AEC AND ECOWAS: THE ABUJA AND ECOWAS TREATIES COMPA RED

Th e Abuja Tr ea ty is remar kably significa n t and to a large extent different from the Lagos Treaty in terms of institut iona l and decision-makin g processes , as well as approach and orienta tion . It is

( mp rch c n s ivc in s op , co n ra m m g 10() article arranged into 22 hap ters while th Lagos Tre a t) has ()..J articles cover ing 1..J chapters.

Ab u] : brings together not only the main dcvclop me n^t sectors highlighted in the L.agos Plan of Action, but also many other strictly non-economic or "positive" integration aspects of co-operation. As noted in the preceding chapter, it reflects admirably the holistic vie w of the can cp t of development that links the so-called objective and quantitative factors of production on the one hand, and the so- aile d non- onornir factors - the poli tical, social, cultural, environ m n tal and instttutional, on the other. In particular, the Pan-African rre: ty, unlike that of E 'OW S, rcllerts the essential elements of a demo.ra uc framework or the importance of popular democracy in the development process as forc efully articulated in lINDP''i seminal II u man Development Reports, 1()()O and 1()()1, and the E 's African Charter for Popular Participation in Development and Transformation, adopted in February 1 <)()O, and reinforced b) the OAtI's commitment to democratisation of the development process.

Underlying Principles

Unlike the Lagos Treaty, the Ah u ja Tr ea ty provides instructive prc fa e of a se t of fund mental prin iplcs which br at hc thr ugh the operative chapters. The first is rel: t d to the "promotion of . p ca refu l environment" as a prerequisite for Africa'v .urccssfu l xono nur development. Linked to this, second, i'i the ernpha-i" placed on "till' respect, promotion and prot etio n of human and people rights", in ar or d arue with the provi ions of the Afri n .har t r on II um; nand People's Right» adopted h) the /\ iri L') 1. Third, \fri can Stat '\ ar

.orn m it tc d . under the Tr t), to th pr motion 01 ^{.11 I} ou n tability . economic ^justir and p ^{pulur pa}rti ip.ui n in ^{d '\ -l}o p mcnt.

Conscqucntly, fourth, the om m u nity " s the co-or> -ratir n of African non-government lorg ni tit n (, ^{h )} in ord -r to inv olv ^l the peoples of Africa in the proce s of co no rnir int '~r~lti()n .md to mobilise their skills and financ i I support. Women p _{'riall ~} must he mor act iv e ly drawn into the dev lo p m nt pr

"I h se prin ip l r n c ary a a gu ide .

r '

era of institutionali tio n of th e hum n fa t r in the d v lop rn

- ru

pro c . Th y a re wo rt h revi wing for inr or 0 ati n in th e rcv i d 'COWAS Tre aty, th y ^C n titut th ing r i n , .a.;,p=a.:...r....=.:.;x:..:....=..:..:...=..:..:....::...=

sustainable d \ el pm nt.

Community Obj ectives

L4A.J;;',"'~ d • n t m to ha .

t nd rd provis io n of ti n he m Ith ugh In t rms of mrnunity oh j tiv

much to lea rn from buja , b th r

n

fri n e ono m ic co-ope ra ti n nd Integ 17

Abuja is much more detailed and more clearly set out than Lagos. The main difference is in the promotion of the attainment of Community objectives where, as indicated below, Abuja places the accent on production whereas Lagos stresses the centrality of, and concern for, market integration.

Institutional Structure

The process of integration necessitates creation of suitable institutions to deal with the complex problem of linking the economic destinies of several nations. Indeed, much of the success of the EEC is attributable to the wide range of institutions which have been instrumental in translating its programmes and policies into action.

The Treaty of Rome established clear provisions not only for setting-up these organs, but for a gradual transfer of initiatives from member States to these supranational entities. A significant result of these built-in provisions is that integration among the member States of the Community has become a continuous process, whose scope is expanding along a previously determined time-path. It is the continuity of this process which to a large extent has consistently increased the stake of the member nations in European Community programmes3.

While the institutions of the Pan-African Community and those of ECOWAS are not so elaborate, both Abuja and Lagos recognise the development of adequate institutional machinery as an essential condition for successful co-ordination of development policies. Abuja, however, institutionally goes much further than Lagos in meeting the prerequisites for building-up an integrating community.

The Abuja Treaty provides for the establishment of a Pan-African Parliament to ensure the involvement of the people in the

"development and integration" process of the continent (Article 14).

In this respect, the Treaty reflects current concerns about the role of the people and the democratic imperative in the process of integration.

The Lagos Treaty, on the other hand, does not institutionally provide a forum for exchange of views with interest groups or private sectors in the West African sub-region - trade unions, employers' associations, chambers of commerce, etc. - who are directly interested in and likely to be directly affected by many of the provisions of the

3 S.K.B. Asante, The Political Economy of Regionalism in Africa: A Decade of the Economic Community of West African States (ECOWAS) (New York: Praeger, 1986) pp.

64-5.

Tr y and policies of ECOWAS4. lienee, ECOWAS ca n he rightly riti ised for not having any popular roots, and because the people and in titutions con t ro lling it have little contact or involvement with the man in the street. The whole institutional structure of the ECOWAS s heme ca n he described as a brain-child of the elite, and there is no organ through which interest groups ca n bridge the elite-mass gap.

In the circumstances, Article -t of the l.agos Treaty should be amended to provide for a Parliament or Assembly.

Ahuja, also, unlike Lagos, provides for the establishment of an Economic and Social Commission to comprise Ministers responsible for Economic Development, Planning and Integration of each member State.

This is a special, high-powered Commission responsible, among other things, for co-ordination, harmonisation and supervision of the economic, social, cultural, scientific and technical activities and the Community secretariat, the specialised technical committees and any other subsidiary body, and ensure their follow-up.

ECOWAS may not necessarily require such a body, which in the case of the AEC, is essential as the only competent organ in respect of economic development and integration matters; the rest (e.g. Council of Ministers composed of Ministers of Foreign Affairs) being political.

Instead, it would be desirable for ECOWAS to establish an Economic and Social Committee on the model provided for in Articles 193-198 of the Rome Treaty to be composed of representatives of producers, agriculturalists, industrialists, transport operators, trade unions, merchants, artisans, etc.

Decision-Making Process

The decision-making proc would em to constitute one of the most contentious areas of regio n a l economic groupings. This process sometimes crea tes tensions between the form al in titu t io ns of a grouping. A clear case in point is th struggle betw n th Council and the Commission of the EEC which formed an ele me nt in th e political stagnation affectin g the Communi ty during 19 5 nd 196 6 from which the Commission em rged cha tened.5

In the ca e of ECOWAS, there i no provi ion for voting under the Treaty, neither is it made qu ite lear hi h in titution i empowered to make a formal propo I a a first tep in the d I

IOn-making pro es . Th is pu ts ECOWAS in a differ nt, p uli r setting,

5

Ibid., pp. 7 -77. e al ⁰ .K.B. an te, W~~:"":''':'='':'~::Jt January 199 1.

S.K.B. Asan te, "ECOWAS, the EE and the Lome Conve n tio n", in D. 1azzeo (ed.), Afri n 01"'2 ni ~

(Cambridge University Press, 1(8 4 ) pp. 171 - 19 5.

19

the PTA which followed it in 1981 makes provision for adopting decisions by consensus (Article 6(5) of PTA Treaty).

Abuja, on the other hand, is quite explicit on this troublesome issue of decision-making. It clearly states that the decisions of the Assembly and the regulations of the Council "shall be adopted by consensus or alternatively by a two-thirds majority of Member States"

(Arts. 10(4) and 13(4)). The importance of having an alternative provision cannot be over-emphasized. Experience has shown how decision-making restricted to "consensus" or unanimity alone can become a major obstacle to positive action by an organisation. The constant need for complicated deals, and the arduous effort to arrive at compromise often lead to immobility and obscure the text or resolutions. Thus, a compromise is often reached at the expense of precision. Generally, also, the consensus requirement renders the decision-making process slow and inadequate.

Closely related to this are the powers to bind member States and organs of a community to decisions and regulations. In the case of the Lagos Treaty, the powers of the Authority and the Council to bind members States to decisions are non-existent. the decisions and directions (like the PTA) are binding only on ECOWAS subordinate organs after ratification, usually by at least seven signatory States.

This is in marked contrast to what obtains in the Abuja Treaty where the decisions of the Assembly and regulations of the Council become binding on both member States and subordinate organs of the Community and these "automatically enter into force thirty days (30) after the date of their signature by the Chairman of the Assembly" or the Council (Arts. 10(2 and 3) and 13 (2 and 3). In this regard, and what is more important, supra-national status' has been accorded to the legislative organs of the Community, which are empowered to meet, on behalf of all, tbe major economic and political challenges which Community members would otherwise be unable to tackle individually.

There is undoubtedly a good case for ECOWAS to critically review its decision-making process and model it on the provisions of Abuja, so as to enable it to combine thoroughness with speed of action and thereby remove the tendency to frustrate those member States who are eager and have taken the trouble to ensure that the Community moves ahead. It may be necessary, however, for Lagos to move a little beyond Abuja and make a distinction on issues where consensus would be required and those that could be taken by a two-thirds majority.

Approach to Integration

Of particular importance, too, is the approach to integration that will be the most effective in realising the poten tial of the African continent for the benefit of its populations. Unlike ECOWAS. PTA or

S which have focused attention for more tha n a de ad e on market irncgration. the new Community is based on a certain number of key sc tors with a great capacity for integration, notably i nd us try, agriculture, transport and communication, energy, science and technology, trade, money and finance.

Thus, primarily, Ahuja adopts production-focused approach or sp e c i fica lly , collaboration for expansion and diversification of material production. In this respect, Ahuja breaks with the past and the present tendencies which looked at economic co-operation and integration only in the context of traded goods (which are not produced locally) and financial arrangements!". It aims at strengthening the capacity of African States to industrialise and strengthen agriculture and mining among other productive sectors of their economies so as to provide goods to be traded in a common market.

The Scope of Abuja

Ahuja breaks new grounds in terms or scope and highlights a number of critical development sectors on which Lagos is silent hut which pose enormous challenges to African development. It ees the meeting of these challenges mostly within the context of regionalism.

The first is environment (Art. 58), which has b me a major developmental challenge in Africa. Fuiur prospects for development depend on maintaining healthy environments and on r hahilitating degraded ones. Consequently, Ahuja stres es the need for promotion of healthy environment by adopting not only nation I, hut more importantly, sub-regionul and continental polici s, trutegies and programmes, since much of the environmental problems of Afri go beyond the limits of national b rdcrs.

One other distinguishing f at u rc of Ahuja is . ondly, its response to the rapid changes in scientific and t rhnologi I developments which have result d in a n -w indu rri I r v lution whose consequences for Afri are enormou . T m t thi chall ng , Abuj . commits Community members to tre n th n th ir i ntifi nd technological capahilitie in orde r, int r lia, t hrin ab ut th socio-economic transformat ion r uir d r impr v m nt f th quality of life of their popul lion , to r due th ir d p nd n nd promote their individual and coli tiv t hnol gi I If-r liance (Art. 51).

6

21

1\ closely related aspect, thirdly, is the importance which the Abuja Treaty attaches to education, training, research and culture, thus reflecting the fact that economic development, or any kind of economic change, does not occur in isolation but is part of a much larger and more general transformation. Abuja therefore calls upon the Community members to "strengthen co-operation in the field of education and training, co-ordinate and harmonise their policies in the field" with a view to "training persons capable of fostering the changes necessary for enhancing social progress and the development of the continent" (Art. 68). Regional approaches to education, training and research have a positive long-term effect on economic and political co-operation in the Africa region. It enables institutions to be built that are more indigenous, economical and better suited to local conditions.

To consolidate their cultural identity, Abuja commits African States to pursue not only the objectives of the Cultural Charter of Africa but also to ensure that "development policies adequately reflect their cultural values" (Art. 69). In this respect, Abuja responds adequately to the cultural reality of developing societies as recently analysed by development scholars like S.C. Dube in Modernisation and Development: The Search for Alternative Paradigms (1988) and Thierry Verhelst in No Life Without Roots: Culture and Development (1990).

Fourthly, Abuja stresses the need for strengthening private sector participation in regional industrialisation and development efforts. There are provisions for the coordinated establishment of stock markets and for free movement of capital within the Community.

Freeing labour and capital flows within Africa would improve growth prospects by creating conditions - through increased competition and wider market access - for mergers, acquisitions, joint ventures, and other forms of horizontal and vertical integration.

Fifthly, Abuja introduces another significant element, which is generally absent, not only in ECOWAS but also in all the past and existing economic co-operation schemes in Africa. This is the sanction provision relating to non-payment of contributions (Art. 84). Member States with outstanding contributions to the budget of the Community

"shall not participate in either the vote or decisions of the Community" and eventually "cease to enjoy other benefits arising from the Treaty as well as the right to speak".

In this regard, the new Pan-African Treaty attempts to solve the perennial financial crisis that has bedevilled many an African economic co-operation and integration arrangement. For example, according to the April 1991 Memorandum by the Executive Secretariat,

"as at 20 September, 1990, arrears of contributions were estimated ar UA14 million or US$18.2 million... Non-payment of contributions

'reatly h.unpers the implementation f ' -operation pro 'rammes, as m t the a tivitic« in the orn rn u n uy -( pcration programmes are

In. nr I Ir 111 C ntrtbuuons paid hy member tares".

1\ Iurt h r sig n ifica n t novelty in the new o mrnuni ty is it "

r gn it io n of the special economic and so ci a l diff'icuhic s of Africa' l a st dcv eloped rountrics .•is well as the land-locked and ixl.md Stat's.

Ah uja. in a rt ir lc 7( , would rcr og nis e the need to at cord thcse ou ntric: "spccial trcntrne nt". Th is could inr l ud e temporary

.xc m p t io ns from the full application 01 som« Treaty prov isions an d

~L istnnrc rom a new Solidartty. Development and Compensation ·u nd . On the whole. this discussion indicates what l.agos can learn from ·\ h u j.l to enhance it\ \ iability and to enable ECOWAS to meet

l ulidcntly the emerging challenges ( I' the !I)()()s and h yo n d . It uls nukes rlrar that it is on ly through suer lui linking-up of E'OvVAS a nd other vu b-rcgion.rl grou ping , artivitics, hot h horizon tally and vcrucally, that the way will he paved for the creation of a meaningful

and fUIH tiunal Alri ".111 liconornir Community.

2

3

SUPRANATIONALTY

AND THE DECISION-MAKING PROCESS IN