Status on the Signature and Ratification of Anti-Corruption Instruments by SADC Member States

Status on the Signature and Ratification of Anti-Corruption Instruments by SADC Member States – 11 May 2017

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

 

The significance of signing and ratifying regional, continental and international anti-corruption instruments or treaties and bringing them into force at the earliest possible moment cannot be overemphasized.  The signature, ratification and domestication of these instruments and treaties is urgent considering the deleterious effects of corruption on African development. However, the lack of the progress thereof, is devastatingly worrying. This triggered an interest in this assessment which looks at the progress of signature and ratification of the SADC Protocol against Corruption (SPAC), the AU Convention on preventing and combating Corruption (AUCPCC), and the UN Convention against Corruption (UNCAC) by the SADC member states. This is a third assessment of this nature commissioned the Anti-Corruption Trust of Southern Africa, to monitor and report on progress made by SADC Member States vis-à-vis the signature and ratification thereof. It does not look at the extent to which the Member States have domesticated the same. This will be part of future assessments that are of great interest to researchers and networks such as the UNCAC Coalition.

 

In a nutshell, the assessment made a number of findings. Firstly, the status of ratification stands at 87% for SADC Protocol against Corruption, 100% for UN Convention against Corruption and 67% for the AU Convention on Preventing and Combating Corruption.  Of the 3 Conventions, the ratification of the AU Convention on Preventing and Combating Corruption is the lowest since it stands at 67% among the 15 SADC Member States. There will be huge value if one interrogates why AU Member States do not all seem to support such an important ‘assegai’ or tool against corruption, which they drafted and adopted themselves. Why did Africa come up with the Convention in the first place? Where they forced to come up with the same? Are they genuinely interested in fighting corruption? All these questions need answers.

 

The signing of these three leading conventions stands at 93%, 87% and 80% for the SADC Protocol against Corruption, UN Convention against Corruption and the AU Convention on Preventing and Combating Corruption respectively. Again the AU Convention on Preventing and Combating Corruption registered the lowest. Refer to Table 1 below for more information.

 

Table 1: Status of Signature and Ratification of Anti-Corruption Instruments

  Number of SADC Member states out of a total of 15 signing and ratifying the SADC Protocol against Corruption Number of SADC Member states out of a total of 15 signing and ratifying the AU Convention on Preventing and Combating Corruption Number of SADC Member states out of a total of 15 signing and ratifying the UN Convention against Corruption
Signature 14 out of 15 SADC Member States signed (93%) 12 out of 15 SADC Member States signed (80%) 13 out of 15 SADC Member States signed (87%)
Ratification 13 out of 15 SADC Member States ratified (87%) 10 out of 15 SADC Member States ratified (67%) 15 out of 15 SADC Member States ratified (100%)

 

Furthermore, it would be a remiss if this assessment fails to name and single-out the countries still lagging behind. Table 2 below shows that Madagascar is the only SADC Member State that has not signed the SADC Protocol against Corruption. In addition, Madagascar joins Seychelles to make the only two countries that have not ratified the same instrument.

 

Table 2: SADC Member States Lagging Behind

Anti-Corruption Instruments SADC Member States that have not signed SADC Member States that have not ratified
1)     SADC Protocol against Corruption o   Madagascar o   Madagascar

o   Seychelles

2)     AU Convention on Preventing and Combating Corruption o   Botswana

o   Malawi

o   Seychelles

o   Angola

o   Botswana

o   Democratic Republic of Congo

o   Mauritius

o   Swaziland

3)     UN Convention against Corruption o   Botswana

o   Democratic Republic of Congo

o   –

 

The AU Convention on Preventing and Combating Corruption appears to be the most unpopular since it has registered the lowest in both being signed and ratified by SADC Member States. African Governments should be interrogated on why such an important instrument has lost its support.

 

In keeping with the above, the following recommendations are made:

 

  • The governments of Madagascar and Seychelles should ratify the SADC Protocol against Corruption;
  • The governments of Angola, Botswana, DRC, Mauritius and Swaziland should ratify the AU Convention on Preventing and Combating Corruption;
  • Pursuant to Article 11 of the SADC Protocol against Corruption, SADC Member States should establish a Committee to oversee the implementation of the Protocol.[1] This is long overdue considering the destructive effects of corruption in Southern Africa.

 

 


 

  1. INTRODUCTION AND BACKGROUND INFORMATION

 

In 2007 and 2012, the Anti-Corruption Trust of Southern Africa (ACT-Southern Africa) commissioned studies aimed at ascertaining the status of signature[2] and ratification[3] of the SADC Protocol against Corruption (SPAC)[4], AU Convention on preventing and combating Corruption (AUCPCC),[5] and the UN Convention against Corruption (UNCAC)[6] by SADC member states.[7]

 

The 2007 study produced a report[8] which was followed by a number of advocacy activities. Since then there has been a lot of progress as shown below:

 

  1. The DRC and Mozambique ratified the SPAC on 19 May 2008 and 28 December 2007 respectively;
  2. Malawi and Seychelles ratified AUCPCC on 26 November 2007 and 1 June 2008 respectively;
  3. Botswana, DRC, Malawi, Mozambique, and Zambia ratified the UNCAC on 27 June 2011, 23 September 2010, 4 December 2007, 9 April 2008, and 7 December 2007 respectively

 

The 2012 study on the same subject made the following findings:

  1. Swaziland remained as the only SADC member state that had not ratified the UNCAC;
  2. Madagascar had neither signed nor ratified the SPAC whilst Seychelles signed but had not ratified the same; and
  3. Angola, Botswana, DRC, Mauritius and Swaziland had not ratified the AUCPCC, whilst Botswana had neither signed nor ratified the same.

 

The recommendations made through the 2012 assessment report were that:

  • The Kingdom of Swaziland should ratify the UNCAC, since this had reputational implications on the country and the rest of the SADC member states;
  • The governments of Madagascar and Seychelles should ratify the SPAC; and
  • The governments of Angola, Botswana, DRC, Mauritius and Swaziland should ratify the AUCPCC.

 

After the publication of the 2012 report a number of advocacy activities were carried out. These included the following:

  1. On 23 August 2012, a letter was sent to E. Dr Barnabas Sibusiso Dlamini pleading that Swaziland ratifies the AUCPCC  and the UNCAC.[9]
  2. On 23 August 2012, the Botswana Government received a letter from the Anti-Corruption Trust of Southern Africa informing the Botswana Government that it had neither signed nor ratified the AU Convention on preventing and combating Corruption (AUCPCC).[10] A response from the government showed that the letter was received and sent to the President’s private office.[11] Later on the 3rd of September 2012, the Government confirmed receipt of the letter. [12]
  3. On 28 August 2012, the SADC Secretariat through Dr Tomaz Augusto Salomão was asked to motivate its member states to take the subject of corruption very seriously by ratifying anti-corruption instruments and domesticating them and where possible give technical support on the implementation or domestication thereof. Furthermore, it was urged to set up and empower institutional arrangements for the implementation of Article 11 of the SPAC which provides for the establishment of a Committee[13]
  4. On the 28th of August 2012, the Government of Mauritius was notified that it had signed the AU Convention on preventing and combating Corruption but had not ratified it. [14]
  5. The Governments of DRC and Angola were also urged to sign and ratify anti-corruption treaties.
  6. The report was widely circulated globally and through http://www.kubatana.net.

 

 

During that time there were a number of challenges in some countries. In Madagascar, Andre Rajoelina was the President of the transitional High authority and did not have the power/right to commit the country to any international treaties. [15] The same was the case in other SADC Member States where there were conflicts.[16]

 

2.     PROGRESS ON THE SIGNATURE AND RATIFICATION OF THE SPAC, AUCPCC and UNCAC

The following findings were made on the status of signature and ratification of the SPAC, AUCPCC and the UNCAC by SADC member states:

2.1 Signature and Ratification of the SADC Protocol against Corruption (SPAC)

The SPAC is one of the flagship instruments of the SADC for preventing and combating corruption in the region. According to the SADC (2011:12), the Protocol was signed by 14 SADC Heads of State and Government in Malawi on 14 August 2001. It was ratified by the majority of the SADC member states as depicted in Table 1 below[17].

 

The only two countries that have not ratified are Madagascar and Seychelles. On the 6th of May 2017, the Anti-Corruption Trust of Southern Africa wrote to the SADC Focal Persons for both Seychelles[18] and Madagascar[19] seeking feedback on their plans on the same subject. Part of the letter to the Government of Seychelles reads “We have noted that Seychelles signed the SADC Protocol against Corruption on 14 August 2001. However, we have noted that there is no indication on whether or not you ratified the protocol and hence this enquiry” whilst an extract of the letter to the Government of Madagascar also reads “We have observed that there is no information to show that Madagascar has both signed and ratified the  SADC Protocol against Corruption and hence this enquiry”.

 

On the 8th of May 2017, the Government of Seychelles confirmed that the Government had been notified.[20] In its response, the Anti-Corruption Trust of Southern Africa urged the Government to ratify the Protocol.[21]

 

Table 3 below gives the detailed status of all the 15 SADC Member States.

 

Table 3: Signature and ratification of the SADC Protocol against corruption

 

Country Heads of State and Government[22] Date of signing Date of ratification
1.       Angola H.E. José Eduardo dos Santos 14 August 2001 17 July 2005
2.       Botswana H.E. President Lt. Gen. Seretse Khama Ian Khama 14 August 2001 14 August 2001
3.       DRC H.E. President Joseph Kabila Kabange 14 August 2001 19 May 2008
4.       Lesotho His Royal Highness King Letsie III 14 August 2001 29 July 2003
5.       Madagascar H. E. RAJAONARIMAMPIANINA Hery Martial No No
6.       Malawi His Excellency Prof. Arthur Peter Mutharika 14 August 2001 2 September 2002
7.       Mauritius Ameenah Gurib-Fakim, GCSK, CSK, PhD 14 August 2001 4 January 2002
8.       Mozambique H.E. Filipe Nyusi 14 August 2001 28 December 2007
9.       Namibia H.E. Dr. Hage Geingob 14 August 2001 23 June 2005
10.   Seychelles H.E. James Alix Michel 14 August 2001 No
11.   South Africa H.E. President Jacob Gedleyihlekisa Zuma 14 August 2001 15 May 2003
12.   Swaziland His Majesty, King Mswati III 14 August 2001 1 August 2006
13.   Tanzania H.E. Dr. John Pombe Joseph Magufuli 14 August 2001 20 August 2003
14.   Zambia H.E. Edgar Lungu 14 August 2001 8 July 2003
15.   Zimbabwe H.E. President Robert Gabriel Mugabe 14 August 2001 8 October 2004

 

However,  it appears that the SADC Secretariat and the Member States are not demonstrating full commitment towards the implementation of the provisions of the Protocol itself. For instance, Article 11 of the Protocol provides for the establishment of a Committee[23] but shockingly the Committee is not yet in place after 16 years of existence of the protocol.

 

2.2 Signature and Ratification of the AU Convention on Preventing and Combating Corruption (AUCPCC)

The AUCPCC, which entered into force on 5 August 2006, was adopted by the 2nd Ordinary Session of the Assembly of the African Union (AU) in Maputo, Mozambique on 11 July 2003. According to the African Union (2010:2) as at the 6th of August 2010, the AUCPCC had been signed by 45 member states and ratified by 31 members only.

 

As at 2012, the African Union Advisory Board on Corruption (2017), states that the number of ratifiers rose from 31 to 34 in 2012[24]. At the continental level the following Member States ratified the treaty as at the year 2012: Algeria, Benin, Burkina Faso, Burundi, Comoros, Congo, Côte d’Ivoire, Ethiopia, Gabon, Gambia, Ghana, Guinea Bissau, Guinea Conakry, Kenya, Libya, Lesotho, Liberia, Madagascar, Mali, Malawi, Mozambique, Namibia, Nigeria, Niger, Rwanda, Senegal, Seychelles, Sierra Leone, South Africa, Tanzania, Togo, Uganda, Zambia and Zimbabwe. Table 4 below shows that there has not been much progress by SADC Member States in ratifying the Convention.

 

Table 4: Signature and ratification of the AU Convention on Preventing and Combating Corruption by SADC member states

 

Country Heads of State and Government[25] Date of signing Date of ratification
1.       Angola H.E. José Eduardo dos Santos 22 January 2007 No
2.       Botswana H.E. President Lt. Gen. Seretse Khama Ian Khama No No
3.       DRC H.E. President Joseph Kabila Kabange 5 December 2003 No
4.       Lesotho His Royal Highness King Letsie III 27 February 2004 26 October 2004
5.       Madagascar H. E. RAJAONARIMAMPIANINA Hery Martial 28 February 2004 6 October 2004
6.       Malawi His Excellency Prof. Arthur Peter Mutharika No 26 November 2007
7.       Mauritius Ameenah Gurib-Fakim, GCSK, CSK, PhD 6 July 2004 No
8.       Mozambique H.E. Filipe Nyusi 15 December 2003 2 August 2006
9.       Namibia H.E. Dr. Hage Geingob 9 December 2003 5 August 2004
10.   Seychelles H.E. James Alix Michel 1 June 2008
11.   South Africa H.E. President Jacob Gedleyihlekisa Zuma 16 March 2004 11 November 2005
12.   Swaziland His Majesty, King Mswati III 7 December 2004 No
13.   Tanzania H.E. Dr. John Pombe Joseph Magufuli 5 November 2003 22 February 2005
14.   Zambia H.E. Edgar Lungu 03 August 2005 30 March 2007
15.   Zimbabwe H.E. President Robert Gabriel Mugabe 18 November 2003 17 December 2006

 

2.3 Signature and Ratification of the UN Convention against Corruption (UNCAC)

According to the United Nations Office on Drug and Crime (2016), Swaziland which was the only SADC Member State that had not ratified finally ratified the UNCAC on 24 September 2012. Table 5 below shows the status of signature and ratification by SADC member states.[26] However, Botswana and DRC have not signed the same.

 

Table 5: Signature and ratification of the UN Convention against Corruption

 

Country Heads of State and Government[27] Date of Signature Date of Ratification
1.       Angola H.E. José Eduardo dos Santos 10 December 2003 29 August 2006
2.       Botswana H.E. President Lt. Gen. Seretse Khama Ian Khama No 27 June 2011
3.       DRC H.E. President Joseph Kabila Kabange No 23 September 2010
4.       Lesotho His Royal Highness King Letsie III 16 September 2005 16 September 2005
5.       Madagascar H. E. RAJAONARIMAMPIANINA Hery Martial 10 December 2003 22 September 2004
6.       Malawi His Excellency Prof. Arthur Peter Mutharika 21 September 2004 4 December 2007
7.       Mauritius Ameenah Gurib-Fakim, GCSK, CSK, PhD 9 December 2003 15 December 2004
8.       Mozambique H.E. Filipe Nyusi 25 May 2004 9 April 2008
9.       Namibia H.E. Dr. Hage Geingob 9 December 2003 3 August 2004
10.   Seychelles H.E. James Alix Michel 27 February 2004 16 March 2006
11.   South Africa H.E. President Jacob Gedleyihlekisa Zuma 9 December 2003 22 November 2004
12.   Swaziland His Majesty, King Mswati III 15 September 2005 24 September 2012[28]
13.   Tanzania H.E. Dr. John Pombe Joseph Magufuli 9 December 2003 25 May 2005
14.   Zambia H.E. Edgar Lungu 11 December 2003 7 December 2007
15.   Zimbabwe H.E. President Robert Gabriel Mugabe 20 February 2004 8 March 2007

3.     CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS

The status of signature and ratification by SADC Member States is encouraging. However, the usefulness thereof,  will be in doubt if corruption remains uncurbed at the national level. Southern Africa has great potential of being prosperous, yet some of countries in the region remain poor due to bad governance, mal-administration and corruption.

 

In keeping with the findings of this assessment, the following recommendations are made:

 

  • The governments of Madagascar and Seychelles should ratify the SADC Protocol against Corruption;
  • The governments of Angola, Botswana, DRC, Mauritius and Swaziland should ratify the AU Convention on Preventing and Combating Corruption;
  • Pursuant to Article 11 of the SADC Protocol against Corruption, SADC Member States should establish a Committee to oversee the implementation of the Protocol.[29] This is long overdue considering the deleterious effects of corruption in Southern Africa.

[1] Article  11 of the SPAC, provides for institutional arrangements for implementation of SPAC through the setting up of a Committee to oversee implementation.

  1. A Committee consisting of State Parties is hereby established to oversee the implementation of this Protocol.
  2. Each State Party shall report to the Committee within one year of becoming a Party, on the progress made in the implementation of this Protocol. Thereafter, each State Party shall report to the Committee every two years.
  3. The Committee shall, inter-alia, be responsible for the following:
  • gathering and disseminating information amongst State Parties;
  • organising training programmes as and when appropriate;
  • evaluating programmes to be put in place and a programme of co-operation for the implementation of this Protocol; and
  • providing any other related assistance to State Parties as and when appropriate;
  • reporting to Council on a regular basis on the progress made by each State Party in complying with the provisions of this Protocol.

[2] Signature to a convention is subject to ratification, acceptance or approval. This means that the signature does not establish the consent to be bound but is an important means of authentication and expresses the willingness of the signatory state to continue the treaty-making process. In other words signature to a treaty qualifies the signatory state to proceed to ratification, acceptance or approval. It is significant since it also creates an obligation to refrain, in good faith, from acts that would defeat the object and the purpose of the treaty. (Arts.10 and 18, Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties 1969)

[3] On the other side, ratification is an international act whereby a state indicates its consent to be bound to a treaty. Ratification grants states the necessary time-frame to seek the required approval for the treaty on the domestic level and to enact the necessary legislation to give domestic effect to that treaty. [Arts.2 (1) (b), 14 (1) and 16, Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties 1969]

[4] The SADC Protocol against Corruption (SPAC): According to the SADC (2011:12), the Protocol was signed by 14 SADC Heads of State and Government in Malawi on 14 August 2001. This excluded Madagascar that only joined SADC in August 2005.[4] In line with Article 3 of SPAC its purpose is:

  1. to promote and strengthen the development, by each of the State Parties, of mechanisms needed to prevent, detect, punish and eradicate corruption in the public and private sector,
  2. to promote, facilitate and regulate cooperation among the State Parties to ensure the effectiveness of measures and actions to prevent, detect, punish and eradicate corruption in the public and private sectors; and
  3. to foster the development and harmonization of policies and domestic legislation of the State Parties relating to the prevention, detection, punishment and eradication of corruption in the public and private sectors.

[5] The AU Convention on Preventing and Combating Corruption (AUCPCC):  The AUCPCC, which entered into force on 5 August 2006, was adopted by the 2nd Ordinary Session of the Assembly of the African Union (AU) in Maputo, Mozambique on 11 July 2003. The objectives of the Convention are to:

  1. Promote and strengthen the development in Africa by each State Party, of mechanisms required to prevent, detect, punish and eradicate corruption and related offences in the public and private sectors.
  2. Promote, facilitate and regulate cooperation among the State Parties to ensure the effectiveness of measures and actions to prevent, detect, punish and eradicate corruption and related offences in Africa.
  3. Coordinate and harmonize the policies and legislation between State Parties for the purposes of prevention, detection, punishment and eradication of corruption on the continent.

[6] The UN Convention against Corruption (UNCAC):  The UNCAC entered into force on 14 December 2005. The purposes of UNCAC are:

  1. To promote and strengthen measures to prevent and combat corruption more efficiently and effectively;
  2. To promote, facilitate and support international cooperation and technical assistance in the prevention of and fight against corruption, including in asset recovery;
  3. To promote integrity, accountability and proper management of public affairs and public property.

[7] Chinhamo, O and Chaumba, A (2012). Progress on Signature and Ratification of Anti-Corruption Instruments by SADC Member States: Who is lagging Behind among SADC Member States? [online] Available at https://actsouthernafrica.files.wordpress.com/2012/08/24-august-2012-progress-report-on-the-status-of-signature-and-ratification-of-anti-corruption-treaties-by-sadc-member-states.pdf [Accessed on 5 May 2017]

[8]Chinhamo, O and Shumba, G (2007). Report on the Status of Signature and Ratification of Anti-Corruption Treaties by the Southern African Development Community (SADC) Member States. [online]. Available at http://archive.kubatana.net/docs/demgg/act-sa_sadc_signature_of_treaties_070730.pdf [Accesed on 6 May 2017]

[9] Anti-Corruption Trust of Southern Africa. (actsouthernafrica@gmail.com) (23 August 2012) Urgent letter to H.E. Dr Barnabas Sibusiso Dlamini- Swaziland- Signature and Ratification of Anti-CorruptionTreaties. E-mail to: Mabuza, S. (mabuzasindi@gov.sz).

[10] Anti-Corruption Trust of Southern Africa. (actsouthernafrica@gmail.com) (23 August 2012) Letter to H.E. President Lieutenant General Seretse Khama Ian Khama;. E-mail to: Ramsay, J; (jramsay@gov.bw).

[11] Ramsay, J. (jramsay@gov.bw) (23 August 2012) Letter to H.E. President Lieutenant General Seretse Khama Ian Khama;. E-mail to: Anti-Corruption Trust of Southern Africa; (actsouthernafrica@gmail.com).

[12] Dinale, L. (lesegodinale@gmail.com) (3 September 2012) Letter to H.E. President Lieutenant General Seretse Khama Ian Khama;. E-mail to: Anti-Corruption Trust of Southern Africa; (actsouthernafrica@gmail.com).

[13] Anti-Corruption Trust of Southern Africa. (actsouthernafrica@gmail.com) (28 August 2012) Letter to Dr Tomaz Augusto Salomão- Status ofSignature and Ratification of Anti-Corruption Treaties by SADC Member States. E-mail to: Salomão, T. (Penehupifolm@rocketmail.com and LMartin@sadc.int).

[14] Anti-Corruption Trust of Southern Africa. (actsouthernafrica@gmail.com) (28 August 2012) Letter to Dr Tomaz Augusto Salomão- Status ofSignature and Ratification of Anti-Corruption Treaties by SADC Member States. E-mail to: Salomão, T. (Penehupifolm@rocketmail.com and LMartin@sadc.int).

[15]  Anti-Corruption Trust of Southern Africa. (actsouthernafrica@gmail.com) (28 August 2012) Mauritius recommended to ratify the AU Convention on Preventing and Combating Corruption. E-mail to: RAMGOOLAM, N. (pmo@mail.gov.mu).

[16] ibid

[17] SADC (2011). SADC Treaty and Protocols Status of Protocols in Force. [online]. Available from: http://www.sadc.int/files/5113/3162/1668/STATUS_OF_SIGNATURE__RATIFICATION_OF_PROTOCOLS_REVISED-_24-11-2011.pdf. [Accessed on 20 August 2012].

[18] Anti-Corruption Trust of Southern Africa. (actsouthernafrica@gmail.com) (5 May 2017) Letter to Mr Maurice Loustau-Lalanne. Status on the Ratification of the SADC Protocol against Corruption. E-mail to: Lalane, M. L. (mloustaulalanne@mfa.gov.sc and copied to kracombo@mfa.gov.sc, nconstant@mfa.gov.sc, cmederic@seychelleshc.co.za).

[19] Anti-Corruption Trust of Southern Africa. (actsouthernafrica@gmail.com) (5 May 2017) Letter to Ms. Vololomiora Lalanirina Rabarijaona. Status on the Ratification of the SADC Protocol against Corruption. E-mail to: Rabarijaona, V.L. (miorarabarijaona@yahoo.fr and copied dcrmae@gmail.com, nirina.angie2013@gmail.com,ambamad.pta@infodoor.co.za).

[20] Lablache, F. (FLablache@mfa.gov.s) (8 May 2017) Letter to Anti-Corruption Trust of Southern Africa;. E-mail to: (actsouthernafrica@gmail.com).

[21] Anti-Corruption Trust of Southern Africa. (actsouthernafrica@gmail.com) (8 May 2017) Letter to Mr Maurice Loustau-Lalanne. Status on the Ratification of the SADC Protocol against Corruption. E-mail to: Lalane, M. L. (mloustaulalanne@mfa.gov.sc and copied to kracombo@mfa.gov.sc, nconstant@mfa.gov.sc, cmederic@seychelleshc.co.za).

[22] SADC (2017). Member States. [online] Available at http://www.sadc.int/member-states/[Accessed on 9 May 2017]

[23] Article  11 of the SPAC, provides for institutional arrangements for implementation of SPAC through the setting up of a Committee to oversee implementation.

  1. A Committee consisting of State Parties is hereby established to oversee the implementation of this Protocol.
  2. Each State Party shall report to the Committee within one year of becoming a Party, on the progress made in the implementation of this Protocol. Thereafter, each State Party shall report to the Committee every two years.
  3. The Committee shall, inter-alia, be responsible for the following:
  • gathering and disseminating information amongst State Parties;
  • organising training programmes as and when appropriate;
  • evaluating programmes to be put in place and a programme of co-operation for the implementation of this Protocol; and
  • providing any other related assistance to State Parties as and when appropriate;
  • reporting to Council on a regular basis on the progress made by each State Party in complying with the provisions of this Protocol.

[24] African Union Advisory Board on Corruption (2017). Status of ratification of the Convention on Corruption. [online]. Available at http://www.auanticorruption.org/auac/about/category/status-of-the-ratification. [Accessed on 6 May 2017]

[25] SADC (2017). Member States. [online] Available at http://www.sadc.int/member-states/[Accessed on 9 May 2017]

[26] UNODC (2017). United Nations Convention against Corruption. Signature and Ratification Status as of 12 December 2016. [online] Available at https://www.unodc.org/unodc/en/treaties/CAC/signatories.html [Accessed on 6 May 2017]

[27] SADC (2017). Member States. [online] Available at http://www.sadc.int/member-states/[Accessed on 9 May 2017]

[28]UNODC (2017). United Nations Convention against Corruption . Signature and Ratification Status as of 12 December 2016. [online] Available at https://www.unodc.org/unodc/en/treaties/CAC/signatories.html [Accessed on 6 May 2017]

[29] Article 11 of the SPAC, provides for institutional arrangements for implementation of SPAC through the setting up of a Committee to oversee implementation.

  1. A Committee consisting of State Parties is hereby established to oversee the implementation of this Protocol.
  2. Each State Party shall report to the Committee within one year of becoming a Party, on the progress made in the implementation of this Protocol. Thereafter, each State Party shall report to the Committee every two years.
  3. The Committee shall, inter-alia, be responsible for the following:
  • gathering and disseminating information amongst State Parties;
  • organising training programmes as and when appropriate;
  • evaluating programmes to be put in place and a programme of co-operation for the implementation of this Protocol; and
  • providing any other related assistance to State Parties as and when appropriate;
  • reporting to Council on a regular basis on the progress made by each State Party in complying with the provisions of this Protocol.

About Anti-Corruption Trust of Southern Africa

The Anti-Corruption Trust of Southern Africa (ACT-Southern Africa) is a non-profit making organisation registered to facilitate the sharing of anti-corruption best practices and advocacy against corruption in Southern Africa.
This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s