SADC Protocol on Gender and Development: A Critical Analysis on Its Practicality
Written by Thuso Ramabolu
SADC Treaty as a Platform for Gender Action
As early as 1992, the Treaty of the Southern African Development Community (SADC) already included a commitment to human rights, democracy, and the rule of law as governance standards for its member states, but it was in 2001 that SADC significantly broadened its efforts to open up about gender deliberations at the regional level. SADC focuses in particular on standards related to gender, human rights, and democracy which are promoted and protected through various instruments. While gender-based violence prevention and good governance have also gained a more prominent place on the agenda since 2001, standards and instruments have always been wanting until the introduction of the Revised SADC Protocol on Gender and Development. Overall, there is a significant gap between the ratification of the Protocol on the one hand and the domestication and institutionalisation of measures on the other. The suspension of the SADC Tribunal in 2010 following its rulings on human rights issues clearly shows the limits of SADC as an active promoter vis-à-vis its member states. Be that as it may, the SADC Protocol can still be utilised as a regional mechanism to promote equality in the region in real terms. While the SADC Protocol deals with a myriad of gender issues, this article will only traverse gender equity and women empowerment in the SADC region. The article will interrogate the ‘practicality’ of the SADC Gender Protocol, and then jump into how the gender parities could be addressed through the Protocol.
The Practicality of SADC Protocol in Gender and Development
Before diving into the discussion, it is extremely prudent to lay a foundation and unpack the SADC Protocol on Gender and its ramifications. The recently acclaimed SADC Protocol presents one of the untapped regional opportunities to be used to fight the scourge of gender-based violence (GBV). The Protocol in no uncertain terms calls for gender equality and women's empowerment in SADC member states. One of the monitoring tools, being the SADC Gender and Development Monitor, has noted positively that ‘SADC Member States are changing the region through commitment to gender equality and women’s empowerment…The results are beginning to show.’ These positive results stem from implementation of recommendations as contained in the Protocol. The Protocol called on states to curb GBV through legal; social, economic, cultural, and political practices; support services; training of service providers; and adoption of integrated approaches. The Protocol further provides the context within which member states that have also ratified the Regional Strategy and Framework of Action for addressing GBV 2018-2030 should direct realisation of their anti-GBV programmes. The ultimate goal that it aspires to achieve is to reduce the incidences of GBV by half in 2030.
A number of gender activists and advocates in the region have observed that while the Protocol does introduce some new rights and state obligations, its overall effect is that these rights and obligations fall short of enhancing the regime for the protection of women’s rights in the SADC region (Nyane, 2022).
Further to the above, and in contrast, there is practicality in the approach and use of the SADC Protocol as it seeks to respond to the topical gender challenges by capturing emerging issues such as climate change and child marriage. The nature of the Protocol is such that states are bound to ensure the implementation of the Protocol with the development of National Action Plans. These National Action Plans are expected to have measurable timelines, monitoring, and evaluation mechanisms with clear data collection and thorough analysis, along with baseline data information that progress will be measured against. States are expected to provide reports to the Executive Secretary of SADC once every two years. This unequivocally means that paying ‘lip-service’’ to the Protocol by the state parties will not suffice. In other words, it is not enough to simply implement gender programmes and assume that successful implementation equates to actual improvement of women’s lives on the ground. A relentless focus on the outcomes and actual impact are key in assessing whether and how the goals are being achieved over time and the progressive nature of such measures.
Using the Protocol to Promote Gender Parity in the SADC Region
As discussed and observed above, the Revised SADC Protocol on Gender and Development provides for the empowerment of women, elimination of discrimination, and the promotion of gender equality and equity through gender-responsive legislation, policies, programmes, and projects. According to Article 12 of the Protocol, ‘all state parties shall endeavour to ensure equal and effective representation of women in decision-making positions in the political, public, and private sectors’. Article 5 of the same Protocol obligates member states to use affirmative action measures to achieve gender parity in political affairs in Southern Africa. Even though the 50% representation threshold had not been reached by 2015, the participation of Southern African women in politics has improved considerably.
Article 13 of the SADC Protocol on Gender and Development further places on state parties an obligation to enable equal political participation in an effort to uplift women towards leadership positions and leadership roles. It stipulates a specific goal for women participation that culminates in gender parity in the electoral process. As illustrated in the SADC Gender Protocol Barometer (2021), women have now outnumbered men as voters. The SADC Gender Protocol Barometer was established by the Southern Africa Gender Protocol Alliance to illustrate annual progression in the implementation of the SADC Protocol on Gender and Development by Southern African states. Having the barometer alone is a clear indication of the commitment to pursue gender equality in the political realm in Southern Africa. Subsequently, many Southern African states, including Angola, Mozambique, Namibia, South Africa, and Tanzania have more than 30% women’s representation in both their lower and upper houses of parliaments (SADC). The most recent example is Lesotho which saw an appointment of the first woman to hold the position of Deputy Prime Minister in the country, coupled with 26.45% of the parliamentary seats occupied by women.
Women in South Africa have emerged victorious as they represent one of the countries with the largest proportion of women representation in parliament (Lorenc, 2019). All other Southern African countries have followed suit by enacting legislation on minimum quotas for women representation in parliaments (Nyane,, 2020). The quota systems for women representation in parliament have culminated in a significant increase in the number of women in parliament.
According to the SADC Gender and Development Monitor 2022, using official data submitted by member states, Eswatini and Botswana are at the bottom of the SADC regional gender table in 15th and 16th place and have the lowest representation by women in the National Assembly with just 12.2% and 11.1% respectively. The other main electoral system used in SADC is the Mixed System which combines aspects of the FPTP and PR electoral systems, and three countries - Lesotho, Tanzania and Zimbabwe - use this system, which achieves results that are lower than the PR system with quotas, but higher than the FPTP (Nyane, 2021).
Other main findings of the SADC Gender and Development Monitor 2022 is that in the legislature, the representation, and participation of women have generally seen a modest improvement over the past 25 years compared to other arms of government. For example, in 2013, the regional average for women in parliament in SADC (both houses combined) was 24.5 percent, and this increased to 30.4 percent in 2018, and 30.9 percent by March 2022.
Gaps and Challenges in Implementing the Protocol
Despite these stated elevations, a number of challenges continue to be encountered by women in the SADC member states.
i. Domestication of Protocol:
Studies on gender-based violence in the region demonstrate that progress on Protocol implementation, though commendable, remains slow with some member states still lacking critical data on gender-based violence (Gender Links: 2022). For example, most member states have implemented multi-sectorial approaches, campaigns, and actions on addressing violence against women and human trafficking laws, but not all SADC countries have laws on domestic violence and sexual assault as a criminal offence.
ii. Limited Political Will:
There is still a limited political will to invest, implement, and monitor progress on women and girls’ rights.
iii. Gaps in Data:
The gender-based violence data remains outdated in most SADC countries. Some member states are still not providing accurate data, which hinders implementation because of its inability to give the statistics of achievements and challenges. There is a lack of reliable gender-disaggregated data within available statistics. Last, but not least, most member states are limited in their understanding of GBV and specific roles they should play in effectively handling its prevalence in society. (Nyane, 2021).
Conclusion
From the above discussion, it has become evident that across the SADC region there is demonstrated evidence of an expanding consensus about the significance of women participation in democracies. Of importance is the increasing commitments and efforts that target the promotion and empowerment of women viewed as a matter of crucial importance to the character of societal development. The aspirations to expand the role of women are encompassed in the SADC Protocol Declaration on Gender and Development and also reflected in the national constitutions of the countries in the region. However, these perceived milestones have not been immune from challenges as highlighted above. There has arguably been less political will on the effective implementation of the Protocol. Be that as it may, there still exists an element of hope as the Protocol presents ample opportunities as it has successfully levelled the playing field of gender frameworks. It is therefore left up to each individual state party to maximise the opportunities presented by the Protocol. This can only be achieved through the full domestication of the Protocol, which will ultimately ensure uniformity of approach on gender issues in the region.
Bibliography
Munalula, Mulela Margaret 2011: SADC Protocol on Gender and Development: Road map to equality?, in: SADC Law Journal, Volume 1, 189-196.
Ojigho, Osai. (2020). Chapter 2 Litigating Gender-Based Violence and Discrimination -The Dorothy Njemanze Case ” in Litigating the Maputo Protocol - A Compendium of Strategies and Approaches for Defending the Rights of Women and Girls in Africa (2020) Equality Now.
https://www.tralac.org/news/article/13380-revised-sadc-gender-protocol-enters-into-force.html
IPU 2021, Global and regional averages of women in national parliaments. [Online] Available at: https://data.ipu.org/women-averages?month=1&year=2021
Solyom, E 2020, Gender Quotas: Towards an Improved Democracy. [Online] Available at: https://www.e-ir.info/pdf/85754 [Accessed 13 September 2023].
https://www.sardc.net/widsaa/sgm/1999/ie4-index.html
Nyane H 2021: “Women Representation in Lesotho’s Legislative Bodies:: A Politico-Legal Analysis of the Effectiveness of Electoral Gender Quotas” (online) Available at: https://www.eisa.org/pdf/JAE20.2Nyane.pdf
UNWomen 2021, Facts and figures: Women’s leadership and political participation. [Online] Available at: https://www.unwomen.org/en/what-we-do/leadership-andpolitical-participation/facts-and-figures#_edn14 [Accessed 10 September 2023].
Teevan, C., Tadesse Shiferaw, L. and Di Ciommo, M. 2021. Taking the gender agenda forward in EU programming. 19 April 2021. ECDPM Discussion Paper 297. Maastricht: ECDPM.
Written by Thuso Ramabolu (Manager, Human Capital at Tsebo Solutions Group)
Published by Africa Legal Aid
The views expressed on this blog are those of the contributors. They are not necessarily the views of AFLA, its editors, or its board.