A contentious draft treaty in Africa, which seeks to redefine family values and prioritise cultural sovereignty, is moving closer to formal adoption following a recent conference in Accra, Ghana. The charter, which asserts that sexual and reproductive rights pose a threat to African families, has drawn sharp criticism from human rights advocates and legal experts who warn of its regressive implications.
A Shift Towards Cultural Sovereignty
During the inaugural session of the annual inter-parliamentary conference on family values and sovereignty, Ghana’s parliamentary speaker, Alban Bagbin, emphasised the need to protect African cultural identity from what he termed “foreign ideologies”. The conference, attended by representatives from 20 nations, aims to advance the draft African charter, which calls for member states to retract from international agreements that conflict with its principles, notably the 2003 Maputo Protocol that advocates for gender equality and the health rights of women and girls.
This draft charter marks a significant shift towards a legal framework that favours a moralistic perspective over established human rights norms. It claims that sexual and reproductive health rights threaten the foundational fabric of African families and misleadingly associates these rights with the promotion of abortion on demand.
Rejection of Comprehensive Education and Gender Diversity
In a stark rejection of progressive educational policies, the charter denounces comprehensive sex education (CSE), labelling it as a force that sexualises children. The document further insists on a binary understanding of gender, defining it strictly as male or female, and positing that parental rights should supersede children’s rights in matters of sexuality and discipline.
Gilbert Mitullah, a Kenyan lawyer and board member of the Queer African Network, condemned the charter as a dangerous tool that would enable governments to withdraw from existing commitments related to sexual and reproductive health and LGBTQ+ rights. He highlighted its potential to undermine the Maputo Protocol before it even receives official endorsement.
Criticism from Human Rights Advocates
The charter’s narrow definition of family—centred exclusively on heterosexual marriage—has been criticised for failing to recognise the diverse family structures present across Africa’s 54 countries. The Initiative for Strategic Litigation in Africa (ISLA) warns that prioritising family interests over individual rights could legitimise the oppression of women and children, potentially shielding private family matters from state intervention, particularly in instances of abuse or discrimination.
Lakshita Kanhiya, a legal officer at ISLA, voiced concerns over the safety of women and children under such a framework, stating, “Women will no longer be safe; children will not be safe.”
Moreover, the discourse surrounding “family values” has been deemed a façade for increased governmental intrusion into private lives. Critics argue that this rhetoric not only legitimises state control but also serves as a populist tool that distracts from meaningful policy changes.
External Influences and Colonial Narratives
The charter has also attracted scrutiny for its alignment with conservative Christian movements from Western nations, which oppose abortion and LGBTQ+ rights. Activists accuse the authors of distorting legitimate concerns regarding sovereignty and colonialism to align with these ideologies. Famia Nkansa, from the Sierra Leone-based organisation Purposeful, articulated this sentiment, stating that anti-rights efforts in Africa echo colonial narratives, positioning the continent as a battleground for ideological and economic struggles.
The draft’s connections with external lobbying groups, such as Family Watch International (FWI), which has actively campaigned against CSE, have raised alarms among reproductive rights organisations. Despite FWI’s assertion that the charter is an African initiative directed by local voices, critics like Mitullah argue that it is a product of a transnational network designed to present an illusion of indigenous authorship.
Why it Matters
The potential adoption of this charter could signify a significant regression in the protection of human rights across the African continent. By prioritising cultural sovereignty over established rights, it risks institutionalising discrimination and undermining hard-won advancements in gender equality and sexual health. As the treaty moves towards a vote at the upcoming African Union general assembly in February, the implications for millions of individuals across Africa remain profound, highlighting the urgent need for a dialogue that respects human rights while honouring cultural contexts.
