History — @

The African Union and the African Diaspora - Tracking the AU 6th Region Initiative and the Right to Return Citizenship: A Resource for the 8th Pan African Congress Part 1 in Harare, Zimbabwe

WORKING PAPER ON DESIRABLE RESULTS OF THE 6TH PAN AFRICAN CONGRESS, TANZANIA 1974

————————————-

African charter oN HUMAN AND PEOPLES RIGHTS - 1981

Article 12

1. Every individual shall have the right to freedom of movement and residence within the borders of a State provided he abides by the law.

2. Every individual shall have the right to leave any country including his own, and to return to his country. This right may only be subject to restrictions, provided for by law for the protection of national security, law and order, public health or morality.

World Conference against Racism, Racial Discrimination, Xenophobia and Related Intolerance - Durban Declaration, 31 August to 8 September 2001

“54. We underline the urgency of addressing the root causes of displacement and of finding durable solutions for refugees and displaced persons, in particular voluntary return in safety and dignity to the countries of origin, as well as resettlement in third countries and local integration, when and where appropriate and feasible;”

“78. Urges those States that have not yet done so to consider signing and ratifying or acceding to the following instruments: 

(a) Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide of 1948;

(l) The Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court of 1998;”

Commentary: the 1949 Geneva Convention Article 4 (1) defines prisoners of war and Article 5 states, 

“the present Convention shall apply to the persons referred to in Article 4 from the time they fall into the power of the enemy and until their final release and repatriation.” 

The new Geneva Convention Protocol on Prisoners of War, which the United States has signed but not yet ratified and which went into force for some states on 7 December 1978, has provided in Articles 43 through 47 broader standards for prisoners of war, who come from irregular and guerilla units, than the terms of the 1949 Article 4. Article 45 of the 1978 Protocol states that a

“A person who takes part in hostilities and falls into the power of an adverse Party shall be presumed to be a prisoner of war… if he claims the status of war, or if he appears to be entitled to such status, or if the party on which he depends claims such status on his behalf.

The African Diaspora, referred to as “Afrodescendents” has been determined by a competent tribunal -- the Third World Conference against Racism, Racial Discrimination, Xenophobia and Related Intolerance in the city of Santiago, Chile in the year 2000 - and confirmed in 2002 at the United Nations Conference for the Rights of Minorities in La Ceiba, Honduras to refer to the African Diaspora that  

  • Were forcibly disposed of their homeland, Africa;

  • Were transported to the Americas and Slavery Diaspora for the purpose of enslavement;

  • Were subjected to slavery;

  • Were subjected to forced mixed breeding and rape;

  • Have experienced, through force, the loss of mother tongue, culture, and religion;

  • Have experienced racial discrimination due to lost ties from their original identity.

Thus, the designation or status of “prisoner of war” under the Geneva Convention is valid for Afrodescendants since they have yet to be repatriated to their land of origin.

“87. Urges States parties to adopt legislation implementing the obligations they have assumed to prosecute and punish persons who have committed or ordered to be committed grave breaches of the Geneva Conventions of 12 August 1949 and Additional Protocol I thereto and of other serious violations of the laws and customs of war, in particular in relation to the principle of non-discrimination;”

“IV. Provision of effective remedies, recourse, redress, and other measures at the national, regional and international levels

158. Recognizes that these historical injustices have undeniably contributed to the poverty, underdevelopment, marginalization, social exclusion, economic disparities, instability and insecurity that affect many people in different parts of the world, in particular in developing countries. The Conference recognizes the need to develop programmes for the social and economic development of these societies and the Diaspora, within the framework of a new partnership based on the spirit of solidarity and mutual respect, in the following areas:

Facilitation of welcomed return and resettlement of the descendants of enslaved Africans;

160. Urges States to take all necessary measures to address, as a matter of urgency, the pressing requirement for justice for the victims of racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia and related intolerance and to ensure that victims have full access to information, support, effective protection and national, administrative and judicial remedies, including the right to seek just and adequate reparation or satisfaction for damage, as well as legal assistance, where required;

“168. Urges States that have not yet done so to consider acceding to the Geneva Conventions of 12 August 1949 and their two Additional Protocols of 1977, as well as to other treaties of international humanitarian law, and to enact, with the highest priority, appropriate legislation, taking the measures required to give full effect to their obligations under international humanitarian law, in particular in relation to the rules prohibiting discrimination;”

First AU-Western Hemisphere Diaspora Forum in Washington, DC December 17-19, 2002

The Forum established the Western Hemisphere African Diaspora Network (WHADN) to interface with the African Union Commission. WHADN, which was given an 18 month mandate, put forward proposals for effective collaboration between the African Diaspora and the African Union which were refined by the AU Commission. One of those proposals, the Trade & Economic Development Committee proposed the following framework for recommendations as prerequisites to effective and meaningful participation in African trade and development by Africans in the western hemisphere Diaspora:

The African Union should consider the African Diaspora as Business partner, and

-                   Establish official programs to identify and qualify Diaspora businesses

-                   Issue a common visa, or eliminate business travel visas for Diaspora businesses.

IV. WORKING GROUP REPORTS

DEMOCRACY, GOVERNANCE AND THE RULE OF LAW

Selwyn R. Cudjoe (Chairperson)

Kwesi Addae,Lino D'Almeida,Carole Boyce-Davies,Cyril Boynes, Jr.,Howard Dodson,Earnie Ferreira,Tsita V. Himonyanga-Phiri,John W. Jackson,Michelle Jacobs,Kysseline Jean-Mary, Esq.,Dr. Nkamany Kabamba,Barbacar M'Bow, Mamabolo, Ibrahim Mohamed, Dr. Brimmy A.U. Olaghere, Kunirum Osia, Mohamed I. Shoush, Charles Kwalonu Sunwabe Jr., Yetunde Teriba, Barbara Tutani

“190. We, the participants of the above-named Working Group, move that the African Diaspora establishes itself for full regional representation at the African Union.

The question of how to structure Diaspora representation was discussed, and it was agreed that the Western Hemisphere regions would be represented as follows:

  1. i. Latin America (including Mexico and Central America)

  2. ii. The Caribbean

  3. iii. Brazil (given its language, size, and historical disconnect with the rest of Latin America)

  4. iv. The United States

  5. v. Canada (not grouped with the United States given the often different interests of the Diaspora of the two countries, as reported by members of the Working Group)

191. The question of citizenship was discussed extensively, and the following nonexclusive models were proposed:

i. Each Member-State legislate the right of citizenship to members of Diaspora,

ii. The African Union accords certain legal, civil and economic rights to members of the Diaspora,

iii. The African Union and Member-States declare all Africans in the Diaspora citizens of the New African Nation created, for the purpose of providing citizenship to people of descent. Through this process, members of the Diaspora will be accorded citizenship to the African Union, following the European Union model.

CLOSING REMARKS

Dr Jinmi Adisa, Senior Coordinator and Head of Conference on Security, Stability, Development and Cooperation (CSSDCA), Interim Commission of the African Union:

“236. We will take all your resolutions and recommendations to Chairman Essy and the Commission of the Union in Addis Ababa and through them to the Summit of the Union and while we may not be able to implement all of them immediately, you can be rest assured that they will eventually be reflected in the purposes, goals and programmes of the Union.”

RECOMMENDATION FOR COORDINATING BODY FOR AU-WESTERN HEMISPHERE DIASPORA

“December 19, 2002

250. The Meeting recommended that an office of the AU be established in Washington DC.

251. The meeting also recommended that the Foundation for Democracy in Africa serve as the coordinating body and be given the specific mandate to follow-up on the recommendations of the 1st AU-Western Hemisphere Diaspora Conference and work with the CSSDCA, enhancing the work of other African Diaspora NGOs internationally and in consultation with the AU Office in New York, within the next 18 months.”

CONSTITUTIVE ACT OF THE AFRICAN UNION (FEBRUARY 2003) AND PROTOCAL ON AMENDMENTS TO THE CONSTITUTIVE ACT OF THE AFRICAN UNION (JULY 2003)

On February 3-4, 2003, the first Extra-Ordinary Summit of the Assembly of the African Union meeting in Addis Ababa, Ehtiopia, adopted the historic Article 3(q) that officially, “invite(s) and encourage(s) the full participation of Africans in the Diaspora in the building of the African Union in its capacity as an important part of our Continent.” From this decision, the African Diaspora would become designated as the 6th Region of the African Union.” Article 3(q) was then adopted by the 2nd Ordinary Session of the Assembly of the Union in Maputo, Mozambique on July 11, 2003.

Decision on the Development of the Diaspora Initiative in the African Union at the Third Extraordinary Session in Sun City, South Africa May 2003

In May, 2003, the Executive Council of the African Union met at the Third Extraordinary Session in Sun City, South Africa and issued the "Decision on the Development of the Diaspora Initiative in the African Union" This decision stated in point 4 that it

"Supports the initiative of the Commission to convene a technical workshop, as soon as possible, to develop a concept paper to generate proposals on the relations between the AU and the Diaspora. The proposed workshop would also address the following issues:

-                   the definition of the Diaspora;

-                   the role of the Diaspora in reversing African brain drain in line with the NEPAD recommendations;

-                   the modalities of the creation of a Diaspora fund for investment and development in Africa;

-                   the modalities for the development of scientific and technical networks to channel the repatriation of scientific knowledge from the Diaspora to Africa, and the establishment of cooperation between those abroad and at home;

-                   the establishment of a Diaspora database to promote and facilitate networking and collaboration between experts in their respective countries of origin and those in the Diaspora.

The Decision also stated:

"b. What can the African Union offer the Diaspora?

Discussions during the Washington Forum also offers a picture of some of what the Diaspora may expect - a measure of credible involvement in the policy making processes, some corresponding level of representation, symbolic identification, requirements of dual or honorary citizenship of some sort, moral and political support of Diaspora initiatives in their respective regions, preferential treatment in access to African economic undertakings including consultancies, trade preferences and benefits for entrepreneurs, vis a vis non - Africans, social and political recognition as evident in invitation to Summits and important meetings etc. These deliberations must also focus on possibilities, criteria and qualification for Diaspora representation in the Economic, Cultural and Social Council (ECOSOC), the Pan-African Parliament, etc.

ASSEMBLY OF THE AFRICAN UNION Second Ordinary Session 10 - 12 July 2003 Maputo, MOZAMBIQUE: DECISION ON THE AMENDMENTS TO THE CONSTITUTIVE ACT - Doc. Assembly/AU/8(II) Add. 10 - July 10 -12, 2003 Maputo, Mozambique

African Union Technical Workshop on the Relationship With The Diaspora held in the Port of Spain, Trinidad, June 2-5 2004

Working Group 4: Modalities for enhancing effective partnerships between the African Union and the African Diaspora and Diaspora participation in ECOSOC

Recommendations included:

vi. The AUC should develop policies allowing the heads of state of Black nations outside the continent of Africa (in particular the Caribbean) to be included in the deliberations of AU Heads of State Summits and that, in turn, AU Heads of State representatives be invited to Summits of Black nations Heads of State outside of the continent of Africa. The same can be said for reciprocal invitations between African and African Diaspora meetings of professionals, trade associations, and trade unions. For instance, the AU would facilitate and coordinate the appointment of representatives of African professional associations to the executive councils of counterpart professional associations in Black nations and in nations with counterpart national and regional professional associations (both African descent associations and dominant professional associations with African descent caucuses) in areas such as law, medicine, the sciences (social and natural), engineering, the arts and humanities, media, urban planning, rural development, and education, etc.

vii. We recommend that the AU encourage representation policies for summits, conferences, workshops, and key meetings, which would allow for the coming together of government ministers within specified Diaspora Regions in areas of responsibility such as culture, labor, education, and trade to collaborate with AU counterpart ministers to address public policy matters of pressing concern in Diaspora regions and sub-regions (as has happened with the recent WTO meeting in Cancún). When and where appropriate, these meetings could include representatives from NGOs, private industries, professional associations, and civil rights movements.

ix. The AU Diaspora Initiative should establish criteria for selecting NGOs, private industries, universities, professional associations, and primary and secondary educational systems for partnership in the AU Diaspora Initiative. Regarding NGOs, this refers to the development of selection and evaluation criteria for the twenty NGO positions allotted in ECOSOCC. NGOs. Coalitions of NGOs interested in ECOSOCC representation, and which are recommended by regional secretariats to the AUC, must demonstrate capacity to design, implement, and evaluate services, projects, and programmes which (a) improve the quality of life of African and African Diaspora nations, communities, populations, and institutional sectors; or/and (b) promote education and awareness about African and African Diaspora history and other issues; and (c) establish collaborative partnerships with other NGOs, private industries, cultural organizations, Black social movements, and educational institutions. It is recommended that African Diaspora NGOs and coalitions of NGOs interested in being regional consultative partners with the African Union register with their respective regional secretariats;

all NGOs and coalitions of NGOs in the Western Hemisphere desiring to participate in the African Union Development of the Diaspora Initiative should register with WHADN as the first step of membership in this movement.

The AU should set other selection criteria reflecting its organizational needs and determine policy on issues such as length of tenure of ECOSOCC NGOs and NGO coalitions and criteria for renewal of tenure as set by formal performance evaluation procedures and standards.

xii.          The AU should mandate Regional Diaspora Secretariats to coordinate and mobilize when needed Diaspora regional associations, organizations, and institutional sectors and to develop programmes to ensure their capacity to engage in partnerships with each other and with associations, organizations, and institutional sectors on the African continent.

xvi.        The AU should consider offering Diaspora federal citizenship options and recommend that the AU establish a task force of distinguished scholars and policy makers to comprehensively study this question and offer policy recommendations to the AU Assembly.”

Report of the First Conference of Intellectuals of Africa and The Diaspora, October 6-9, 2004 in Dakar, Senegal

"59. The question on how to structure the Diaspora to make it as the 6th region was raised. To that effect:

-          There is need to establish a representative body including the major regions of the world.

-          20 Diaspora organizations will be part of ECOSOCC, the advisory body of the African Union.

Recommendations

a)    Setting up of an African experts group to serve as a 'think tank' to the AU.

e)     Development of databases of associations to promote networking.

f)      To promote the concept of African citizenship and the establishment of an African Passport.

87.  Dr. Molefi Asante put forward five recommendations for the integration of the Diaspora and the continent. These include

i.              the provision of curricula information from the African Diaspora in African schools,

ii.            assigning responsibility to people in the ministries of African states to interface with the Diaspora

iii.           operations from a perspective of strength rather than weakness,

iv.           the need for African leaders to have precise knowledge of Diaspora communities as a basis for strengthening relations, and

v.            the acceptance of the right of return for the African Diaspora.

Key issues and Recommendations

89.  Five key issues were subject of recommendation. Preliminary discussions were held regarding the modalities for their implementation.

a.    Creation of a specific structure of coordination as a follow up mechanism

i.              The African Union should establish a Secretariat as a follow-up mechanism to engage in advocacy and to promote a permanent policy dialogue between intellectuals and policy makers in Africa and the Diaspora.

ii.            The African Union should set up or adopt existing institutions to serve as 'Africa Houses' within strategic global and African locations to promote African interests abroad, improve awareness and knowledge about Africa, and support commercial and other links between the Diaspora and Africa.

c.    Promotion of an African Citizenship Initiative

-     In recognition of the importance of identity as a mobilizing factor for development, the African Union should develop a framework for a wider African Citizenship Initiative.

Modalities for Implementation

91.  The African Union Commission should:

-     Develop, in consultation with the Diaspora, proposals for a Bill of Citizenship that establishes rights, entitlements, and duties of African Citizens on the continent and in the Diaspora, including the responsibility of Member States and the African Union, and submit this to the Executive Council and Summit for consideration and approval.

c)    Establishing The Diaspora as The Sixth Region of The African Union

-                   The Diaspora should initiate and, wherever it already exists should, broaden a process of consultation and regular meetings culminating in the establishment of transparent representative organs, to engage with the African Union.

Meeting of Experts on the Definition of the African Diaspora, April 11-12, 2005 in Addis Ababa, Ethiopia

VIII. ADOPTION OF THE DEFINITION OF THE AFRICAN DIASPORA

18. Following the discussion above, the meeting adopted the following definition by consensus as read by the Chairperson:

“The African Diaspora consists of peoples of African origin living outside the continent, irrespective of their citizenship and nationality and who are willing to contribute to the development of the continent and the building of the African Union.”

Siphiwe Note: this definition is severely flawed in light of the "Out of Africa" DNA studies. What is to stop a blonde-haired, blue-eyed Swede desiring to contribute to the development of Africa, for example, from claiming status as a member of the African Diaspora since current science states that his or her ancestors (and all human beings) originated in Africa? At the time, I recommended the following definition:

"The African Diaspora consists of peoples of African origin, descent and heritage living outside the continent, irrespective of their citizenship and nationality and who are willing to contribute to the development of the continent and the building of the African Union."

Under this definition, the Swede would be excluded on grounds that he or she did not possess an African heritage.

The challenges of Diaspora representation in the African Union’s ECOSOCC Assembly Francis N. Ikome

The African Union Diaspora Initiative, Presentation by Dr. Jinmi Adisa, Director, Citizens and Diaspora Directorate, CIDO, African Union Commission, to the Annual Diaspora Consultation with Formations and Communities in North America, New York, USA, 21-22 October 2010


”Soon after the launching of the African Union in Durban, South Africa in 2002 therefore, the Assembly of Heads of States met in Addis Ababa, Ethiopia to establish, among other things, a legal framework that would create the necessary and sufficient conditions for putting this decision into effect. Hence, it adopted the Protocol on the Amendment to the Constitutive Act of the Union which in Article 3 (q) invited the African 4 Diaspora to participate fully as an important component in the building of the African Union. In adopting the decision, the Protocol symbolically recognized the Diaspora as an important and separate but related constituency outside the five established regions of Africa – East, West, Central North and South. Thus although there is no specific legal or political text that states this categorically, it, in effect, created a symbolic sixth region of Africa. . . .

DEFINITION OF THE AFRICAN DIASPORA

The meeting of Experts from Member States met in Addis Ababa, from 11-12 April 2005 and adopted the definition as follows: “The African Diaspora consists of peoples of African origin living outside the continent, irrespective of their citizenship and nationality and who are willing to contribute to the development of the continent and building of the African Union.” This definition was adopted at the next Ordinary Session of Council and Assembly in July 2005. The definition has attracted some criticisms. Though it was adopted by consensus, two delegations at the meeting felt strongly on the need for a two-part definition, one of which would capture the academic or intellectual aspects and the other that would be related to the political needs of the Union. Another delegation insisted on the need to add “permanently” to “ living outside the continent.” Thereafter, others have argued that the phrase “willingness to contribute to the development of the continent and the building of the African Union” should be left out. Nothing should be demanded or expected from the Diaspora. They should simply be recognized ipso facto as is the case with the Jewish and Israeli Diaspora. The criticisms are useful but they do not sufficiently address the complexity of the subject. The definition was arrived at after serious and deep reflection. The Experts agreed that any working definition must combine the following key characteristics as necessary and sufficient conditions.

A. Bloodline and/ or heritage: the Diaspora should consist of people living outside the continent whose ancestral roots or heritage are in Africa

B. Migration: The Diaspora should be composed of people of African heritage, who migrated from or are living outside the continent. In this context, three trends of migration were identified- pre-slave trade, slave trade, and post-slave trade or modern migration:

C. The principle of inclusiveness. The definition must embrace both ancient and modern Diaspora; and

D. The commitment to the African cause: The Diaspora should be people who are willing to be part of the continent (or the African family)

The AU definition comprises all these elements. A two-part definition would not be a working definition. Also, the distinction between the academic and political in this instance will be artificial. The AU is intrinsically a political and economic organization. Adding “permanently” before those “leaving outside” will imply that economic migrants or the modern African Diaspora would not be part of the working definition. This would be discriminatory and would also ignore an important and dynamic element of the Diaspora community. The final criticism regarding implied commitment of the Diaspora to rebuilding the African Union ignores the debate and decision of the Assembly of African Heads of States at the 1st Extra-Ordinary Summit of the Union in January 2003 which allied the Diaspora project to the building of the Union. This is not to imply that the AU definition of the African Diaspora is written in stone. It is a working definition and working definitions can be revised or improved upon if there are ample justifications for it. The Diaspora Initiative would always be work in progress and any work in progress would involve refinements of working models. . . .

Our organizational approach is to enable the Diaspora to organize itself with AU support within the framework provided by executive organs of the Union, the Council and Assembly and with guidance of Member States of the Union within these organs. The approach has not been without its difficulties. The Diaspora programme has created a phenomenon of rising expectations among the family abroad. This is laudable because it proves commitment. Yet, there are obvious signs of impatience. Moreover, civil society formations have not fully appreciated the organizational demands and imperatives of the AU. More often than not, the AU Commission is the whipping board for associated anger and frustrations. This is a burden that we are happy to bear.

More disturbing still is that there is some competition for power and influence within the Diaspora communities. This is a normal human disposition except that we see tendencies that can prove disruptive and which we must all try to rise above. There are some elements of the Diaspora within the US that wish to assume the natural leadership of the Diaspora agenda and to organize and centralize the Diaspora effort.

Discussions at the Expert Workshop in Trinidad and Tobago provided clear evidence that such apparent paternalism would undermine the general effort.

The challenge of organizing the Diaspora movement must embrace the need for autonomous regional coalitions to evolve and federate, if willing, but only by consent, at hemispheric levels, as may be deemed appropriate. The success of the Diaspora initiative, (to be assured) must dissuade focus on power blocs and stress an organizing principle based on democracy, within and among regions. . . .

At the continent – Diaspora level, the focus must be on building bridges across the Atlantic with an organizational emphasis on commitment, common cause and reciprocal advantages. The Commission and the Union must encourage the formation and consolidation of cooperative structures for mutual collaboration as inputs for the next wider Pan-African Congress.

Declaration of the Global African Diaspora Summit south africa 2012

”In the area of political cooperation, we commit to the following:

h) Strengthen the participation of the Diaspora population in the affairs of the African Union so as to enhance its contributions towards the development and integration agenda of the continent;

j) Encourage African Union Member States to urgently ratify the Protocol on the Amendments to the Constitutive Act, which, inter alia, invites the African Diaspora, an important part of our continent, to participate in the building of the African Union;

k) Encourage the Diaspora to organize themselves in regional networks and establish appropriate mechanisms that will enable their increasing participation in the affairs of the African Union as observers and eventually, in the future, as a sixth region of the continent that would contribute substantially to the implementation of policies and programmes.

n) Support efforts by the AU to accelerate the process of issuing the African Union passport, in order to facilitate the development of a transnational and transcontinental identity;

IMPLEMENTATION AND FOLLOW-UP

We adopt the following implementation and follow-up mechanism/strategy:

8. Agree to set up a Diaspora Advisory Board, which will address overarching issues of concern to Africa and its Diaspora such as reparations, right to return and follow up to WCAR Plan of Action, amongst others;

The African Union’s diplomacy of the diaspora: Context, challenges and prospects

AU 50th ANNIVERSARY SOLEMN DECLARATION may 2013

We, the Heads of State and Government of the African Union assembled to celebrate the Golden Jubilee of the OAU/AU established in the city of Addis Ababa, Ethiopia on 25 May 1963,

Evoking the uniqueness of the history of Africa as the cradle of humanity and a centre of civilization, and dehumanized by slavery, deportation, dispossession, apartheid and colonialism as well as our struggles against these evils, which shaped our common destiny and enhanced our solidarity with peoples of African descent;

Recalling with pride, the historical role and efforts of the Founders of the Pan African Movement and the nationalist movements, whose visions, wisdom, solidarity and commitment continue to inspire us;

Reaffirming our commitment to the ideals of Pan-Africanism and Africa’s aspiration for greater unity, and paying tribute to the Founders of the Organization of African Unity (OAU) as well as the African peoples on the continent and in the Diaspora for their glorius and successful struggles against all forms of oppression, colonialism and apartheid; . . . .

Stressing our commitment to build a united and integrated Africa;

Guided by the vision of our Union and affirming our determination to “build an integrated, prosperous and peaceful Africa, driven and managed by its own citizens and representing a dynamic force in the international arena”; . .

Guided by the principles enshrined in the Constitutive Act of our Union and our Shared Values . . . .

ACKNOWLEDGE THAT: . . .

III. The implementation of the integration agenda; the involvement of people, including our Diaspora in the affairs of the Union; the quest for peace and security. . . remain challenges.

WE HEREBY DECLARE:

A. On the African Identity and Renaissance
i) Our strong commitment to accelerate the African Renaissance by ensuring
the integration of the principles of Pan Africanism in all our policies and
initiatives;
ii) Our unflinching belief in our common destiny, our Shared Values and the
affirmation of the African identity; the celebration of unity in diversity and the
institution of the African citizenship;
iii) Our commitment to strengthen AU programmes and Member States
institutions aimed at reviving our cultural identity, heritage, history and Shared
values, as well as undertake, henceforth, to fly the AU flag and sing the AU
anthem along with our national flags and anthems;
iv) Promote and harmonize the teaching of African history, values and Pan
Africanism in all our schools and educational institutions as part of advancing
our African identity and Renaissance;
v) Promote people to people engagements including Youth and civil society
exchanges in order to strengthen Pan Africanism.

B. The struggle against colonialism and the right to self-determination of
people still under colonial rule

i) The completion of the decolonization process in Africa; to protect the right to
self-determination of African peoples still under colonial rule; solidarity with
people of African descend and in the Diaspora
in their struggles against racial
discrimination; and resist all forms of influences contrary to the interests of the
continent; . . .

C. On the integration agenda
Our commitment to Africa‟s political, social and economic integration agenda, and in this
regard, speed up the process of attaining the objectives of the African Economic
Community and take steps towards the construction of a united and integrated Africa.
Consolidating existing commitments and instruments, we undertake, in particular, to:

i) Speedily implement the Continental Free Trade Area; ensure free movement
of goods, with focus on integrating local and regional markets as well as
facilitate African citizenship to allow free movement of people through the
gradual removal of visa requirements;

ii) Accelerate action on the ultimate establishment of a united and integrated
Africa, through the implementation of our common continental governance,
democracy and human rights frameworks. Move with speed towards the
integration and merger of the Regional Economic Communities as the building
blocks of the Union.

Global African Stakeholders Diaspora Convention, Washington DC, 19- 22 November 2015

DECISION ON FREE MOVEMENT OF PERSONS AND THE AFRICAN PASSPORT AT THE 27th Ordinary Session in Kigali, Rwanda in July 2016

Protocol to the Treaty Establishing the African Economic Community Relating to Free Movement of Persons, Right of Residence and Right of Establishment at the 29th Ordinary Session of the Assembly of Heads of State and Government held in Addis Ababa in January/February 2018

“REITERATING our shared values which promote the protection of human and people’s rights as provided in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights of 1948 and the African Charter on Human and Peoples Rights which guarantees the right of an individual to freedom of movement and residence;

GUIDED by our common vision for an integrated, people-centered and politically united continent and our commitment to free movement of people, goods and services amongs the Member States as an enduring dedication to Pan Afrianism and African integration as reflected in Aspiration 2 of the African Union Agenda 2063;

RECALLING our commitment under article 4(2)(i) of the Treaty Establishing the Econmic Community, to gradually remove obstacles to the free movement of persons, goods, services and capital and the right of residence and establishment among Member States:” [Siphiwe note: Here should be inserted, FURTHER RECALLING Article 3(q) to the Constitutive Act of the African Union to ““invite(s) and encourage(s) the full participation of Africans in the Diaspora in the building of the African Union in its capacity as an important part of our Continent.” ]

NOTING FURTHER the decision of the Peace and Security Council adopted at its 661st meeting (PSC/PR/COMM.1 (DCLX) held on 23rd February 2017 in Addis Ababa, Ethiopia where the Council acknowledged that the benefits of free movement of people, goods and services far outweigh the real and potential security and economic challenges that may be perceived or generated;

REAFFIRMING our belief in our common destiny, shared values and the affirmation of the African identity, the celebration of unity in diversity and the institution of the African citizenship as expressed in the Solemn Declaration of the 50th Anniversary adopted by the 21st Ordinary Session of the Assembly of Heads of State and Government in Addis Ababa on 23rd May, 2013;

MINDFUL of the decision of the Assembly adopted in July 2016 in Kigali, Rwanda (Assembly?AU/Dec.607(XXVII) welcoming the launch of the African Passport and urging Member States to adopt the African Passport and to work closely with the African Union Commission to facilitate the processes towards its issuance at the citizen level based on international , continental and citizen policy provisions and continental design and specifications:

HAVE AGREED as follows:

Article 3 PRINCIPLES

  1. The free movement of persons, right of residence and right of establishment in Member States shall be guided by the principles guiding the African Union provided in article 4 of the Constittutive Act.

Article 5 PROGRESSIVE REALIZATION

  1. The free movement of persons, right of residence and right of establishment shall be achieved progressively through the following phases:

(a) phase one, during which States Parties shall implement the right of entry and abolition of visa requirements;

(b) phase two, during which States Parties shall implement the right of residence;

(c) phase three, during which States Parties shall implement the right of establishment

Article 10 AFRICAN PASSPORT

  1. States Parties, shall adopt a travel document called “African Passport” and shall work closely with the Commission to facilitate the processes towards the issuance of this Passport to their citizens.

  2. The Commission shall provide technical support to Member States to enable them to produce and issue the African Passport to their citizens.

  3. The African Passport shall be based on international, continental and national policy provisions and standards and on a continental design and specifications.

Article 16 RIGHT OF RESIDENCE

  1. Nationals of a Member State shall have the right of residence in the territory of any Member State in accordance with the laws of the host Member State.

  2. A national of a Member State taking up residence in another Member State may be accompanied by a spouse and dependants.

  3. States Parties shall gradually implement facourable policies and laws on residence for nationals for nationals of other Member States.

AGREEMENT ESTABLISHING THE AFRICAN CONTINENTAL FREE TRADE AREA - MARCH 21, 2018

CONCEPT NOTE African Union Continental Symposium on the Implementation of the International Decade for People of African Descent 18-20 September 2018 Accra/Cape Coast, Ghana


”The African Union Designation of the African Diaspora as the 6th Region of Africa The African Union Commission through its Citizens and Diaspora Directorate (CIDO) has instituted a program of Regional Consultative Conferences (RCCs) as a vehicle to enable the African Union to consult with the various Diaspora stakeholders around the world to give practical meaning to the designation of the African Diaspora as the 6th Region of the continent. Through this mechanism, CIDO has established and/or supported a growing number of AUaffiliated diaspora networks around the world, including in the Caribbean, Canada, Australia and Europe.”


Resolution on Africa’s Reparations Agenda and The Human Rights of Africans In the Diaspora and People of African Descent Worldwide - ACHPR/Res.543 (LXXIII) 2022

Dec 12, 2022

The African Commission on Human and People’s Rights, meeting at its 73rd Ordinary Session held in Banjul, The Gambia, from 21 October 2022 – 9 November 2022. 

Recalling its mandate to promote and protect human and peoples' rights in Africa under Article 45 of the African Charter on Human and Peoples' Rights (the African Charter);  

Recalling also the decision of the Assembly of the African Union to invite and encourage the full participation of the African diaspora as an important part of the Continent, in the building of the African Union; 

Noting the commitment of members states in the African Union Diaspora Programme of Action of: (a) engaging developed countries with a view to creating favourable regulatory mechanisms governing migration, and to address concerns of African immigrants in diaspora communities; (b) working for the full implementation of the Plan of Action of the United Nations World Conference against racism;  (c): engaging developed countries to address the political and socio-economic marginalization of diaspora communities in their country of domicile; and (d): strengthening the implementation of legislation and other measures aimed at eradicating child trafficking, human trafficking, child labour, exploitation of women and children in armed conflicts and other modern forms of slavery. 

Reaffirming the Durban Declaration and Programme of Action as a comprehensive framework addressing racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia, and related intolerance; 

Acknowledging the significance of the International Decade for People of African Descent (2015 – 2024) in advancing recognition, justice and development of people of African descent worldwide;

Reaffirming the obligations of States under the African Charter on Human and People’s Rights and relevant international human rights instruments, in particular the International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination; 

Recognizing that the human rights situation of Africans in the diaspora and people of African descent worldwide remains an urgent concern; 

Expressing concern that Africans and people of African descent continue to suffer systemic racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia and related intolerance and other violations of their human rights; 

Noting the emergence of contemporary forms of enslavement of Africans and people of African descent globally including in the Middle East and Arabo-Persian Gulf states; 

Affirming that accountability and redress for legacies of the past including enslavement, the trade and trafficking of enslaved Africans, colonialism and racial segregation is integral to combatting systemic racism and to the advancement of the human rights of Africans and people of African descent

Taking note of the ongoing discussions the calls from the African continent and Africa’s diaspora for reparations for legacies of the past including the trade and trafficking of enslaved Africans, colonialism and racial segregation; 

Welcomes the reports of the United Nations Working Group of experts on people of African descent and its recommendations to eliminate racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia and related intolerance faced by people of African descent and Africans in the diaspora; 

Welcomes also the recommendation by the Working Group of Experts on People of African Descent that work begins urgently to conceptualize Africa’s Reparations Agenda, seek the truth, define the harm, address the legacies of past tragedies, pursue justice and reparations and contribute to non-recurrence and reconciliation of the past; 

The Commission:

1. Reinforces its collaboration with the Working Group of Experts on People of African Descent and other United Nations special procedure mechanisms concerning the human rights situation of Africans in the diaspora and people of African descent worldwide in the framework of the Addis Ababa Road Map. 

2. Calls upon member states to:

  • promote and protect the human rights of African migrant workers worldwide including in the Middle East and Arabo-Persian Gulf states;

  • protect the human rights of migrants and ensure the right of all its citizens to receive full and authentic information about migration;

  • take measures to eliminate barriers to acquisition of citizenship and identity documentation by Africans in the diaspora;

  • to establish a committee to consult, seek the truth, and conceptualise reparations from Africa’s perspective, describe the harm occasioned by the tragedies of the past, establish a case for reparations (or Africa’s claim), and pursue justice for the trade and trafficking in enslaved Africans, colonialism and colonial crimes, and racial segregation and contribute to non-recurrence and reconciliation of the past;

  • respect their obligations under the International Convention on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination, the Durban Declaration and Programme of Action, and the Programme of Activities for the Implementation of the International Decade for People of African Descent;

  • fulfill their commitment under the African Union Diaspora Programme of Action to encourage and support its adoption and implementation, in different diaspora countries, policies that facilitate the elimination of racism and the promotion of equality of all races.

3. Invites civil society to document and report on human rights cases concerning people of African descent and Africans in the diaspora (or AU sixth region) including migrants in the Middle East and Arabo-Persian Gulf states.
 
4. Encourages civil society and academia in Africa, to embrace and pursue the task of conceptualising Africa’s reparations agenda with urgency and determination. 

Done in Banjul, The Gambia, on  9 November 2022

Share

PREPARING FOR THE AFRO DESCENDANT/NEW AFRIKAN PLEBISCITE FOR SELF DETERMINATION IN THE UNITED STATES: UNDERSTANDING THE BERLIN CONFERENCE OF 1884

The Berlin West Africa Conference was a series of negotiations (Nov. 15, 1884–Feb. 26, 1885) at Berlin, in which the major European nations met to decide all questions connected with the Congo River basin in Central Africa. Including a short break for Christmas and the New Year, the West African Conference of Berlin would last 104 days, ending on February 26, 1885. As noted by Al-Jazeera,

“In the popular imagination, the delegates are hunched over a map, armed with rulers and pencils, sketching out national borders on the continent with no idea of what existed on the ground they were parcelling out. Yet this is mistaken. The Berlin Conference did not begin the scramble. That was well under way. Neither did it partition the continent. Only one state, the short-lived horror that was the Congo Free State, came out of it – though strictly speaking it was not actually a creation of the conference.

It did something much worse, though, with consequences that would reverberate across the years and be felt until today. It established the rules for the conquest and partition of Africa, in the process legitimising the ideas of Africa as a playground for outsiders, its mineral wealth as a resource for the outside world not for Africans and its fate as a matter not to be left to Africans.

From the very start, the conference laid out the order of priorities. “The Powers are in the presence of three interests: That of the commercial and industrial nations, which a common necessity compels to the research of new outlets. That of the States and of the Powers summoned to exercise over the regions of the Congo an authority which will have burdens corresponding to their rights. And, lastly, that which some generous voices have already commended to your solicitude – the interests of the native populations.” It also resolutely refused to consider the question of sovereignty, and the legitimacy of laying claim to someone else’s land and resources.

American journalist Daniel De Leon described the conference as “an event unique in the history of political science … Diplomatic in form, it was economic in fact.” And it is true that while it was dressed up as a humanitarian summit to look at the welfare of locals, its agenda was almost purely economic. Few on the continent or in the African diaspora were fooled. A week before it closed, the Lagos Observer declared that “the world had, perhaps, never witnessed a robbery on so large a scale.” Six years later, another editor of a Lagos newspaper comparing the legacy conference to the slave trade said: “A forcible possession of our land has taken the place of a forcible possession of our person.” Theodore Holly, the first black Protestant Episcopal Bishop in the US, condemned the delegates as having “come together to enact into law, national rapine, robbery and murder”.

The outcome of the conference was the General Act (see below) signed and ratified by all but one of the 14 nations at the table, the US being the sole exception. Some of its main features were the establishment of a regime of free trade stretching across the middle of Africa, the development of which became the rationale for the recognition of the Congo Free State and its subsequent 13-year horror, the abolition of the overland slave trade as well as the principle of “effective occupation”.

The principle of “effective occupation” was to become the catalyst for military conquest of the African continent with far-reaching consequences for its inhabitants.

At the time of the conference, 80 percent of Africa remained under traditional and local control. The Europeans only had influence on the coast. Following it, they started grabbing chunks of land inland, ultimately creating a hodgepodge of geometric boundaries that was superimposed over indigenous cultures and regions of Africa. However, to get their claims over African land accepted, European states had to demonstrate that they could actually administer the area.

Continuing:

“Often, military victory proved to be the easy part. To govern, they found they had to contend with a confusing milieu of fluid identities and cultures and languages. The Europeans thus set about reorganising Africans into units they could understand and control. As Professor Terence Ranger noted, the colonial period was marked “by systematic inventions of African traditions – ethnicity, customary law, ‘traditional’ religion. Before colonialism Africa was characterised by pluralism, flexibility, multiple identity; after it, African identities of ‘tribe’, gender and generation were all bounded by the rigidities of invented tradition.”

The term Afro Descendent is the term adopted in 2002 by nineteen (19) countries at the United Nations Conference for the Rights of Minorities in La Ceiba, Honduras to recognise people of African descent as subjects of international human rights law. This meant that Afro Descendants are able to acquire rights and obligations directly in the international arena, according to the provisions of these international instruments. The term New Afrikan is defined as “African people with some Indian and European genes, living away from Africa” and expresses our racial, cultural, and social fusion of various African ethnic groups into one unique New Afrikan Nation with a common history, language, economic, life, and consciousness manifested in a community of culture and desiring freedom, self-determination and Independence much like other African nations that achieved political independence on the continent of Africa and New Afrikan nations that achieved political indpendence in the Caribbean since the 1960’s.

THE BEGINNING OF COLONIALISM AND THE SCRAMBLE FOR ARICA

FROM THE BERLIN CONFERENCE TO THE YALTA CONFERENCE

Share

PLEBISCITES IN WORLD HISTORY

From Nationalism, Referendums and Democracy: Voting on Ethnic Issues and Independence, Second Edition  edited by Matt Qvortrup

“Establishing a new state is a major political, legal and economic undertaking. Before considering the practicalities of such an endeavour, and the likely economic implications of it, it is necessary to outline some of the other examples for countries that gained their independence/seceded from other countries.

In the twentieth century, a large number for former colonies gained independence, and a good number of countries that hitherto were part of larger states seceded. While there were examples of this before the Second World War, for example, when the Philippines became independent in 1935, most new states were established after the Second World War. In this period, most of the new states were former colonies, for example, the former British Colonies, India, Kenya and the former French colonies Senegal, Togo and Cameroon.

By contrast, after the Cold War, most newly established countries were not former colonies but were areas which hitherto had been part of larger entities, for example, Croatia and Bosnia-Herzegovina in Former Yugoslavia, and Ukraine and Belarus, to name but two, which were previously part of the Soviet Union.

“The problem with these referendums is not only that they have occasionally – though not generally – resulted in war. The problem is also that many would-be states claim to have a right to self-determination, that they consider it legally right – and not just morally just – that they have a right to declare independence after a referendum. As the examples of Catalonia in 2017 and Kurdistan in the same year show, this belief is widespread, but it is based on legally dubious grounds. This duality is the subject of Peter Radan’s chapter. Surveying the legal practice from the American Civil War (which was predated by referendums on independence in several confederate states in the South), the author looks at the emerging legal doctrine surrounding independence referendums. While he acknowledges that a decisive vote may have moral force, his admirably dispassionate analysis is equally clear that there is no right to hold an independence referendum. Such votes, he shows, can only be held where there are constitutional provisions that allow them, following a peace deal or in cases where the territory in question is a former colony.

As a general rule, unilateral referendums on independence are only legally permissible in cases where the people in question have no other recourse through democratic means. Thus, the referendum in Kurdistan could conceivably be regarded as legally permissible, as Iraq is not a democratic state (as defined by Freedom House). Conversely, the Catalan referendum (notwithstanding unnecessary show of force by the Spanish Police) was not justified, as Spain is a democratic state.

It was one of the more spectacular moments in recent history, when President Carles Puigdemont issued his Declaració d’independència de Catalunya – the declaration of independence of Catalonia. It happened on the 1 October 2017, a couple of weeks after a majority of over 90% of the voters – on a less than 50% turnout – had voted for independence.

The declaration came to naught. Puigdemont’s political comrades were jailed, and he escaped to Belgium. The Spanish government dealt resolutely (some would say harshly) with, what they considered to be, an insurrection. But the Catalan crisis was not common. Indeed, the fact that it was peaceful makes it stand out. As Aleksandar Pavković writes, most declarations of independence in recent decades were made prior to military interventions by outside states which led to the eventual independence of these states. And all of these declarations, except the first three declarations in Kosovo, were made during or following the violent conflict on the territory whose independence is being proclaimed.

The fact that the Catalan Declaració failed might be explained by the fact that the territory was not supported by a strong, foreign, military power. Contrast this with declarations of independence in states with more dubious claims, such as South Ossetia and Abkhazia, and it is clear that power politics plays a stronger role than reference to ideals in international affairs.

It is one thing to declare independence, but it is quite another to be recognised. . . . But it might be useful to point out that recognition is now part of a legal process. In summary, this goes as follows: First, the state submits an application to the United Nations Secretary-General and a letter formally stating that it accepts the obligations under the UN Charter. Secondly, the Security Council considers the application. Any recommendation for admission must receive the affirmative votes of 9 of the 15 members of the Council, provided that none of its five permanent members – China, France, the Russian Federation, the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland and the United States of America – have voted against the application. Thirdly, if the Security Council recommends admission, the recommendation is presented to the General Assembly for consideration. And, finally, if membership is supported by a two-thirds majority in the General Assembly, the state in question is granted immediate membership.

In short, creating a new state is no easy task. Holding a referendum (sometimes of dubious legality), winning a majority in favour of independence, declaring independence and getting recognition, all of these steps require almost superhuman efforts. The benefits seem meagre. And yet, history has shown that the quest for national self-determination is one of the strongest urges in international politics. . . . 

Ethno-national referendums after the fall of communism

There have been 114 ethno-national referendums since the Second World War. Sixty seven were held after 1989 and of these 35 of these were held between 1989 and 1993, and were all and more or less direct consequence of the fall of communism. That such momentous events shake the political kaleidoscope is not surprising, nor, perhaps, is it surprising that the developments left their mark on legal practice. There is a bit of a sea change in the new doctrine adopted after 1989. As Matthew Craven has observed, ‘Of the new states that were to emerge in the 1990s … most held plebiscites or national polls by way of authorization’ (Craven 2010: 234). It became a norm in international law that countries ought to win approval from the people in order to be recognised as an independent state, and it became recognised – at least in democratic states – that policies of difference management required positive approval from the citizens concerned.

As we can see from Table 2.8, most of the referendums held post-1989 were held in former communist countries. And 31 of the 66 votes were held in countries that were formerly ruled by one-party communist regimes, such as Eritrea (then part of Ethiopia), Ukraine, the Baltic States and various successor states in the former Yugoslavia. Yet other ethno-national referendums were – at least indirectly – a consequence of the end of the Cold War. The nationalist aspirations of the population of East Timor were well known before the fall of communism, but for geo-political reasons, the United States supported Suharto’s regime. Once the threat from the Soviet Union was gone, the USA loosened its grip and accepted (and some would even say encouraged) the fall of the autocracy, and as a result East Timor was allowed to vote on independence in 1999 (Steele 2002).

Another interesting factor is that referendums in democratic countries (here defined at ‘Free’ following the Freedom House classification) rarely vote for independence. After the 1995 vote in Quebec, a political scientist (who later became a leader of the Liberal Party!) wrote,

“There has never been a single case of secession in democracies if we consider only the well-established ones, that is, those with at least ten consecutive years of universal suffrage. The cases most often mentioned happened only a few years after the introduction or significant expansion of universal suffrage: Norway and Sweden in 1905, Iceland and Denmark in 1918, … Secessionists never managed to split a well-established democracy through a referendum or an electoral victory. We must conclude that it is very hard for them to achieve and maintain the magic number of 50 per cent support (Dion 1996: 269).”

20 MARCH 1921: UPPER SILESIAN PLEBISCITE (POLAND V GERMANY)

13 JANUARY 1935: THE SAAR PLEBISCITE TO REUNITE WITH GERMANY

1947 SYLHET PLEBISCITE (PAKISTAN)

6 JULY 1948 -THE KASHMIR PLEBISCITE THAT NEVER HAPPENED

1961 - SOUTHERN CAMEROONS PLEBISCITE

1986: PALAU PLEBISCITE

5 OCTOBER 1988 - CHILE - PINOCHET LOSES HIS OWN PLEBISCITE

BANGSAMORA PLEBISCITE

New Caledonia - December 2021

An independence referendum was held in New Caledonia on 4 October 2020. The poll was the second to be held under the terms of the Nouméa Accord, following a similar referendum in 2018.

Independence was rejected, with 53.26 percent of voters opposing such a change, a slight drop from the 2018 result in which 56.7 percent voted "no". Turnout was 85.69 percent. The Nouméa Accord permitted one further referendum to be held, should the Congress of New Caledonia vote for it. This third referendum was held in December 2021.

With a turnout of 85.6 percent, 53.26 percent of voters opted for "no", with the result that the islands remain French. This was a lower figure than the 2018 poll, in which 56.7 percent voted "no".[9] Results were strongly polarised geographically, with 71 percent of South Province residents rejecting independence, while the smaller other two provinces, North Province and Loyalty Islands Province, voted "yes" by 76 percent and 82 percent respectively.[27] In almost every commune, the share of "yes" votes increased.

As this was the second of three permitted independence referenda, it was expected that there may be a third and final referendum at some point before 2022.[9] Daniel Goa, of the pro-independence party Caledonian Union, expressed a hope that the shift in vote share towards the "yes" camp would lead to a successful third referendum. Meanwhile Sonia Backès, leader of Les Loyalistes, called for dialogue between the two sides although she acknowledged that it might be necessary to hold the third referendum before such a dialogue could commence.[28]

French president Emmanuel Macron expressed gratitude for the result, thanking New Caledonians for their "vote of confidence" in the Republic. He also acknowledged those who had backed independence, calling for dialogue between all sides to map out the future of the region.[27]

In April 2021, 26 pro-independence members of Congress requested that a third vote take place. On 2 June, the French government announced that the third referendum was scheduled for 12 December 2021. [29] This third referendum resulted in an overwhelming rejection of independence, with 96.49% of the electorate voting against independence and 3.51% for independence. However, turnout was significantly lower than in past referendums at only 43.90%.[2]

Share

African Liberation and the Use of Plebiscites

British Togoland - 1956

A summary of the background on the issue is as follows: A plebiscite conducted in May, 1956, under UN supervision in British Togoland resulted in a 58% majority of the votes cast (approximately 170,000 voted out of an eligible list of about 194,000) for union with the Gold Coast (Ghana) when it obtains its independence (the date is set fori"Warch 6, 1957 ). The alternative offered in the plebiscite was separation of the Togoland Trust Territory from the Gold Coast -- it had been administered as an integral part. of that colony by the British -- and its continuation in trust status pending future developments leading to eventual freedom. As a result of the plebiscite and of subsequent general elections in the combined Gold Coast-Togoland area, which gave a clear majority over all other parties for the Convention Peoples Party (CPP), the advocates of a unitary state, the British government now urges an end to trusteeship and the integration of Briti sh Togoland into Ghana as soon as it becomes fully independent.

The great majority of tre speakers in the Fourth Committee have supported the British position, but it has been opposed by some representatives of both British and French Togoland groups, particularly as the result of recent developments in French Togoland: After plans were made for tr.e plebiscite in the British Trust Territory, the French government, which previously had not encouraged any nationalist political development, suddenly announced that the French Togolanders were ready to end trusteeship and detennine their future; a law was passed granting "universal suffrage, n and four months later the UN was asked to approve a Frehch•sponsored referendum to determine whether the Togo people wished to be "independent" under a new statute (giving the Togolanders territorial, administrative, and financial "autonomy" as to local matters, with 11 common 11 affairs determined by the French Parliament and the Assembly of the French Union, in which Togoland would be represented)., or to continue under trusteeship. Under the circumstances tre Trusteeship Council refused to supervise tl':e plebiscite; the French proceeded nevertheless to hold it in October of this year and announced that over three-quarters of tre voters had approved the end of trusteeship under the proposed new statute. Togolanders who oppose this future i'or the country claim that the voters' lists were 1!fixed11 and that force and fraud were used in tr.e election, which many of them boycotted as tre only feasible means of opposition. Partly as a result of these une,xpected events in French Togoland, African opposition to integration of British Togoland into Ghana on the part of the National Liberation movement in the Ashanti area of tre Gold Coast, the Nortrern Peoples Party, the Togoland Congress, and the All-Ewe Conference has emphasized the following arguments: (1) that it would separate the two parts of Togoland forever and leave French Togoland in an untenable position with no future but absorption by the French (although a united Togoland is claimed to be a real possibility in view of tre recent political dev~lopments in the French territory, tr~ common tribal traditions of the b'we people who live in both Togolands, and the potential viability of a united Togo state); (2) that integration into neighboring Ghana is an unfortunnte precedent which might be applied to the detriment of tra Cameroons, Ruanda-Uruncli, and other trust territories; and (3) that althoughh there was an overwhelming majority for union, large blocs of Togolanders voted by considerable margins against union, so that there was no real or sufficient consent. The French government exacerbated these fears by opposing simultaneous consideration of tre future of the two Togolands in the Fourth Committee and by refusing passports to French Togolanders who wished to argue for joint consideration until such time as the future of French Togoland was specifically before tre Fourth Committee. Opponents of integration have sought variously (a) continuation of trusteeship; (b) federation with Ghana (leaving open the possibility that French Togoland might also-federate at a later date); and (c) federation with a federated (rather than unitary) Ghana. Nevertheless, it appears likely that the great rnajority of the Fourth Connnittee will approve the proposed integration. Any division among the members of the Committee will be based not on any “cold war” consideration nor on any conventional bloc (India supports and Indonesia has quasi-integration), but rather on differing views of how best to solve the partly historical problems of this area.

The General Assembly approved the British request to end the British Togoland Trusteeship and to permit the integration of the Territory into the new state of Ghana, in accordance with the results of a referendum supervised by the UN. Despite some misgivings as to the effect of this action on the possibiJ.i ty of a future union of British and French Togoland Territories, which many petitioners from both areas desired, the Assembly vote favoring the British request was 63 too. Africa-UN Bulletein 6

British Cameroons: Plebiscite Postponed in South - 1958

At the 1958 session of the General Assembly no question aroused more bitterness than that of the future of the British and French Cameroons Trust Terri tories. These territories, halves of the pre-World War I German Kanerun colony, which first became League of Nations mandates and subsequently UN trust territories, in a cultural sense comprise three, rather than two, territories: the French terri to y, the Northern British Cameroons, and the Southern British Cameroons (the latter two separated by a thin slice of Nigerian territory). Determining their future last year, the Assembly acted as if three separate territories were involved and proposed different solutions for each. The 1958 Assembly voted to hold a plebiscite in the Northern Cameroonh this November in order to determine whether its inhabitants prefer to join an independent Nigeria (on October 1, 1960) or to defer a final decision on the territory's future until a later date. Surprisingly, the results of the plebiscite announced November 9 indicated that the people of the Northern Cameroons wished to have the trusteeship continue until a later time. Another plebiscite will be held after the French Cameroons and Nigeria have achieved independence, in 1960, to allow the people to choose whether they wish to join Nigeria, to join the French Cameroons, or to form an independent territory with the Southern British Cameroons. Following a bitter struggle which split the Afro-Asian bloc, the 1958 Assembly voted termination of trusteeship for the French Cameroons on January 1, 1960, when it is scheduled to receive full independence, without requiring prior elections, as demanded by the African countries. At that timeB Premier Ahijdo promised to hold elections immediately after independence; but at present he apparently needs French support to maintain order in the face of a minor rebellion presumably led by the banned UPC (Union des Populations Camerounaises). Therefore the liklihood of imme diate elections when the new state takes over its own internal security does not seem great. The uncertain state of affairs in the French Cameroons caused the difficulties the Fourth (Trusteeship) Committee faced this year in implementing its resolution of the last session relating to the Southern Cameroons. Largely as the result of elec tions held last fall in the Southern Cameroons, which brought into power the party opposing unification with Nigeria and favoring reunification of British and French Cameroons, the 1958 Assembly adopted a resolution requiring a plebiscite to be held this winter to determine the future of the area. The exact wording of the plebiscite question was left to be determined by this session of the Assembly, the hope being that the two major political parties could agree upon a satisfactory formula in the intervening year. However, at the beginning of this Assembly session the government leader, John Foncha, had not been able to reach any agreement with the opposition leader, E. M. L. Endeley, who favors union with Nigeria. Since Foncha's party had become frightened by the prospect of union with the French Cameroons in its current troubled state, page 2 Foncha felt obliged to ask the Fourth Committee to continue trusteeship over the Southern Cameroons until 1962, when he proposed that the plebiscite should be held. Endeley, sensing that current events were strengthening his party's position, sup ported an immediate vote. Eventually, under pressure from the Independent African States' Organization, the two leaders agreed on a plebiscite to be held between September 30, 1960, and March, 1961, in which the choice would be between achieving independence by joining an independent Nigeria or an independent Republic of the (Frenco Cameroons. Surprisingly, many delegates objected strongly to the temporary continuation of trusteeship over the Southern Cameroons, even with the consent of the major parties there. The objections of the outspoken Indian delegation were based on the doubtful legality of the resulting alteration of the British Cameroons trusteeship agreement (although the UN legal counsel did not have such doubts) and on the "bad precedent as to partition" (of the entire British Cameroons territory) which might be establsihed thereby. It seems possible that the Indians were still smarting from the rebuff handed the UN's 195 Visiting Mission to the Cameroons, which included an Indian delegate; its recommendation to unite the Northern Cameroons to Nigeria without a plebiscite was overruled, and its acceptance of the Ahijdo government of the French Cameroons as.fully representative was sharply challenged by all the African states, who demanded UN-supervised general elections prior to independence and the end of trusteeship. (It is clear that the Africans will again raise the question of elec tions in the French Cameroons if they have an opportunity.) Ultimately the Fourth Committee adopted the compromise worked out by Foncha and Edeley, including a provision that eligible voters should be limited to persons born in the Southern Cameroons or one of whose parents was born there. (This will bar many Nigerians and French Cameroonians whose interests do not necessarily coincide with those of the South Camerooians.) The General Assembly approved the draft reso lution on October 16.

South African Plebiscite Proposal for South West Africa - 1971

Share

OUTCOME OF SECOND PREPARATORY MEETING FOR THE 8TH PAN AFRICAN CONGRESS PART 1 IN HARARE, ZIMBABWE

From April 14 to the 17th 2023, the government of Zimbabwe will be hosting the “8th Pan African Congress Part 1 (8PAC1)”. One of the main Agenda items is the establishment of a continental pathway to citizenship for the descendants of the formerly enslaved. On Saturday, February 25, The Second Preparatory Meeting for the 8PAC1 discussed the agenda item, Establishment of AU 6th Region Headquarters . Below are the comments culled from the Questionnaire soliciting input on the location of the proposed AU 6th Region Headquarters for the Zero Draft Resolutions working document for the 8PAC1 Harare Declaration.

It was also decided that the following committees would be set up:

6th Region Headquarters Committee - to create specifications/criteria for host city nominations

ADD YOUR CRITERIA INPUT USING THE FORM AT THE BOTTOM OF THE PAGE!!!

INPUTS CONCERNING LOCATION OF PROPOSED AU 6TH REGION HEADQUARTERS

Share

Outcome of the First Preparatory Meeting for the 8th Pan African Congress Part 1 in Harare, Zimbabwe

Later this year, the government of Zimbabwe will be hosting the “8th Pan African Congress Part 1 (8PAC1)”. One of the main Agenda items is the establishment of a continental pathway to citizenship for the descendants of the formerly enslaved. On Sunday, February 19, The First Preparatory Meeting for the 8PAC1 discussed the agenda item, Pathway to Dual-Citizenship for Continental Diaspora and Descendants of the formerly enslaved . Below are the comments culled from the Questionnaire soliciting input on citizenship for the Zero Draft Resolutions working document for the 8PAC1 Harare Declaration.

It should be recalled that in 1996 the Economic and Social Council of the United Nations granted consultative status to the Rastafari Movement who were represented by Ras Bongo Spear and Ras Boanerges. [Note: it is unclear which organization received the ngo consultative status. The Jamaican Observer, November 24, 1996 says it was the International Rastafarian Development Society while others say it was the IRGC and still others say it was the Barbados-based Africa Hall ngo.] In 1998, at the United Nations in Geneva, Switzerland, Ras Bongo Spear and Ras Boanerges ask: “What is the responsibility of the nations to Africans in the diaspora with respect to the age-old quest for Repatriation?” Said the Rasses, “Our advice from that committee and from the UN Office of Human Rights . . .. was simple.

The United Nations as an organization of states cannot at this time in any serious way entertain the issue of repatriation without the consent of the African states and the African Governments to which we want to go in Africa. So we were directed to seek the support of African governments with respect to the acquisition of land. And after that, the matter can be brought up again to the United Nations and the issue of [settlement] can take place.”

Pathway 1: Investment 

Citizenship granted anywhere in Africa to African Diasporans who have bought a home, started a business, or invested $100,000 to $200,000 in one way or another in the country of their choice.

Inputs:

“I think this pathway will be rejected by most African Diasporans. It doesn’t reflect or respect the principle of “Right to Return” and seems elitist and class based. This could further divide African people. Most Diasporans can not afford this investment upfront and many if not most will not want to be a kind of “indentured servant” for three years to qualify.”

“I believe this requirement may be a bit of a hinderance for many in the Diaspora. There appears to be an underlying assumption that many can meet this requirement. That would be a poor assumption, if implemented as an only option. Yes, it is a pathway for some. However it may be perceived as a barrier to entry and should not be implemented alone in any African territory. Otherwise, I think this is a valuable offer for those who can accommodate the requirement, granted that there are multiple options for entry.”

“Favors the already privileged class. Would not favor this as the only pathway.”

“This sounds good for the economy and the repatriate, somewhat extensive in recommendations but fair.”

“It is a positive action plan for people who wish to move. However, there should be transparency. Some countries are lacking in the administration department, they need to be clear on the timelines. Do you get citizenship 2 minths from application?”

“I'm not opposed to this if I was looking for more than just to learn more about my heritage.”

“Is it possible to change the word "bought" a home to "Have" a home? There are people who may have been gifted properties.”

“This is a great idea. I particularly like the part about buying a home or investing in a business. That would open the door to many and would require us to have actual skin in the game.”

“I think that is fine. I invest through M1 finance.”

“This is limiting. One shouldn't be barred from getting to their home simply because they do not have money to purchase a home or start a business.”

“Yes its a good idea but look at us in Africa we are paying $500 thousand to invest in DRC but you are suggesting $200 thousand.”

“Yes, I think this is good but reduced the investment amount.”

“The $ amount is high and may be unaffordable for the average Diaspora member.”

“Home investment, and jobs for African countries.”

“This path should be approved in general, but streamlined and made less expensive.”

“Foreign direct investment is a way for Africa to support all continents. We've supported every continent for years, there are no African cellphones or cars, for this only for creating an extraction economy which isn't necessary anymore, land, mines and businesses can receive investment with easier access.”

“I suggest lowing the investment amount..”

“One concern with buying a home is whether or not you actually own it. I read that in Ghana and Kenya it was only a fifty to ninety-nine year lease. One of the reasons for going home to Africa is to have a sense of belonging. As a retiree having so many resources (land and home) tied up in property that you cannot pass on to your children is unacceptable.”

“I like this, it shows commitment from those who are coming back home and have the money to invest.”

“Since the intention is to develop Africa then the investment should be directed to the specific area what needs development. But this should be for Africans or the descendants of Africans that left on a volunteered vs forced departure. It should not be used as a requirement for African descendants whose parents were departed by enslavement. To keep in line with the UN resolution already approve the domicile of an African who have been the victims of enslavement retain the domicile of the last free parent.”

“The investment amount should be at minimum $50,000. Given the fact that it is not just an ordinary foreigner but a diaspora to whom special privileges should be considered.”

“Investment must be a smaller amount younger people who want to move and bring their ideas should have that opportunity. As ADOS (African descendants of Slaves) we didn't have much when our fore fathers built America. We must found a way for anyone who has a will we should making a way.”

“is it possible to include land acquisition too... Land is everything and should be first... our Ancestors have been taken from Their Land...”

“I plan to take this path in the next 2 years but will also be bringing my retired mother with me who has her own savings and will not require assistance. I am an entrepreneur but need to know that I move to the continent and quickly setup and run my business from the African country of my choice. Waiting on full citizenship to be able to have full access and liveable business expenses is extreme important to me. I can't move to an African country and afford to walk away from my business because of expired visas and exorbitant setup fees. I'm not sure if there is a residency step that can be implemented as part if the process for others who are entrepreneurs and have dependents moving with them but it needs to be considered. This includes access to business registration, drivers license, internet access etc without hassles because I'm not a citizen or additional fees. Same with buying and building a home, I don't want to rent especially since I'm a home owner now so I need the access to a lifestyle of a citizen while I wait for paper work-what are the options they can provide once we decide we want to stay. I also plan to invest or expand my business into other African countries, will not having citizenship cost me more as well?! I'm thinking of Canada and the USA where we can expand our business across provinces and states without concerns of citizenship or extra fees or have to deal with citizenship or residency. How can I grow my businesses and create jobs across the continent without concerns of extra fees and restrictions tied to citizenship and residency. Also processing time needs to be considered. If this is a true effort to accommodate us, it needs to be timrly and efficient. I can't financially afford to wait 3 years, then take another 3 or more years to process the paperwork. Efficient processes need to be put into place and support for local businesses like internet, banks, real-estate, motor vehicle licenses, electricity companies, etc. need to be given directives on how to handle our service applications as new residents/new citizens/etc... we need an end-to-end cross-functional process where all parties impacted are involved. This means laws and legal accountability and ways for us to be protected if local companies try to take advantage of us. This is like the issue we have in North American companies who claim they want to hire "diverse talent" but don't prepare the company to welcome the talent and endure they want to stay... Ghana is loosing face by doing this exact thing and we can't turn the Diaspora off behaving like thus. Thank you for starting this conversation.”

“I suggest a smaller amount investment amount, otherwise it may be seen as the elite can gain automatic citizenship while others take longer. If the amounts prove to be too low, we could propose a lower amount (example $10,000 - $25,000 plus 1 year residency). I suggest special considerations if investments are made in African businesses. Include children up to a certain age (example 22) gain citizenship with the parents. Questions: -- If a home is purchased using a down payment and payment for a certain period of time (example 5 years), would the citizenship only come when the final payment is made? -- Would paying home/apartment rental costs count as investment?”

“Please consider a tier step process where organizations, i.e., faith based organizations, charity foundations, and co-ops, whose members would be allowed citizenship if their organization have invested or plan to invest funds in Africa based on the following scale:
1 - 10 members, $20,000. 11- 25 members, $50,000. 25 - 50 members, $75,000. 51 - 75 members, $100,000. 76 - 100 members, $125,000. 101 members and over, $150,000.”

“For this pathway, I am in agreement with home ownership and business start up as a way to citizenship. I however feel that the $100,000 or $200,000 investment is a bit too steep. Again, the bar should not be placed too high for persons of African descent to gain citizenship in any country of their choice on the African continent. I suggest investments between $50,000 to $100,000.”

“This should be a lower amount so as not to be exclusive”

“I believe the investment of skill should be added. For example, one may not be able to buy a home, start a business or invest $100,000 but may have the skill of teaching or plumbing etc.”

“This should be an "alternate" option; definitely not the primary one; even with this being a consideration, it will "exclude" many in the diaspora with the investment amount that high. Recommend the amount be lowered considerably to not exceed $10,000 USD.”

Pathway 2: Work

Citizenship granted anywhere in Africa to African Diasporans who have worked for three years in the country of their choice.

Inputs:

“This is a great option for anyone in the African Diaspora seeking citizenship. It allows for a viable path to entry. It should also be one of the alternative paths to citizenship. I do not believe it should stand alone.”

“Many Countries will only grant you a work permit if you are working in an area that is considered to be a « skill shortage » area. Typically is you are working for three years then you are needed and established. Citizenship should be granted after this time.”

“Sounds good, and an easy fix for both Africa and the African Diasporian.”

“Good choice as you have invested time that country and have made a contribution, the commitment has been made.”

“I'm not opposed to this if I was looking for more than just to learn more about my heritage.”

“This is a wide category. What qualifies as "work." Does one have to have an employer? Is this folded into the first pathway? If one has to be eliminated we can perhaps leave this one in favor of number one.”

“I say 1 year.”

“Europe has allowed people who can prove that they have direct ancestry without any other further barriers. Citizenship should be granted ad such to allow lost and displaced people to find their ways back to their homes.”

“Already there is a lot of unemployment of in Africa after COVID 19 companies are closing down so how are we going to accommodate our brothers.”

“No I think we should be granted citizenship by just returning home to Africa.”

“Great Option.”

“The process re this path should also be streamlined and made less expensive. One should not have to apply for a residency permit along with an application for a work permit.”

“This would work well, making sure that they have multiple streams of income can also be made possible if we create a better infrastructure to help the diaspora.”

“I suggest a one-year work limit.”

“As the kidnapped children of Africa. I believe we should be granted residency from day 1 of acquiring a contract of work if our desire is to make that African country our home. After 3 years of working we should be able to be granted full citizenship.”

“I would prefer this pathway. I can bring my profession as a DNP/board certified FNP with a strong background in oncology and feel strongly that with my medical skills, I can contribute to the healthcare and wellbeing of my people.”

“I believe this is a viable alternative for those who wish to use it. One should, in my opinion, be a willing contributor to Africa.”

“Three years is a lot especially if you have to leave the country every 3-6 months. This is good however, for people who have been living on the continent already, and already put in the time.”

“Freedom is good and per ur choice”

“The idea of work in Africa also has to be specific because people can put in work that is counter to the development of Africa. As for descendants of enslaved Africans this should not apply. We will have to put in work for ourselves in order to survive. So those who left Africa on a volunteer departure to work or make money should share with Africa as a requirement for citizenship.”

“I think two years is a sufficient time.”

“I'm a retired paralegal and would be willing to work in some capacity, however, we discussed during the zoom making an exception for those of us who are purchasing homes and bringing our pensions.”

“from my research, and from what I have learned from those of the diaspora who are currently on Mother Land that entrepreneurship is the only real alternative...”

“I suggest making sure to include working remotely while in the country. Question -- Will this require 3 consecutive years, or 3 years within a certain time frame?”

“African Diasporas should be granted for those who have worked for at least 3 years regardless of where they may elect to reside moving forward.”

“The idea of working in Africa to gain citizenship is a great idea, however, I believe as diasporans it should be a maximum 2 years to gain citizenship via this pathway. We should have preferential treatment as people of African descent. The integration and unity of persons of African descent globally should be paramount and all avenues to do so should be given the utmost priority.”

“Agreed with a more detailed definition of the work to qualify”

“This is another "alternate" option to have; however, 1 year of work should be sufficient.”

“I agree with this, however 1-2 years is sufficient.”

Pathway 3: Residency

Citizenship granted anywhere in Africa to African Diasporans that have lived in the country of their choice for three years.  For example, students, researchers, NGO workers, etc.

Inputs:

“This is a great option for anyone in the African Diaspora seeking citizenship. It allows for a viable path to entry. It should also be one of the alternative paths to citizenship. I do not believe it should stand alone.”

“If you have been a resident for 3 years than typically you would have been granted a residency permit. Typically a country will consider Citizenship after five years of being a resident. Three years for the diaspora or even two years l think is fair.”

“Yes, for those needing to get on their feet first, perfect”

“Another good plan. Lots of people have done this, NGOs etc, so their commitment is already there.
They have made contribution in person, in kind and in time.”

“I'm not opposed to this if I was looking for more than just to learn more about my heritage.”

“Bought land (50 Year lease) in Ghana and native Ghanaian squared on the land built home on it and land may have been sold by different chiefs. Discouraged any further attempts to relocate to Ghana.”

“This would be great. I would qualify it by adding with allowances for trips outside the country for up to 25% of the year. So, for people who are working or have investments in the U.S. they have the option of traveling outside the country without losing their pathway status.”

“I say 1 year once again.”

“Europe has allowed people who can prove that they have direct ancestry without any other further barriers. Citizenship should be granted ad such to allow lost and displaced people to find their ways back to their homes”

“Good idea”

“Given the opportunity to accept or reject citizenship at the airports”

“Great Option”

“Retiree bringing investments”

“This and the other pathways should be adopted, but the process her, as in the others should be streamlined and also made less expensive. Also, a shorter time period to the achievement of this should be recommend, and the waiting period for this should be reduced.”

“Their documentation can be sorted by PAC for their residency to be permitted easier if the PAC and ADDI has a formal partnership to handle those processes to make it less complicated.”

“I suggest a one-year residency.”

“Absolutely agree. Ties in with my answer for pathway 2. Only addition once again, would be to grant those who want it, Residency from day 1 if they are able to prove they can support themselves.”

“If indeed residency is a requirement (not domicile) then it is also reasonable.”

“This is very similar to Pathway 2 Is it possible to just combine 2 and 3 into one pathway. It stands to reason, if the worked there for 3 years then you probably have lived there for 3 years also.”

“3 years is to long for people who are the descendants of enslaved Africans. If taken into consideration the time the traditional rulers took to give the Tabom people of Ghana when they returned, they were given land and no request for visa or documents to fill out for citizenship. Or the people of the Armistad no visa or citizenship so why us now need those documents?”

“Again, I think two years is sufficient to determine whether the person has added value, also taking into consideration of the fact that the right to return should not be a long and drawn out period of time as if the person is a stranger to the motherland. While he or she was never born in the mother Africa, his or her forefathers would have contributed immensely to Africa before they were taken away two enriched the lives of the Colonial masters. Reducing the period of time to two years is a good gesture to the diasporas of Africa's empathy towards our cry to return home.”

“I began a 501 3c praise dance ministry in 2005 and in 2006 we sponsored an orphanage in Kenya where we visited and brought supplies I.e. schools supplies, toys , and other necessary items. We have also supported them monetarily each year by fundraising. Can something like this be included in this section.“

““Is it 3 years straight or could it be spread as well ? 3 years is not too long, (and it is a good opportunity to create or review the current "NGO" structures or create pan-African ones...)”

“My daughter has just started highschool and I would need high-school access to registration and no fees such as foreign student etc.”

“I suggest the following:
-- Automatic 1 year residency (for those that may not have an extended residency permit).
-- Permanent residency after 1 year.
-- Citizenship after 3 years.
-- Parents status can apply to children that may go outside the country for advance education (college/university/training) during the required residency periods.
-- Lower fees for residency and citizenship.
Question
-- Will this require 3 consecutive years, or 3 years within a certain time frame?”

“I find this option to be reasonable.”

“This pathway should be reduced to 2 years for persons of African descent in any circumstance whether they be students, NGOs or researchers.”

“Agreed with a more detailed criteria for NGO return to the community. For example, working for the Clinton foundation in Haiti should not be deemed as meeting the qualification given how little it returned to the Haitian people.”

“This is another "alternate" option to have for the diaspora; those who can show "previous" residency should be allowed to have that time counted as well.”

Pathway 4: DNA/ Right to Return 

Citizenship granted to a specific country to African Diasporans that have taken an African Ancestry DNA test and have either a maternal or paternal African lineage.

Inputs:

“This makes the most sense to me. It respects the right to return as well as the principle of “each under his/her own vine and fig tree. It achieves lineage restoration, balanced repatriation and development.”

“This should be an automatic qualifier for exercising right to return rights. It can stand alone, but again should not be the only path as it may still present a significant barrier to access for too many in the African Diaspora. It is easily accessible by African Americans in particular. Consideration should be given for the accessibility challenges this may present.”

“I think this should happen. The country may want to protect itself however with review of any criminal background and granting a resident permit for a period of 1 year. They might want to receive from you a $1500 deposit in case they have to deport you for any reason during that one year. At the end of the one year, if you can show that you are stable with no criminal activity, then citizenship is granted and your deposit returned”

“This should be automatic.”

“This is a right, it should not be questioned.”

“I like this path the best. I should not have to pay to return to where I was stolen from. At this time, I'm not interested in living or working in my homeland. I would like to visit many times to learn more about my lineage.”

“I think DNA as a mechanism of entitlement to return to an Afrikan country of origin has severe limitations. Eligibility for Afrikan citizenship is ultimately a political and cultural issue that will never be satisfactorily answered by a turn to genetics. I actually believe that a reparations approach has to undo rather than reinforce the harms of colonisation and dispossession including the 1884-1885 Berlin Conference consensus that created states in the image and likeness of our peoples colonisers. I support the notion of a Pan-Afrikan citizenship rather than return to an existing country as a reparations measure. We cannot simply seek to fit into nation-construct that were designed to atomise our indigenous Afrikan sovereign peoples power. The Afrika many of us want as Pan-Afrikanists is premised on recognising indigenous forms of nationhood and governance as political entities and not simply the elevation of so-called distinct ethnic groups. Afrikan ancestry DNA tests do not provide foolproof answers to questions of Afrikan identity. Ethnicity is a sociocultural factor, it’s fluid, and it changes over time. It’s not purely biological.”

“Have been identified as Temne in Seirra leon. Have yet to pursue citizenship.”

“This is a hot topic. Many people do not trust DNA testing due to Medical exploitation by the west on our people.”

“This is the one I am most in favor of, with qualifications. This one can be pathway if the person satisfies at least one of the other pathways. This would make sure it is not used a loophole by other people who have not identified as African descended all their lives. Many non - African identified people have minute portions of African DNA. I don't believe they should qualify as returnees.”

“Good Idea.”

“That shouldn't be mandatory.”

“Great Option”

“My lineage is from Africa.”

“This should be the easiest path and the Sierra Leone process should be put forward for adoption.”

“This can work if African ancestry DNA is easily accessible through PAC. I would like an ancestry DNA test for myself and royal ancestry test as well just to make sure, I just need to have a place that does that.”

“I agree with DNA/ Right to Return.”

“African Enslavement harmed the entire continent of Africa. Black African Diaposans with DNA should be granted Universal Dual African Citizenship to All African Nations. To engage is a specific Country Right Of Return" is a false argument that should be avoided at all cost.”

“Absolutely agree.
This should be an automatic right to claim Citizenship.
Our ancestors are common to all who live in Africa today. We have as much right to claim Africa as our home. We should not have to beg. We should not have to jump through hoops. If our blood shows we come from a certain tribe we should be able to return to that Country without question. It is indeed worse than being kidnapped and sold from our home 400-500 years ago (by colonisers and other tribes) that now our own African Governments continues to perpetuate those wrongs that were committed against us by maintaining and enforcing the barriers to our return home and to once again join our brothers and sisters. To be denied by your own always cuts the deepest.”

“This also is another pathway I would glady take. Especially since I have already done my DNA testing through Africanancestry.com. I and my brother both did the test so we are aware of our maternal (matriclan) and paternal (patriclan) ancestry. It was one of most liberating things I've ever done for myself.”

“I SUPPORT QUIALITY BLACK OWNED AND OPERATED BUSINESS. The requirement of a single evaluator (African ancestry) is not viable as one should be able to verify with other companies the validity of their tests. IF THIS DATA EXIST SHOW IT. I understand the desire to use a company that claims its baseline is more African than any other, but where is the data. if such exist, then without a doubt it is the first choice. it is important when one is making life (permanent ) choices, this is important.”

“I agree, it should also be for anywhere in Africa especially if your DNA belongs to various countries.”

“I like this and am glad this is being considered as an option to citizenship. My question would be is it required that people become citizens only of the countries/peoples to where or to whom their DNA is traced? I.e., if I'm found to have Ibo ancestry, I'm limited to Nigerian citizenship or wherever Ibos live? If I have it from Guinea Conakry, I can only become a citizen of Guinea Conakry, etc.? Thanks.”

“This would be best for the descendants who are the descendants of Africans that were raped and lost their melanin and African physical features and characteristics of Africans.”

“This is a very good initiative. Sierra Leone is a great example and blueprint to patern from.”

“My first cousin took the African Ancestry test for me, paternal test. and the results were Portugal and Spain. Then I took the ancestry.com and 23andMe, both results were close showing the largest % in Nigeria. So, why just African Ancestry and not the others?”

“I noted that the RTR does not mention Our People who has been deported into slavery in India...
*(my DNA tests with African Ancestry come out on my mother's side as Afro-Indian descendant).”

“I have done my African Ancestry but not interested in going to Nigeria (matrican test proved 99%). Will they look at me as only eligible for Nigerian citizenship? What if Nigeria decides they will not join other countries who offer citizenship with proof. I also don't want to give up my Canadian citizenship due to future pension payments when I retire.”

“I suggest adding that the individual must have identified as African/African Descent for a certain period of time, and on official documents. Allow dual citizenship for all pathways.”

“I find this option to be reasonable and may be the most popular, especially for African Diaspora with limited financial resources.”

“Great idea to use DNA as a means to gain citizenship of an African country. However, if we want to unite the African Continent and the diaspora, persons should be free to decide which country they want to be a citizen of regardless of DNA links. We need to breakdown borders and the idea of them and us. It is WE. I do appreciate that the circumstances can be different on the ground for various reasons, but we must start somewhere.”

“For the DNA/Right to Return, Citizenship (or Residency) should be granted to the country of the person's choice not a specific country because the test proves African Ancestry not where the person's ancestors were taken. My African Ancestry Maternal test shows Guinea-Bissau, Sierra Leone, & Liberia but I feel a very high affinity to East Africa and specifically to Tanzania.
I lived in Tanzania for nine months (minus short trips to other countries) and not only did I feel at home but I met and befriended people who felt like family including one older Mama who not only looked like my late maternal grandmother but had her same behaviors and cooking skills.
That all being said, any African Descendant of Slavery (ADOS) should be granted Citizenship (or Residency until they decide) to the African country of their choice.”

“This pathway is crucial as more and more Africans in the diaspora, waking up and want to places to live work and raise their families. Someone places where they can retire in community with support and love.”

“We should not restrict it to one company. This company has many faults in their testing the are continually unresolved. All DNA tests should be accepted.”

“All Africans in diaspora should have this right. We shouldn’t have to prove anything but DNA bloodline from our fathers or mothers line. Our mothers and sisters have been raped and produced mixed seed and it’s not their fault. We need to have somewhere to go to be safe from the slavers, murderers and kidnappers. They still butcher us on the streets today like cattle or dogs in the street. I have the paternal DNA test that proves my father was Balanta.”

“This is a must and should be considered as the "primary" or "main" option for those who seek it. The "investment" has already begun once one in the diaspora has decided to find out who they truly are by DNA testing. It is with great respect, admiration, and honor to highlight what the African nation of Sierra Leone have done to do this and welcome Africans from the diaspora home. Our Ancestors demand that we be given our true, original citizenship from Mother Africa, and all the other African Heads of State must adopt the "Sierra Leone" model in this regard. Many hundreds of thousand have taken this DNA and want to be "officially" related to our ancestral homeland with "official" documentation/citizenship!”

“Please make this a more open option to settle in any country of choice once. DNA is established. The Scramble for Africa and colonization was the cause of many lines drawn, we must not conform to the mould created by Imperialization and colonization. If it must be limited it should be based on region of origin instead of a specific country or based on tribal location.”

The following was suggested during the meeting:

Pathway 5: Retirement

Citizenship granted anywhere in Africa to retirees upon submission of qualifying information

Input:

It was generally agreed that this was necessary.

TESTIMONIES

“I have visited Ghana as a tourist and am planning to visit other countries this year, again as a tourist. I have not have the opportunity to live or work in Africa. I am working to establish connections and do business with Africans in country while I plan on transitioning to become a resident. There are many countries I plan to visit while assessing where I would prefer to live.”

“Yes, Zimbabwe. President Mugabe called for African Americans to come and bring their skills. I headed the call. After having a 1000 deposit taken from me at the airport because l did have a return ticket and including going through six months of Bueracracy including being told that is illegal for me to seek a job on a tourist visa, l was finally granted a work permit.”

“I have not repatriated, it I have visited Ghana twice, Togo once, Benign once, and Kemet”

“I have set up two NGOs, in Gambia, too much red tape, not even transparency. Too many fees.”

“The costs are just exorbitant and extortionate”

“Am back in Africa and we have challenges we need to be considered to share our thoughts within these vitural meetings. We need to tell you whats on the Ground here in Africa.”

“Yes I bought land in Kenya”

“I plan to retire in America in less than 1 year and I would like to enjoy my retirement in my homeland in Africa.”

“Have not been to Africa as of yet.shall be their soon”

“I'm an entrepreneur looking to assist people find easier ways to live in Africa, the process to citizenship can be different in every country and I feel obligated to make Africa a developed continent.”

“I worked in South Africa with an NGO. I was excepted by the South African that I worked with.”

“I am from the Caribbean Island of Saint Martin but live in the United Kingdom for now, in 2021 I opened a branch in Uganda and one in South Africa, my company helps organisations solve their challenges and realise their ambitions through the application of leading-edge software and consultancy services. I am also in the process of setting up a packaging company in Uganda, Gambia and South Sudan, the idea is to grow across the continent quickly. My experience in Uganda was hectic I was ripped off, and extorted, and I had to pay facilitations to get things done from everyone from the police to the taxman to the company registration bureau. I learnt that I just can't throw money at people to help them, but I must lead by example and provide advice in hope that they would take it which 90% did not. It was definitely a wake-up call and a lesson in humility, in many ways I admire Ugandans because they deal with so much but yet remain calm and push on every day. This learning curve in Africa cost me money and time but it was well-invested I have grown in my knowledge of East Africa and as a person. This is why going forward I try to advise anyone diasporan that invests in East Africa and South Africa on what to expect as it would save them time and money two of the most precious commodities.”

“In 2008, I started AWOW International Girls Leadership Initiative, in Bogatanga, Upper East Region of Ghana. My quest was not without bribery, corruption or lies. However, I made the conscious choice to remain focus in order to achieve my vision. We have spann our reach into India, Costa Rica, Nigeria and Trinidad and Tobago. Nearly 15 year later, I can not express how priceless it is when I reflect on the number of young women and girls who's lives were forever changed. I am now at a crossroad in life and embarking upon new ventures. The possibility of manufacturing EV batteries and EV bicycle. Rwanda is the leading on the board: however we are visiting other countries . Accepting Africa With Opened Arms.
I pray some day she'll do the same for me♥️ Born and raised in The USA.”

“I have done volunteered work in several countries in Africa. Cameroon, Kenya, Tanzania and visited several other African countries. My experience was positive every country I visited. I would love to have a home in Southern region of Africa, willing to work anywhere on the continent.”

“No testimony since I've never lived, worked, or traveled in the continent. I'm just offering an opinion, and that is that I think it's unlikely that I'll be able to do much in regard to helping ADDI in its efforts because it seems like all the costs involved are prohibitive. I am low to moderate income person who cannot afford to own a home in the US, so it seems out of the question I'd be able to do it on the continent, so I'm thinking moving there is not possible. I'm wondering what other contributions can be made to the efforts of the organization in lieu of actual travel, moving, etc.”

“I repatriated to Africa in 2011. I moved into the rural area of Ghana along Volta river and I was treated just fine like on was one of them, I was dark enough to blend in...but my friend from NY who lived down the road from me was light skin was call "obruni" which is a derogatory name for a white foreigner. I would stand up for him and tell them the story of how Africans were raped during enslavement and that it was an insult to refer to him as a white man. There was some language barriers but not much of a problem because expressions that appear on people face in Ghana represent the same emotions on the faces of Black people from Chicago or the US. The only difference I can attest to is there is a difference in the twist of the tongue when Ghanains talk.”

“I've only been to Egypt as a tourist.”

“I have never been to Africa, BUT i long to return to the Land of my Ancestors.”

“I have not yet returned, however, I have invested over $10,000 in a business in West Africa and another group investment in excess of $60,000 in Eastern African. Currently, my investments will continue through the year 2023. My strategy was to invest so that in the future, when the opportunity arises, I, along with my group may be allowed to set up residency in a country of our choice. Our African elders that came from Ghana and South Africa to the USA between 1925 - 1939, taught us that in order to get something out of Africa, we must first put something into Africa.”

“I lived in Tanzania for nine months and was in the process of getting a business started with the wonderful Tanzanian friends I met but had to leave because of my mom having a stroke.”

“I lived in Africa in my 20s and now I’m in my 70s and I live in Africa, Zanzibar in particular six months out of the year.”

“It is hard to get to know the people. Language is a huge barrier. They see us as rich and expect opportunity beyond relationship.”

“Father had a desire to go to Africa to live permanently in the early 1960s so after meeting some students from Guinea he just decided to pack up a wife and two children, head to Paris, France, go to the Guinea embassy in Paris and volunteer to work in that country.  At that time the president of Guinea was Sekou Toure.  The embassy refused to grant him a visa.  He then decided that he would take his family to Dakar, Senegal and apply for work as an educator.  Once we arrived in Dakar he spent three months trying to get employment for he and my mother as educators to no avail.  He was told that the Senegalese government would not touch him because he was not approved of by the U.S. Embassy.  Finally he was able to secure teaching positions for he and my mother in Mali.  We lived there however he became disillusioned with the way the Malian government treated him and decided to return to the U.S. after three years where he became a minister in the Nation of Islam.  Fast forward to 1992.  My wife and I were invited to attend the Black Think Tank conference in Bagdary, Nigeria.  The Nigerian embassy was of no help to us in getting to Nigeria at that time even when we had a letter inviting us to attend the conference and refused to approve the visa.  We attempted to get the visa approved in London because we were going to stop in Cote D'Ivoire first to stay with the family of a friend of ours.  They would not approve the visa.  While we were in Cote D'Ivoire my Godfather who had lived in Nigeria contacted a banker friend of his in Nigeria who was able to secure a visa for us.  When we arrived in the airport in Lagos it was under military heavy military security.  The military officer looking at our visas told under no uncertain terms not to make trouble in the country after we informed her that we were there a conference. In the meantime, white male oil executives were allowed to pass by with a smile.  

These are two of my horror stories that have taken place.  In both cases when we were able to be around the grassroots people, they treated warmly with open arms.  Because government is about politics and politics is about political parties, it will become important for us to have conversations about dual citizenship not only with governments but also with political parties that will support the dual citizenship process in the government parliaments.  They can influence legislation and the law making of the countries.  It is also important to educate the heads of the different ethnic groups about the history of enslavement and the need for them to bring their children home from the diaspora.  We can do this on the ground while we also adhere to the requirements of the African Union.  The strongest internal advocates we can have are the grassroots people and ethnic groups that the heads-of-state come from.”

“No; however, I have visited 3 of the African countries in the last 13 months on 2 separate occasions; Dakar, Senegal (March 2022); Juffureh Village, The Gambia (March 2022); and Duoala, Cameroon (March 2023). I have had 4 DNA test taken with African Ancestry to find my maternal grandparents ancestors as well as my paternal grandparents ancestors, which are:

Maternal grandmother: Mandinka People of present day Senegal.
Maternal grandfather: Kru People of present day Liberia.
Paternal grandmother: Masa People of present day Cameroon.
Paternal grandfather: Samo People of present day Burkina Faso.

None of my ancestral countries listed above offer dual citizenship to African Americans in the disapora, and this is extremely disappointing. I am praying that this changes immediately to the same as what Sierra Leone grants for DNA testing.”

Please share your thoughts on the African Diaspora's Right to Return:

“The African 'people have been invaded enslaved and genocided and exported and exiled into perpetual slavery by european edicts.outside of Africa .for centuries No African Armies came to our rescue .we the survivors freed ourselves and made a stand in these foreing slave lands .since Africa was also under occupation by these inhuman europeans,who now controls our African continent.via proxy..now Africa is independent its time to return whats left of its prisioners of 400 years war upon our African forefathers and mothers, regardless of tribe nation or geography. We never left Africa ,we were shanghied and forced onto slave ships and they changed our African family names to destroy our cultures and identities.but we still have the evidence to this crime,its our DNA...we are our African Ancestors.and they want African govts to do the right thing and restore our African citizenships..so we can really come home to build as true Africans .not as tourists residents that can be deported any time one party sees fit.
Dual citizenship is our natural Inheritance ,but our African citizenship is non-negociable.bring the black diaspora home now.”

“The Afro Indian is not encluded :(
This is how i overstand the return of the diaspora based on Taubira Law (passed on 2001 in france) slavery is a crime against humanity, which means that france recognizes its crime against the African descents, and therefore afro-descendants should be able to return to their land in Africa without paying for a plane ticket, or passing through immigration services without taking into account their Western nationality any more and be wellcome and beeing provide with what needed to start a new life as far as ID document is concern...This is not applied, but shoulb be :)”

“I am an African (for lack of a better word) born in America. And it is my desire to return home. I have always had a spiritual connection to Mama Africa. I feel that we are all spiritual beings that have the right to move about this earth as we are directed divinely. There should be no place on earth restricting our presence. I know that all Human and Huwomb kind has origin from the Mamaland, we call Africa today. Therefore, why shouldn't I have the right to return?”

“RTR may appear from a carnal perspective, however, the return of Africans back to our Motherland is biblical prophecy. I truly believe that our African elder statesmen and stateswomen, will be let by THE MOST HIGH to carry out His will, but not greedy gain, if there be any. I pray for peace and cooperation for us all.”

“It was both bitter and sweet reading these words. Bitter, because of the centuries of trauma faced and still faced by people of African descent and Sweet, because it is recognised that this needs to be done to reconcile persons of African descent with their spiritual birthright. There is a long way to go but at least that journey has begun. Our right to return must be assured in law but also no time should be spared to develop cultural and economic links with the global Diaspora.”

“I cannot wait to return but I believe reparations should be earnestly pursued and Caricom's ten-point action plan should be seriously considered, then we can talk about RTR . We need to ensure that the spiritual, socioeconomic, and psychological impact of the legacies of slavery has to be repaired. or else we will return with a western mindset and defeat the whole purpose of the RTR and ADDI mandate. In the meantime, let's build our wealth base, owned by Africans, respect will be restored and the world will listen attentively and begin to apologise for that atrocious Acts against humanity- slavery.”

“Absolutely the right thing to do.”

“I agree 100%. Unity of all African people is required to heal the body, citizenship is needed to know where we belong and are wanted.”

“Displaced and enslaved African diasporans should have a fundamental right to return to the African continent due to historical injustice, the loss of cultural heritage, and the desire for self-determination.


Firstly, the history of African diasporans being forcibly displaced through slavery and colonialism has resulted in immense injustice. Millions of Africans were uprooted from their homeland, forcefully separated from their families, and subjected to brutal conditions. This historical injustice has had long-lasting effects on the descendants of these African diasporans, who continue to face systemic racism, discrimination, and inequality all over the world. Granting the right to return acknowledges this historical trauma and attempts to rectify the injustice inflicted upon them.

Secondly, returning to the African continent would enable African diasporans to reconnect with their cultural heritage. Centuries of forced assimilation, cultural erasure, and loss of ancestral ties have disconnected African diasporans from their original roots. By providing them with the opportunity to return, they can rediscover their customs, languages, traditions, and spirituality, reestablishing a strong bond with their African identity. This reconnection allows for the preservation and revitalization of diverse African cultures, reinforcing the value they add to global cultural exchange.

Lastly, the right to return empowers African diasporans to exercise their right to self-determination. Escaping the constraints of a system that perpetuates their marginalization, returning to the African continent allows them to actively contribute to the development and progress of their homeland. Their knowledge, skills, and experiences gained through resilience and adaptation in various countries could be leveraged to address the economic, social, and political challenges faced by African nations. This mutual exchange of ideas and resources benefits both the African diasporans and their home countries, fostering a sense of empowerment, agency, and belonging.

In conclusion, recognizing the fundamental right of displaced and enslaved African diasporans to return to the African continent is a step towards rectifying historical injustice, reclaiming cultural heritage, and promoting self-determination. By facilitating this return, societies can work towards creating a more inclusive and equitable world that values the experiences and contributions of all individuals, regardless of their historical past.”

Share

A BRIEF HISTORY OF THE MODERN RIGHT TO RETURN CITIZENSHIP MOVEMENT SINCE THE BERLIN CONFERENCE 1884: A PRESENTATION TO THE 8TH PAC PART 1 PREPARATORY MEETING DISCUSSING PATHWAYS TO CITIZENSHIP

Ethiopia, Malcolm X and the Liberation Story They Never Told You Part 2

Ethiopia, Malcolm X and the Liberation Story They Never Told You Part 3

These two one hour lectures combines the information from the articles:

MAY 5TH - THE MOST IMPORTANT DAY IN THE TWENTIETH CENTURY AND EVIDENCE THAT THE ANCESTORS OF AFRICAN PEOPLE COMMUNICATE TO THEIR DESCENDANTS ON EARTH AND SHAPE WORLD EVENTS

AFTER BROWN VS. BOARD OF EDUCATION: HAILE SELASSIE, MALCOLM X, MARTIN LUTHER KING, REPATRIATION AND THE OAAU

JUNE 8, 1954: THE MOST IMPORTANT DAY IN 20TH CENTURY AFRICAN AMERICAN HISTORY

These are powerful history lessons that explain how the Back-to-Africa movement was subverted by planned integration and the significant role Malcolm X played in the unfinished African Liberation movement and repatriation back to Africa. It also lays the foundation for the proper structuring of African Diaspora citizenship policy in Africa.

Defining the Afro Descendants' Right to Return (RTR) to their Ancestral Homelands on the African Continent

It should be recalled that in 1996 the Economic and Social Council of the United Nations granted consultative status to the Rastafari Movement who were represented by Ras Bongo Spear and Ras Boanerges. [Note: it is unclear which organization received the ngo consultative status. The Jamaican Observer, November 24, 1996 says it was the International Rastafarian Development Society while others say it was the IRGC and still others say it was the Barbados-based Africa Hall ngo.] In 1998, at the United Nations in Geneva, Switzerland, Ras Bongo Spear and Ras Boanerges ask: “What is the responsibility of the nations to Africans in the diaspora with respect to the age-old quest for Repatriation?” Said the Rasses, “Our advice from that committee and from the UN Office of Human Rights . . .. was simple.

The United Nations as an organization of states cannot at this time in any serious way entertain the issue of repatriation without the consent of the African states and the African Governments to which we want to go in Africa. So we were directed to seek the support of African governments with respect to the acquisition of land. And after that, the matter can be brought up again to the United Nations and the issue of [settlement] can take place.”

Share

Defining the Afro Descendants' Right to Return (RTR) to their Ancestral Homelands on the African Continent for the 8PAC Part 1

The Right To Return (RTR) is the recognition by international society that as many as 250 million members of the African Diaspora, recognized as the Sixth Region of the African Union, are descendants of the people taken as prisoners of war during what is commonly called the Trans-Atlantic Slave Trade. As such, we have the immediate right to be returned to the territory of our ancestor that survived the middle passage and be recognized as citizens with a unique immigration status, policies and programmes by the government(s) claiming the territory as within its national boundaries. 

The RTR is based first on a principle of traditional African spirituality that identity was formed by the knowledge and preservation of one’s maternal lineage, transmitted from mother to daughter and paternal lineage, transmitted from father to son. Depending on each family’s village tradition, identity, and all that it included – language, culture, spirituality, land, and one’s place in the world and universe (history), was determined either by maternal or paternal lineage. Health and well-being, therefore, required the preservation of one’s lineage. If you did not preserve your lineage, you lost your location or place in the world. Thus, the first priority of the RTR is restoring the lineage identity of the descendants of the prisoners of war that were taken from territories on the African continent and subsequently suffered ETHNOCIDE - the loss of their ethnic and cultural identities. 

The RTR is based second on the historical fact that Pope Nicholas V and the King of Portugal declared total War against the land of “Guine” on June 18, 1452 in a document called the Dum Diversas. The document stated,

we grant to you full and free power, through the Apostolic authority by this edict, to invade, conquer, fight, subjugate the Saracens and pagans, and other infidels and other enemies of Christ. . . . . AND TO LEAD THEIR PERSONS IN PERPETUAL SERVITUDE, AND TO APPLY AND APPROPRIATE REALMS, DUCHIES, ROYAL PALACES, PRINCIPALITIES AND OTHER DOMINIONS, POSSESSIONS AND GOODS OF THIS KIND TO YOU AND YOUR USE AND YOUR SUCCESSORS THE KINGS OF PORTUGAL.

This declaration of total war is now considered a crime against humanity and was followed up with monopoly contracts known as “Asientos” which were variously given to private merchants from 1518 to 1595, to Portugal from 1595 to 1640, to the Genoese from 1662 to 1671, to the Dutch and Portuguese from 1671 to 1701, to France from 1701-1713, the British from 1713 to 1750, and the Spanish from 1765 to 1779. In the United States, several colonies became combatants to the Dum Diversas War when they legalized slavery: Massachusetts in 1641; Connecticut in 1650; Virginia in 1657 and Maryland in 1663. Other colonies followed and the United States of America officially entered the Dum Diversas War trafficking of people from Guine after American independence in 1776. As a result of the Dum Diversas Declaration of War: 

Portugal and Brazil were and are responsible for at least 7,300 slave voyages (26.8%) and at least 5,074,900 (45.9%) of the people who were forcibly, illegally, and immorally transported from the African continent and, using Cooper’s order of magnitude, were and are responsible for the murder, kidnapping and enslavement of more than 73 million people of African lineage and heritage; 

Britain was and is responsible for at least 11,632 slave voyages (42.7%), and at least 3,112,300 (28.1%) of the people who were forcibly, illegally and immorally transported from the African continent, thereby being responsible for the murder, kidnapping and enslavement of 52.2 million people of African lineage and heritage; 

France was and is responsible for at least 4,038 voyages (14.8%) and at least 1,456,000 (13.2%) of the people who were forcibly, illegally and immorally transported from the African continent, thereby being responsible for the murder, kidnapping and enslavement of 21.6 million people of African lineage and heritage; 

Spain was and is responsible for at least 1,116 slave voyages (4.1%), and at least 517,000 (4.7%) of the people who were forcibly, illegally and immorally transported from the African continent, thereby being responsible for the murder, kidnapping and enslavement of 8.5 million people of African lineage and heritage; 

The United States was and is responsible for at least 834 slave voyages (2.3%) from 1776 to 1808 and at least 114,960 (1%) of the people who were forcibly, illegally and immorally transported from the African continent, thereby being responsible for the murder, kidnapping and enslavement of 1.7 million people of African lineage and heritage; 

Almost every country of the Western Hemisphere, and especially the British Mainland of North America, the British Leewards, the British Windwards and Trinidad, Jamaica, Barbados, Guyana, the Spanish American Mainland, the Spanish Caribbean, Northeast Brazil, Bahia, Southeast Brazil and other areas, participated in some degree, in the criminal Trans-Atlantic Trafficking of people with African lineage and heritage; 

Finally, the RTR is based on a principle of justice expressed in the 1949 Geneva Convention: Article 4 (1) defines prisoners of war and Article 5 states, “the present Convention shall apply to the persons referred to in Article 4 from the time they fall into the power of the enemy and until their final release and repatriation.” 

The Decade of Return Initiative will see that international society is held accountable for providing for the Repatriation (“Right to Return”) under the Geneva Convention, for all descendants of the prisoners of the Dum Diversas War.

Additionally, United States v The Libelants and Claimants of the Schooner Amistad - 1841 makes clear that

“it is admitted that the African . . . owe no allegiance to (any Nations laws) their rights are to be determined by the law which is of universal obligation - the law of nature. . . a former domicile is not abandoned by residence in another if that residence be not voluntarily chosen. Those who are in exile, or in prison, as they are never presumed to have abandoned all hope of return, retain their former domicile. That these victims of fraud and piracy - husbands torn from their wives and families - children from their parents and kindred - neither intended to abandon the land or their nativity, nor had lost all hope of recovering it, sufficiently appears from the facts on this record.”

Article 15 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights states,

“Article 15

Everyone has the right to a nationality. No one shall be arbitrarily deprived of his nationality nor denied the right to change his nationality.”

Article 12 of the AFRICAN CHARTER ON HUMAN AND PEOPLES RIGHTS states,

“Article 12

1. Every individual shall have the right to freedom of movement and residence within the borders of a State provided he abides by the law.

2. Every individual shall have the right to leave any country including his own, and to return to his country. This right may only be subject to restrictions, provided for by law for the protection of national security, law and order, public health or morality.”

The World Conference against Racism, Racial Discrimination, Xenophobia and Related Intolerance Durban Declaration states,

“52. We note with concern that, among other factors, racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia and related intolerance contribute to forced displacement and the movement of people from their countries of origin as refugees and asylum-seekers;

(…)

54. We underline the urgency of addressing the root causes of displacement and of finding durable solutions for refugees and displaced persons, in particular voluntary return in safety and dignity to the countries of origin, as well as resettlement in third countries and local integration, when and where appropriate and feasible;”

On February 4th, 2003, the First Extra-Ordinary Summit of the Assembly of the African Union meeting in Addis  Ababa, Ethiopia adopted the historic Article 3(q) that officially,

“invite(s) and encourage(s) the full participation of Africans in the Diaspora in the building of the African Union in its capacity as an important part of our Continent.”

The AU 50TH ANNIVERSARY SOLEMN DECLARATION states,

“We, the Heads of State and Government of the African Union assembled to celebrate the Golden Jubilee of the OAU/AU established in the city of Addis Ababa, Ethiopia on 25 May 1963,

Evoking the uniqueness of the history of Africa as the cradle of humanity and a centre of civilization, and dehumanized by slavery, deportation, dispossession, apartheid and colonialism as well as our struggles against these evils, which shaped our common destiny and enhanced our solidarity with peoples of African descent;

Recalling with pride, the historical role and efforts of the Founders of the Pan African Movement and the nationalist movements, whose visions, wisdom, solidarity and commitment continue to inspire us;

Reaffirming our commitment to the ideals of Pan-Africanism and Africa’s aspiration for greater unity, and paying tribute to the Founders of the Organization of African Unity (OAU) as well as the African peoples on the continent and in the Diaspora for their glorius and successful struggles against all forms of oppression, colonialism and apartheid; . . . .

Stressing our commitment to build a united and integrated Africa;

Guided by the vision of our Union and affirming our determination to “build an integrated, prosperous and peaceful Africa, driven and managed by its own citizens and representing a dynamic force in the international arena”; . .

Guided by the principles enshrined in the Constitutive Act of our Union and our Shared Values . . . .

ACKNOWLEDGE THAT: . . .

III. The implementation of the integration agenda; the involvement of people, including our Diaspora in the affairs of the Union; the quest for peace and security. . . remain challenges.

WE HEREBY DECLARE:

A. On the African Identity and Renaissance
i) Our strong commitment to accelerate the African Renaissance by ensuring
the integration of the principles of Pan Africanism in all our policies and
initiatives;
ii) Our unflinching belief in our common destiny, our Shared Values and the
affirmation of the African identity; the celebration of unity in diversity and the
institution of the African citizenship;
(…)

B. The struggle against colonialism and the right to self-determination of
people still under colonial rule

i) The completion of the decolonization process in Africa; to protect the right to
self-determination of African peoples still under colonial rule; solidarity with
people of African descend and in the Diaspora
in their struggles against racial
discrimination; and resist all forms of influences contrary to the interests of the
continent; . . .

C. On the integration agenda
Our commitment to Africa‟s political, social and economic integration agenda, and in this
regard, speed up the process of attaining the objectives of the African Economic
Community and take steps towards the construction of a united and integrated Africa.
Consolidating existing commitments and instruments, we undertake, in particular, to:


i) Speedily implement the Continental Free Trade Area; ensure free movement
of goods, with focus on integrating local and regional markets as well as
facilitate African citizenship to allow free movement of people through the
gradual removal of visa requirements;

ii) Accelerate action on the ultimate establishment of a united and integrated
Africa, through the implementation of our common continental governance,
democracy and human rights frameworks. Move with speed towards the
integration and merger of the Regional Economic Communities as the building
blocks of the Union.”

The African Union Agenda 2063: Aspiration # 5: An Africa with a strong cultural identity, common heritage, values and ethics states,

“Pan Africanism By 2063, the fruits of the values and ideals of Pan Africanism will be manifest everywhere on the continent and beyond. The goal of the unity of the African peoples and peoples of African descent will be attained (2025). An Agency for Diaspora Affairs will be established in all member states by 2020 with the Diaspora integrated into the democratic processes by 2030. Dual citizenship for the Diaspora will be the standard by 2025. . . . “

In Pan-Africanism and Nationality Rights For the Diaspora: A Contemporary Perspective, in Pan-Africanism, African Nationalism: Strengthening the Unity of Africa and its Diaspora edited by B.F. Banke & K. Mchombu, A. Bernard puts it this wasy:

“The Pan-Africanist Law of Return: Quintessential Reparations

At a very basic level, if reparation is to repair the wrongs committed against African peoples through slavery and its apprentices, colonization and imperialism, the first wrong committed was taking millions of peoples from their homeland. Those taken from Africa lost, among other things, their citizenship and this is the first thing that needs to be given back. It is morally and philosophically the first step in the journey of a thousand miles that needs to be undertaken if Africa and African peoples are to move forward in a forceful, positive and determined manner in the 21st Century.

Concomitant with this position therefore is that the law of return can only be made possible by African governments/states, not the West. It is to be stated clearly nonetheless, that this is a right, not a concession or special privilege. Diasporan repatriates should not have to prove which part of Africa they are from. The loss of this specific identity is a part of the harm done by slavery, and cannot be used by African governments to reject Diasporans. Any African government which challenges the right to return to Africa for proof of specific identity is in breach of their own claim for compensation for slavery.”

It should be recalled that in 1996 the Economic and Social Council of the United Nations granted consultative status to the Rastafari Movement who were represented by Ras Bongo Spear and Ras Boanerges. [Note: it is unclear which organization received the ngo consultative status. The Jamaican Observer, November 24, 1996 says it was the International Rastafarian Development Society while others say it was the IRGC and still others say it was the Barbados-based Africa Hall ngo.] In 1998, at the United Nations in Geneva, Switzerland, Ras Bongo Spear and Ras Boanerges ask: “What is the responsibility of the nations to Africans in the diaspora with respect to the age-old quest for Repatriation?” Said the Rasses, “Our advice from that committee and from the UN Office of Human Rights . . .. was simple.

The United Nations as an organization of states cannot at this time in any serious way entertain the issue of repatriation without the consent of the African states and the African Governments to which we want to go in Africa. So we were directed to seek the support of African governments with respect to the acquisition of land. And after that, the matter can be brought up again to the United Nations and the issue of [settlement] can take place.”

These and other documents detail the basis of the African Diaspora’s Right to Return to their motherland. What do you think?

Share