In February 2025, the African Union (the regional system of human rights protection in Africa) took the momentous step of adopting a Convention on Ending Violence Against Women and Girls. This development is particularly significant given the fact that there are currently no treaty provisions at the UN level on violence against women. Nevertheless, despite the potential held by this instrument to make an important contribution to the movement to combat gender-based violence, there are a number of possible difficulties which may serve to hinder the effectiveness of the new Convention
The Need for Regional Treaty Provisions on Violence Against Women
Violence against women constitutes one of the most prevalent human rights abuses worldwide. However there are currently no legally binding treaty provisions on this issue at the UN level. This is particularly surprising, given that since 1979 a ‘women’s convention’, the UN Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women (also known as CEDAW), has been in existence. However, when CEDAW was adopted, violence against women was simply not viewed as a major problem, and certainly not as an issue which should be addressed by international human rights law.
Nevertheless, despite the omission from CEDAW of any express provisions on violence against women, the CEDAW Committee (the Convention’s monitoring body) has interpreted CEDAW in such a manner as to encompass this issue. In 1992 the Committee issued its General Recommendation 19 which stated that, ‘Gender-based violence is a form of discrimination that seriously inhibits women’s ability to enjoy rights and freedoms on a basis of equality with men’.
Using this interpretation, the CEDAW Committee frequently makes recommendations to states relating to violence against women. In addition, UN consideration of the issue of violence against women is not limited only to the CEDAW Committee. For example, in 1994 a UN Special Rapporteur on violence against women, its causes and consequences was appointed.
However, even though a multitude of statements on violence against women have been issued by the CEDAW Committee and by other UN bodies, these all fall within the category of ‘soft law’ which is non-binding on states. Whilst it is certainly arguable that legally binding treaty provisions on violence against women should be adopted at the UN level, the absence of such makes it even more imperative for such provisions to be adopted by regional human rights systems.
Indeed, prior to the adoption of the new African Union Convention, treaties on violence against women had been adopted by other regional human rights systems – namely the Inter-American system and the Council of Europe. As regards the Inter-American system, the Inter-American Convention on the Prevention, Punishment and Eradication of Violence against Women (Convention of Belém do Pará) was adopted in 1995; and the Council of Europe adopted the Convention on Preventing and Combating Violence Against Women and Domestic Violence (Istanbul Convention) in 2011. It became apparent that there was also a need for a specific treaty dedicated solely to ending violence against women and girls in Africa. As stated by the African Union,
Despite the progress and concerted programmes undertaken at different levels, violence against women and girls remains a devastating vice that threatens women and girls’ lives and national developments. This demands accelerated action to galvanise all sectors of society to actively participating in efforts towards eradicating the scourge.
Advantages of the African Union Convention on Ending Violence Against Women and Girls
The new African Union Convention certainly constitutes an extremely significant development as regards the movement to combat violence against women in Africa, not least because of its symbolic importance. The adoption of this instrument clearly shows a recognition on the part of the African Union of the extent of violence against women in its various forms and of the vital need for further action to be taken to address this issue.
The fundamental importance of the new Convention however reaches beyond a purely symbolic role. Essentially, this instrument places legally binding obligations on states concerning the measures which they must adopt to address the issue of violence against women. These duties cover a wide range of important aspects, such as protection, access to justice and support for victims. The actual measures themselves are generally not new, in that most of them have previously been articulated by UN bodies such as the CEDAW Committee and the UN Special Rapporteur on violence against women. However, as noted above, CEDAW contains no explicit mention of violence against women, and there are no other treaty provisions on this issue at the UN level. It could therefore be argued that the statements of the CEDAW Committee and of the other UN bodies in this area are based on a somewhat insecure foundation. The adoption by the African Union of a Convention which essentially puts a number of the recommendations which have been issued by the UN human rights bodies on a secure and legally binding footing is certainly very much to be welcomed.
The legally binding nature of the duties contained in the new African Union Convention is a factor which can be used by non-governmental organisations working in the area of gender-based violence. Pressure can be placed upon governments in states which will ratify this instrument by publicising the existence of the obligations contained therein, and the fact that they are legally binding. The Convention constitutes an effective tool which can be used by groups which work to combat violence against women.
It is also of particular note that the new African Union Convention is the first of the regional human rights treaties on violence against women to refer specifically to the context of cyberspace. For example, Article 3(a) emphasises that this instrument applies ‘to all forms of violence against women and girls, in public and private spheres, and in cyberspace’. Likewise, Article 5(a) places an obligation on states parties to ‘enact and enforce laws that fight all forms of violence against women and girls in the private and public spheres, and in cyberspace’. By contrast, neither the Istanbul Convention nor the Convention of Belém do Pará contain any express reference to violence in the digital sphere. In recent times however, there has been a growing recognition of the ways in which perpetrators may use technology in their abuse. For instance, research carried out by Refuge found that one third of women in the UK have experienced online abuse. It is therefore meritorious that the new African Union Convention refers expressly to violence against women in this context.
Potential Challenges
There are however a number of potential difficulties which may serve to hinder the effectiveness of the new Convention. The first of these relates to the question of whether all or most of the 55 member states of the African Union will actually ratify the Convention. In order to ensure the optimal level of effectiveness of this instrument, it is clearly important for the Convention to be ratified by the majority, if not all, of the member states of the African Union. Nevertheless, it is notable that, to date, 38 of the 46 states within the Council of Europe have ratified the Istanbul Convention; and that the Convention of Belém do Pará is the most widely ratified Convention within the Inter-American system. It is to be hoped that a similarly large proportion of states within the African Union will ratify the new Convention.
Potential difficulties may however also arise relating to reservations. Article 19 of the new African Union Convention allows states to ratify this instrument subject to reservations to any of its provisions, provided that the reservations are not contrary to the object and purpose of the Convention. The approach which should be adopted towards reservations by any new treaty is a difficult issue. Essentially, a balance must be struck between, on the one hand, the desire to ensure that as many states as possible ratify the Convention in question and therefore allowing some leeway in order to encourage them to do so; and on the other hand, ensuring that states are not permitted to enter reservations which are so extensive that they impact on the very heart of the Convention itself. It is not easy to strike this balance in the correct manner. For example, it is arguable that the approach which has been adopted towards reservations to CEDAW has been of too lenient a nature. As with Article 19 of the African Union Convention, Article 28 of CEDAW permits ratification subject to reservations, so long as the reservations in question are not incompatible with the object and purpose of CEDAW. However, it appears that a broad approach is adopted towards compatibility. Although states can of course enter reservations when ratifying other UN human rights treaties, CEDAW remains the treaty with the most reservations. It is a distinct possibility that similar difficulties could beset the new African Union Convention.
Another potential difficulty for the new Convention relates to implementation and enforcement. This is by no means a problem which would be unique to this instrument. Significant difficulties concerning implementation and enforcement affect all of the UN human rights treaties. The implementation of international human rights law has been inconsistent, to say the least. Although human rights instruments contain extensive lists of the rights which should be afforded to individuals, in many situations these rights are nevertheless still being breached. It is very possible that the implementation and enforcement problems which have arisen for the UN treaties may also occur in respect of the new African Union Convention. This however is not a problem with the specific Convention itself, but is rather a difficulty which pervades international and regional human rights law in general.
A Welcome Development
The new African Union Convention is certainly a very significant development for the movement to combat violence against women in Africa. The Convention serves an important symbolic function, in that it demonstrates a commitment on the part of the African Union to the taking of meaningful action in relation to the insidious problem of violence against women. However, the benefits of the Convention are more than purely symbolic in nature. The Convention essentially draws together a number of the statements which have been made by UN human rights bodies such as CEDAW as regards this issue and puts these statements on a secure legally binding footing. It is also noteworthy that the African Union Convention is the first regional treaty on violence against women to refer expressly to violence against women in the context of cyberspace, an important issue which has gained recognition in very recent years.
There are however a number of potential difficulties which may serve to hinder the effectiveness of the new Convention. One of these problems could be a possible reluctance on the part of states to sign up to its provisions. Difficulties may also arise in relation to reservations and as regards enforcement. Nevertheless, despite these potential problems, the adoption by the African Union of the Convention on Ending Violence Against Women and Girls is certainly very much to be welcomed. It is to be hoped that a substantial number of states sign and ratify the Convention, and that this instrument will make an important contribution to the movement to combat gender-based violence.
The featured image appears courtesy of a Creative Commons License.
