SOUTH AFRICA: Civil society to keep close watch on peer review process

[ This report does not necessarily reflect the views of the United Nations]

JOHANNESBURG, 10 Oct 2005 (IRIN) - Despite some initial hiccups, civil society groups in South Africa say they are committed to ensuring that a national self-assessment conducted under the African Peer Review Mechanism (APRM) will be transparent.

Civil society representatives have complained about the tight timetable, perceived government dominance of the process, and a lack of information about how the South African review will be managed.

But authorities have since expanded the 'governing council' from 10 to 15 members, most of whom represent civil society interests, that is to manage the research and drafting of South Africa's assessment.

"At first it appeared that steps towards the self-assessment were being rushed, and we ... [said] that because it is such an important initiative there should be greater attention paid to details. Furthermore, it wasn't - and still isn't - very clear why there are so many ministers on the council. After all, South Africa has very little to fear from peer review," Steven Gruzd, research manager at the South African Institute of International Affairs (SAIIA) told IRIN.

The African Union (AU) inaugurated the mechanism at its Durban summit in 2002. The hope is that this voluntary exercise will enable African countries to assess their standards of governance and levels of development, setting the stage for better political and economic leadership.

South Africa is the third country to come under scrutiny and observers have suggested it is under enormous pressure to produce a clean bill of health, given its standing in the AU. To date, only Ghana and Rwanda have undergone the process, although 22 other countries have signed up to the APRM.

Gruzd pointed out that South Africa was also a leading member of the New Partnership for Africa's Development (Nepad) and would be emulated, whether the country "got it right or wrong".

The council is to be chaired by Public Service and Administration Minister Geraldine Fraser-Moleketi and will include Finance Minister Trevor Manuel, Trade and Industry Minister Mandisi Mpahlwa, Justice Minister Brigitte Mabandla, and Minister in the Presidency Essop Pahad.

"I think NGOs in general were correct in raising concerns about the number of officials on the council - after all, the process itself is an opportunity for civil society to reflect and critically assess what is working and what isn't up to scratch. But it must noted that, as it stands, the council does have some very credible representatives, including COSATU (Congress of South African Trade Unions)," commented Hassen Lorgat, media and communications manager of the South African National NGO Coalition.

"I think at this stage it is not so much about the composition of the board but rather the capacity of NGOs to ensure that the review is transparent," he noted.

Gruzd explained that Ghana's national methodology had been far more open, transparent and inclusive, and was spearheaded by civil society rather than government. Its seven-member National APRM Governing Council had been mainly composed of respected senior lawyers, academics, diplomats and civil society representatives.

"The Ghanaians removed the process from the ministry, set up a secretariat in a different building altogether and performed the review," Gruzd commented.

Rwanda had adopted a 50-member committee to oversee its report, of whom all but a handful were in government, despite pressure from the APRM Secretariat, he added.

[ENDS]