The Charter of OAU and Constitutive Act of African Union

It is common knowledge that in Africa the issue of the protection of human rights and fundamental freedoms has long been considered not an issue of the first priority and in any case as the exclusive province of states. It is also well known that until recently states have systematically taken refugee behind the principles of national sovereignty and non-interference in internal affairs to avoid all discussion of the human rights situation in their territory. According to the view of Ougergouz, this marginalization by the African States of the question of the rights of individuals within their jurisdiction is first expressed in the Constituent Charter of the OAU adopted on 23 May 1963 at Addis Ababa (Ethiopia). This landmark legal and political document only refers expressly to human rights in its ninth preambular paragraph. This affirms the conviction of the African leaders that “the Charter of the UN and the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, to the principles of which [they] reaffirm [their] adherence, provide a solid foundation for peaceful and positive cooperation among states” and its article II (1(e)), where it is stated that one of the purposes of the OAU is “to promote international cooperation, having regard to the Charter of the United Nations and the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.” Apart from these few references, the OAU Charter focuses solely on states. Articles V & VI devoted to the rights and duties of member states do not place any obligation on the state vis-à-vis the people or individual, where as the principles of national sovereignty and non-interference in the internal affairs of states are laid down forcibly in Art.III.

Therefore, according to the above assertion the initial question that must be considered is why the OAU for many years fail to address adequately the issue of human rights. To this end, Naldi contends that the principal objectives of the OAU have been to defend the sovereignty and territorial integrity of its member states and to rid Africa of colonialism and racism. Conceived and born during the cold war and the liberation struggle, the OAU remained in that mind set for a generation. Thus, its provisions centre on issues such as the non-interference in internal affairs, sovereign equality of states, the fight against neo-colonialism, self-determination in the state context and the peaceful settlement of disputes.

Mathew summarizes the then position and attitude of OAU as follows:

The OAU Charter, for instance, does not contain any provision for the protection of the rights of the African masses . . . evidently the emphasis in 1963 was on the state rather than the peoples. As president Nyerere of Tanzania, one of the founding fathers of OAU, has pointed out, the OAU Charter spoke for the African peoples still under colonialism or racial domination, but the countries emerged to nationhood, the charter stood for the protection of their heads of state and served as a trade union which protected them. In other words, the OAU appears to be an institution of the African heads of state, by the heads of state and for the heads of state.

Thus, R. Murray concludes that any concept of human rights within the OAU went little beyond the notion of self-determination in the context of decolonization and apartheid in South Africa and where other aspects of human rights are mentioned in the Charter, which is broad and general and related to the relationship among states. Further, any threats to human rights appeared to be reflected in the OAU Charter as coming from outside the continent, something which African unity may help to prevent. Thus, to Murray it was the two issues of self-determination and apartheid/racial discrimination in Southern Africa that were central to the OAU at its formation and which appeared to have guided its approach to human rights throughout its later years.

However, it is also important to note that some peoples such as Birame Ndiaye contends that the lack of significant allusion to human rights protection by the OAU Charter should not be readily criticized. His main reason for this suggestion is that the “constitutional instruments of the other regional organizations and the United Nations also contain relatively few references to human rights”. He, however, agrees that these other organizations go a step further in constructing a system for the promotion and protection of human rights, backed by legally binding instruments, which was not the case for the OAU. The OAU Charter’s emphasis is on the rights of peoples to self-determination and struggle against racial discrimination in response to the ravages of colonialism. He further contends that the normative value of OAU Charter on matters of human rights can be inferred by looking at the preamble and the purposes and objectives of OAU Charter. The OAU Charter refers not only to the constitutional text of the UN Charter, but also mentions that the UDHR contains principles to which OAU states parties reaffirm their adherence . . . Preambles generally set the tone for positive provisions that might subsequently be embodied in the relevant instruments. Moreover, the current trends in the interpretation of international instruments attach considerable importance to the preamble of these instruments. The preamble to the Charter of the UN is often involved in interpreting that instrument. In particular, the phrase of the preamble of the OAU Charter makes reference to the universal Declaration which is to be observed as much as the UN Charter.

Therefore, making provisions in preambles of basic instruments and subsequent adoption of implementing instruments are all steps which form part of a growing legal system. Consequently, he concludes that by adopting the preambular provisions of the Charter, its member states have given indication of a desire to take steps in creating normative rules for the protection of human rights even if rights may not be effectively established if they remain only as preambular provisions.

The other area, where attempts have been made to bring out the human rights content of OAU Charter is the statement of the purposes set forth in the Charter under Article II. The Article provides, inter alia, as a purpose of the OAU, the promotion of international cooperation, having due regard to the Charter of the United Nations and the Universal Declaration of Human Rights [Art. II (1) (e)].

Thus, the reference to the UN Charter and the Universal Declaration in article II of the Charter of OAU is an indication of the important source of the growing regional legal system. The incorporation of the UN instruments can be said to be unequivocal creation of the legal principle emphasizing the importance of human rights in the African region along the lines of the UN Charter and the Universal Declaration, and the need for taking steps to interpret it and explain how it applies in a variety of circumstances in the region.

V.U. Nmehielle reminds us that the second paragraph of the preamble to the Charter of the OAU accentuated the fact that “freedom, equality, justice and dignity are essential objectives for the achievement of the legitimate aspirations of the African peoples.” It is further relevant that this paragraph was involved later in the second preamble of the African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights, and that it was in the name of these human rights principles that the African peoples fought their battle for independence, and that it was due to non-observance of human rights by the colonial powers that other states come to their assistance. This was the reason why their main weapon at that time, the Universal Declaration, was mentioned twice in the Charter of the OAU. At that time, it was the African states’ most cherished document, and at the first International Conference on Human Rights, held at Tehran in 1968, all the new African states supported the statement that the Universal Declaration constituted “a common understanding of the peoples of the world concerning the inalienable and inviolable rights of all members of human family . . .”

Accordingly, Nmehielle concludes that the notion that the OAU Charter excluded human rights promotion and protection from the purview of its purposes and objective principles is not totally valid. Similarly, the view that allusions made to human rights in the charter were only reduced to  a simple reference to the Universal Declaration, and thus can not be regarded as entailing an obligation for the member states, misses the point. This is because every state must observe the basic human rights if it wants to be a part of the world community. The obligation is therefore clear, even if international enforcement is limited to gross violations. It is also further contended that though the principle of sovereignty and non-intervention in the internal affairs of states have always stood in the way of human rights agenda in Africa(Art. III (2)), the effect of such principle is continuing to diminish recently.

Generally, it must be stressed that human rights protection was the main weapon against the colonial powers in African, and by accepting them wholeheartedly the peoples of Africa got the support of other states against the violations of their human rights by those powers. The OAU, no doubt, originally failed to provide for early ways of dealing with home grown violations that accompany African self-rule. According to Eze, at the time the Charter was adopted, African states were not prepared to allow any organ other than their domestic institutions to deal with matters that touched on the protection of human rights. Their preoccupation was to stamp out colonialism in all its forms in Africa. African states might have objected to imposition on them of a global human rights commission, but as soon as they had a chance to concentrate on that issue, they established a regional one in furtherance of their obligations.

Therefore, it was stated that when independence was achieved and the regime of apartheid ended, it became difficult for African states to say human rights were just a domestic concern. As Clapham notes:

In bringing their outrage to the attention of external and especially Western audience, however, African governments and other anti-apartheid campaigners both explicitly breached the frontiers of juridical sovereignty and raised issues relating to the treatment of individuals which could equally be raised with reference to their own states. Once the human rights records of African ruled-states started to attract external attention, it was correspondingly harder to claim the protection of sovereign statehood.

Therefore, a land mark development in the OAU’s approach to human rights was the adoption of the African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights (usually called as the Banjul Charter, after the capital of its adoption, Gambia) on 27 June 1981. With its coming into force in 1986, human rights were thus officially recognized in the OAU. This was later on followed by a series of declarations and conventions addressing particular areas and special categories of human rights such as on children, women, youth and so on. Detailed analysis of the general protection under the Banjul charter and other specialized human rights instruments will be in order in the subsequent sections and chapter.

The last point deserving a close attention is the position and emphasis given to protection of human rights under the organizational transformation of African states, that is, under the newly established regime of African Union. The initiative to transform OAU into AU was started by the adoption of Sirte Declaration in Libya on 9 September 1999 by the Fourth Extraordinary Summit of OAU’s Assembly of Heads of State and Government experts, parliamentarians and ministers of OAU member states, the Constitutive Act of the African Union was adopted in July 2000 in Lome, Togo.

The provisions of the resulting Constitutive Act suggest that human rights will indeed play a greater role in the work of the Union than they did in the OAU. Some of the shortcomings of the OAU Charter as a true normative human rights instrument are now addressed by the Constitutive Act of the new African Union. The Act has placed the promotion and protection of human rights in the agenda of the regional body.

Thus, the preamble of the Act recalls the heroic struggles waged by our peoples and our countries for economic independence, human dignity and economic emancipation. Human rights are mentioned specifically with states being determined to promote and protect human and peoples’ rights, consolidate democratic institutions and culture and to ensure good governance and the rule of law [preamble 9 of the Constitutive Act]. The central objectives, in Article 3, and principles, in Article 4, of the Union noted that the Union’s aims include not only achieving greater unity and solidarity between African countries and the peoples of Africa and accelerating development but also the need to ‘promote peace, security and stability on the continent [Art. 3 (f)]. It is recognized that there is a need to ‘encourage international cooperation, taking due account of the Charter of the United Nations and the Universal Declaration of Human Rights’ and promote and protect human and peoples’ rights in accordance with the African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights and other relevant human rights instruments’ [Art. 3 (e) (h)]. Hence, states should respect the need for ‘peaceful co-existence of member states and their right to live in peace and security (Art. 4 (i)), promote gender equality, have ‘respect for democratic principles, human rights, the rule of law and good governance’, respect the sanctity of life and condemn unconstitutional changes of government [Art. 4 (1), (m), (0) & (p). Most importantly, the cherished policy of non-intervention in the interval affairs of member states, which was the creed of the OAU Charter, ceases to be a principle of African States. It has rather become a principle of member states of the African Union to have the “right . . . to intervene in a member state pursuant to a decision of the Assembly in respect of grave circumstances, namely: war crimes, genocide and crimes against humanity [Art.4 (h)].

On the face of it, therefore, the Constitutive Act of the AU appears to give an important place to human rights and an indication that they will play a significant role in the AU. However, according to R. Murray there has been considerable concern that institutions such as the African Commission and the African Court on Human and Peoples’ Rights do not appear to feature in the Act. Whilst some fear that this meant these bodies were being sidelined or forgotten under these new structures, it perhaps indicates lack of coherence in the Act as a whole to the previous structures of the OAU, when other organs, such as the central organ, were omitted.

What is perhaps more concerning is that, despite being mentioned in the substantive provisions of the Act, in relation to the mandates of the various institutions within the Union, human rights are not listed under any of them expressly [See Arts.13, 18].

By reforming the OAU, there is no doubt that African has started responding to global reorganization and is making every effort to reposition itself in global politics and relations. The Constitutive Act of the African Union shows a departure from traditional Africa’s fear of “freedom for the peoples” from their own home rule. While the practical application of the Constitutive Act is yet to be seen, it is a bold step, which will equip the peoples of Africa in pressing for good governance and accountability, respect of human rights,  rule of law, democratization process, economic prosperity and respect for human rights.

Historical Development of Human Rights

International law traditionally governs the relations between sovereign states and has therefore, not been considered responsible for regulating the relations between states and their citizens or those among citizens. The latter are part of the individual states sovereignty and, as such, are governed by national law (constitutional, administrative, penal and civil law). It is only since the Second World War, especially in reaction to the atrocities of National Socialism, that international law has come to regulate the rights of individuals in relation to their governments although many states still refuse to surrender their traditional part of their national sovereignty to international law. That is why the development of the international protection of human rights is an ongoing battle against national sovereignty.

Up until the Second World War, international law was not responsible for the rights of individuals unless the interests of more than one state were concerned. This was true in particular in the case of foreigners for whom the state they are citizens of, has protection power vis-à-vis the state that exercises defacto power.

The protection of minorities is a further historical antecedent of international human rights protection, which is also closely related to the protection power of national states. Ethnic, linguistic and religious minorities traditionally developed as new borders were drawn between states in the aftermath of wars. The protection of minorities is also closely linked to the peoples' right of self determination. In the case of the former colonies of the Axis powers, the right of self determination supported by the League of Nations mandates system and the United Nations trusteeship system, eventually led to their independence.

In addition to bringing an end to the First World War and introducing provisions for the protection of minorities, the Peace Treaty of  Versailles also created two international organizations which proved to be important for the development of protection of human rights: the League of Nations as predecessor of the United Nations, and the International Labour Office as predecessor of the International Labour Organization, which today is one of the most effective specialized agencies of the United Nations for the protection of economic, social and cultural rights today.

We will finalize the discussion of this section by discussing the International Bill of Human Rights which has been described as a milestone in the history of human rights, a veritable Magna Carta marking mankind’s' arrival at a vitally important phase: the conscious acquisition of human dignity and worth . Since its inception, the United Nations has strived to secure the promotion and protection of human rights worldwide. The first, and possibly the singularly most important, step taken by the United Nations in furtherance of the incumbent obligation to promote respect for human rights and fundamental freedoms was the General Assembly's adoption on 10 December 1948, of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. Although not technically binding, the effect of the Universal Declaration has far surpassed the expectations of the drafters and it is widely accepted as the consensus of global opinion on fundamental rights. The original intention that it would be followed swiftly by a binding enforceable tabulation of rights was not to be realized; it was to be eighteen years before consensus was reached on the text of the International Covenants and a further ten years before the instruments attracted sufficient ratifications to enter in to force.

The International Bill of Human Rights consists of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and two Optional Protocols annexed there to and the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights. It has been referred to by the United Nations as the ethical and legal basis for all the human rights work of the United Nations, the foundation up on which the international system for the protection and promotion of human rights has been developed.

Before and after the adoption of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and the International Covenant on Economic Social and Cultural Rights, the United Nations and its specialized agencies helped to formulate a number of other multilateral treaties which sought to implement specific rights or groups of related rights. These supplement the protection afforded by the covenants and several of them contain implementation procedures of their own. Among the human rights treaties elaborated by, or under the auspices of, the United Nations are:

a)    The Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide

b)   Convention for the Suppression of the Traffic in Persons and of the Exploitation of the Prostitution of Others.

c)    Convention Relating to the Status of Refugee as Amended by the Protocol of 1966.

d)   Convention on the Political Rights of Women.

e)    Convention Relating to the Status of Stateless Persons.

f)     Supplementary Convention on the Abolition of Slavery, the Slave Trade, and Institutions and Practices Similar to Slavery.

g)    Convention on the Nationality of Married Women.

h)   Convention on the Reduction of Statelessness.

i)     Convention on Consent to Marriage, Minimum Age for Marriage and Registration of Marriages.

j)     International Convention on the Elimination of All forms of Racial Discrimination.

k)   Convention on the Non Applicability of Statutory Limitations to War Crimes and Crimes against Humanity.

l)     International Convention on the Suppression and Punishment of the Crime of Apartheid

m)  Convention on the Elimination of all forms of Discrimination against Women.

n)   Convention against Torture and other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment.

• o)    International Convention against Apartheid in Sports.

p)   Convention on the Rights of the Child.

q)    International Convention on the Protection of the Rights of all Migrant Workers and Members of their Families

In addition to these international human rights developments, there are also others which grew up as body of regional human rights law. This regional development will be discussed in section

The United Nations Human Rights System

The human rights provisions of the United Nations Charter have been described as scattered, terse, and cryptic. No comprehensive system for protecting human rights was enshrined in the charter. Rather, the goal of securing respect for human rights was specified with state pledging to encourage the promotion and observance of rights with in their territories. There was no real definition or articulation of human rights although reference was made to the concept of equality and the notion of the dignity and worth of the human person. It is unlikely that the drafters of the original Charter could have foreseen the development of international human rights law to its present form based on the Charter’s references.

From the outset, the United Nations has placed great emphasis on the promotion of economic and social progress and development of all states. This has positive repercussions for international human rights, including political and economic stability, conditions more conducive to the realization of human rights.

The failure of national laws to protect citizens had been cruelly demonstrated, the responsibility thus lay with the global community, the new United Nations Organization. As the League of Nations had failed in its attempts to protect minorities from the states in which they find themselves, the new organization sought to approach the question of human rights from a different angle adopting the concept of equality for all in place of the idea of protection of minorities. The new organization was anxious to avoid the problems associated with minorities which has beset its predecessor, ultimately leading to its collapse. The United Nations system is based on a fundamental and irrevocable belief in the dignity and worth of each and every individual. Realization of this should ipso facto obviate the need for minority protection; every individual is entitled to the same fundamental rights and freedoms.

Having pledged to promote universal observance of and respect for human rights, the United Nations required an institutional framework to exercise responsibility thereof. Accordingly, Chapter IX of the Charter, International Economic and Social Cooperation, elaborates on the economic and social foundations of peace. Article 55 of the Charter aims at creating conditions of stability and well being which are necessary for peaceful and friendly relations among nations based on respect for the principle of equal rights and self determination of peoples … in furtherance thereof, the Charter then lists economic and social aims which the United Nations shall promote without distinction as to race sex, language or religion (Art 53(31)). Article 61 of the Charter created the Economic and Social Council. One of the functions of this body is making recommendations for the purpose of promoting respect for, and observance of , human rights and fundamental freedoms for all (Art 62/21) . To assist in this task, Economic and Social Council was to establish a commission for the protection of human rights. This commission has been supplemented by a number of other bodies.  Today there is a comprehensive body of institutions, organs and committees which over see the implementation and realization of human rights at the international level. Six Committees, created by the principal human rights treaties, monitor the implementation of each treaty. These treaty monitoring bodies are the Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, the Human Rights Committee, the Committee against Torture, the Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination, the Committee on the Elimination of Discrimination against Women, and the Committee on the Rights of the Child. These Committees work with and report through the Economic and Social Council and the General Assembly of the United Nations.

This new international organization very quickly established itself as a body which would actively fulfill its commitment under Article 55 of the Charter, promoting universal respect for, and observance of, human rights and fundamental freedoms. Progress in this area has been achieved in a number of ways: drafting Conventions and resolutions; applying political pressure to states; preparing and disseminating relevant information; and internationally condemning serious human rights violations.

Introduction to Regional human rights systems with particular reference to Africa

Parallel with the United Nations human rights systems, regional human rights systems have developed. In this section we are going to see these regional human rights developments.

There are three main regional systems that aim to protect and promote human rights: the Council of Europe; the Organization of American States, and the African Union. Of these, Europe has the oldest and most developed system with an established judicial mechanism for determining complaints brought by individuals. Like the United Nations, the Council of Europe was founded in the turbulent period after the cessation of hostilities in the Second World War.

Human rights were high on the agenda of the new organization. The founding states drew up a convention on human rights and fundamental freedoms which was opened for signature on 4 November 1950, entering in to force in September 1953. All member states of the Council have signed and ratified it. The drafters sought to provide a mechanism for realizing civil and political rights and freedoms as proclaimed in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.

The European Convention on the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms is the prime instrument on human rights with in Europe. The rights enshrined therein are essentially drawn from the first half of the Universal Declaration. They are the right to life, freedom from torture and other inhuman , or degrading treatment or punishment, freedom from slavery and forced or compulsory labour, right to liberty and security of person, right to a fair trial, prohibition on retroactive penal legislation, right to private and family life, home and correspondence, freedom of thought, conscience and religion, freedom of expression, freedom of association and assembly, right to marry and found a family , right to an effective remedy for a violation of the rights and freedom from discrimination in respect of the specific rights and freedoms. With a focus primary on civil and political rights, the Convention did not greatly expand the Universal Declaration. It did provide considerably more detail on many of the rights and, of course, it articulated a binding legal framework to ensure the realization of those rights.

When we come to the American system, the Americans host one major regional organization with a significant impact on human rights- the Organization of American States. The Organization of American States (OAS) was established in 1948 at the ninth inter American Conference (Bogota, Colombia).

The Bogota Conference adopted the American Declaration on Rights and Duties of Man. This Declaration is similar to the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. The rights included encompass civil and political (life, liberty, religious freedom, inviolability of home and correspondence, fair trial) as well as economic, social, and cultural rights (benefit of culture, leisure time, work, social security). However, it also sets out a number of duties incumbent up on the American citizens. The duties are varied ranging from civil and military service through the support, education, and protection of minor children to a duty to pay taxes.

The American Convention on Human Rights was signed in 1969 and entered in to force in 1978. The Convention restricts itself to a detailed tabulation of civil and political rights. Economic social and cultural rights are covered in a single Article (Art. 26) which cross refers to the charter of the OAS as amended by the Protocol of Buenos Aires. On this matter, it should be noted that in 1988, the OAS adopted an additional protocol in the area of Economic, Social and Cultural Rights. The Convention itself establishes the machinery to be employed in protecting the rights of all Americans. The OAS has also expanded the scope of its human rights protection with a number of further conventions.

Now let’s focus on the African system. The youngest developed regional system is to be found in Africa. The African Union, formerly the Organization of African Unity (OAU) has played a prominent role in developing an African jurisprudence on human rights. The African system is in some ways considerably less developed than its American and European counterparts yet perhaps its greatest success lies on its very existence. It is the youngest system of the fully fledged (i.e. monitored and implemented) regional systems for the protection and promotion of human rights. Human rights were not the sole priority when the Charter was drafted although the OAU Charter provides that the constituent states will coordinate and intensify their collaboration and efforts to achieve a better life for the peoples of Africa. The OAU Charter also stipulates that freedom, equality, justice and dignity are essential objectives for the achievement of the legitimate aspirations of the African peoples, acknowledging both the United Nations Charter and the Universal Declaration of Human rights in passing (Art II (1) (el).

In 1981, the OAU adopted the African Charter Human and People's Rights. It was designed to reflect African concepts of rights and thus is distinctive in its phraseology and underlying rationale. In 1998, a protocol to the charter was agreed - the Protocol on the Establishment of an African Court on Human and Peoples Rights.

The Charter (often referred to as the Banjul Charter) entered in to force in 1986. It enshrines the African concept of rights and aims to be accessible to African philosophy: it is striking among international and regional instruments in its emphasis on human and peoples' rights and its cataloguing of the duties the individual /group to the state. A further notable feature is that, unlike other international and regional instruments, states are not permitted to derogate from the articles of the Charter. The rights and duties thus apply during times of public emergency.

In addition to the Banjul Charter, the African system has also adopted other human rights instrument. The OAU Convention Governing the Specific Aspects of Refugee Problems in Africa (1969) is one of these. With civil unrest, authoritarian rule, inter- faction fighting and natural disasters common place in African Society, there is a frequent displacement of peoples, whether to avoid hostilities or escape famine. Refugees are a major problem in some areas. It is thus perhaps inevitable that Africa should read the way in drafting an instrument aimed solely at regulating refugees. Many of the provisions in the convention reflect those of the United Nations Convention Relating to the Status of Refugees (1951).

The African Charter on the Rights and Welfare of the Child (1950) is the other instrument. This instrument entered in to force in 1999. In many respects, it reflects the scope and popularity of the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child. It recognizes that children in Africa need special support and assistance. 'The situation of most African children  remains critical due to the unique factors of their socio -economic, cultural, traditional and developmental circumstances, natural disasters, armed conflicts , exploitation and hunger.’’ (Preamble). The rights of children are considered to impose duties on every one. Many of the provisions are similar to those included in the United Nation Convention, though in Africa the rights extend to all those below the age of eighteen without exception.

A draft Protocol on Women's Rights has been adopted by the Commission on Human Rights. The draft seeks to respond to the Beijing principles (UN) and plan of action. The Protocol, if and when adopted, will most probably be part of the existing human rights machinery.

Before concluding our discussion on the African human rights system it is important to briefly discuss the institutional framework. The African Commission on Human and Peoples' Rights, a body of eleven independent experts, was created in 1987. The functions of the Commission include the promotion of human rights through collecting documents, undertaking studies on African problems in the field of human and peoples' rights, dissemination of information, organization of symposia, formulation of principles and rules aimed at solving legal problems relating to rights and freedoms, and cooperating with other African and international institutions concerned with the promotion and protection of human and peoples' rights, the protection of human rights in accordance with the Charter, and the interpretation of the Charter (Art 45) .

The other important institution is the African Court on Human and People's Rights. The Protocol to the African Charter on the Establishment of the African Court on Human and Peoples' Rights (1997) seeks to create a court which will complement and reinforce the work of the Commission in furtherance of the protection of human and people's rights as enshrined in the Charter (preamble).