's role in democracy support is particularly significant in response to regime changes in the EU Southern Neighbourhood. During the uprisings in Tunisia, Egypt, Libya, and Sudan, the AU implemented its democracy support principles by initially condemning unconstitutional changes, suspending Libya during the 2011 civil war from its membership, promoting dialogue, supporting transition processes, and emphasizing respect for human rights and constitutional governance. However, the organisation's responses were not always consistent, and the study raises concerns about the AU's ability to consistently uphold its democratic principles.
In conclusion, the study highlights the need for the AU to address its internal divisions and external pressures in order to more effectively support democracy and uphold human rights. The AU's inconsistent responses to uprisings and regime changes have raised questions about its commitment to democracy and human rights, and have underscored the need for the organisation to prioritise democratic principles over stability in its responses to political upheavals.
Read also:
- United States tariffs pose a threat to India, necessitating the recruitment of adept negotiators or strategists, similar to those who had influenced Trump's decisions.
- Weekly happenings in the German Federal Parliament (Bundestag)
- Southwest region's most popular posts, accompanied by an inquiry:
- Discussion between Putin and Trump in Alaska could potentially overshadow Ukraine's concerns
