Tag Archives: Safe Abortion

AU Should Strengthen its Framework to Curb Violence Against Women

People participate in a march held to call a halt to gender-based violence on International Women’s Day in Nairobi, Kenya, March 8, 2019. © 2019 Yasuyoshi Chiba/AFP via Getty Images

New York, USA, 13 March 2026 -/African Media Agency (AMA)/- Violence against women and girls in Africa demands urgent action. As of 2023, it is estimated that one in three women and girls between ages 15 and 49, have experienced physical and/or sexual intimate partner violence in their lifetime. Last November, South Africa classified violence against women as a  a national disaster.

When the African Union adopted its Convention on Ending Violence Against Women and Girls in early 2025, UN Women  and several governments  celebrated  it as progress. But across the continent, women’s rights organizations are warning against premature optimism and calling for the treaty to be strengthened.

Indeed, the African Union needs to increase compliance with the existing legal framework, and strengthen the latest one, if it is to lead to tangible improvements for women and girls.

Africa already had one of the world’s most progressive regional frameworks addressing this crisis: the Protocol to the African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights on the Rights of Women in Africa, commonly known as the Maputo Protocol, adopted in 2003 (effective 2005). Maputo guarantees comprehensive protections; from generally obligating states to enact and enforce laws to prohibit all forms of violence against women to taking appropriate measures to prevent and eliminate such violence.

However, there have been  significant setbacks to enforcing it, such as slow passage of national laws and enforcement, and reservations by some countries on key provisions—reproductive health and safe abortion, equality in marriage. The new convention will face similar obstacles if the AU doesn’t address the warnings that it may be used to water down protections already guaranteed under Maputo, burden governments with duplicate reporting requirements, and create confusion around enforcement because of the competing legal frameworks.

Organizations like the Initiative for Strategic Litigation in Africa (ISLA) and Akina Mama wa Afrika have noted under the initiative#PauseforPurpose, the risk that the convention might lead to backsliding. The African Bar Association has already published  model reservations suggesting governments water down the convention’s commitments.

Reports from grassroots organizations and survivor-led groups that they were shut out of consultations in drafting the new convention are troubling. Fos Feminista, the Centre for Human Rights at the University of Pretoria, and the African Centre for Democracy and Human Rights Studies have all raised red flags. When credible voices across the continent sound the alarm, their warnings warrant careful attention.

The AU Convention on Ending Violence Against Women and Girls includes some provisions that add to the Maputo Protocol: explicit protections against cyberviolence and femicide, stronger workplace harassment provisions, and attention to marginalized groups like women with disabilities and refugees. These are important provisions that align with international treaties including the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities and the International Labour Organization (ILO) Violence and Harassment Convention (C190) on violence in the world of work.

However, the convention, with its narrower operational focus, doesn’t explicitly incorporate the comprehensive rights framework for preventing violence such as Maputo’s provisions for sexual and reproductive health rights, including access to safe abortion (article 14), and on equality in marriage, divorce, and inheritance (articles 6 and 7), and safeguards against child, early, and forced marriages.

The Committee of the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women (CEDAW), the body that interprets the international treaty,  affirmed that violence against women is inseparable from structural discrimination, including denial of sexual and reproductive health and rights, and inequality in marriage and family relations.

Any regional framework that addresses violence without confronting the underlying inequality risks treating symptoms rather than root causes. At a minimum, the African Union should ensure that the Convention on Ending Violence is read together with the full scope of Maputo’s obligations to complement and enhance them and not to diminish them.

The document is riddled with vague language, such as “positive masculinity” and “African values and norms,” that could risk loopholes for enforceable rights, by arguing for cultural discretion.

We’ve already seen this play out with Cameroon’s and Uganda’s reservations to the Maputo Protocol, contending that some provisions are inconsistent with African ethical and moral values or principles, though Maputo also recognizes “the crucial role of women in the preservation of African values based on the principles of equality, peace, freedom, dignity, justice, solidarity and democracy.” Without clear definitions, the new convention could be used to open the door wider.

The new convention relies on the African Commission on Human and Peoples’ Rights to monitor its implementation—as it already does with the Maputo Protocol—rather than creating a new treaty body. The commission already faces significant challenges, primarily due to severe resource constraints and a heavy existing workload. For it to act as a monitoring body for the convention, and to prevent weakening the existing legal framework, the AU needs to provide clear guidance on the relationship between the two instruments and overlapping obligations, and standards to avoid complications in reporting and an increased strain on an enforcement system that already lacks adequate resources.

At the same time calls to “pause ratification” also require caution. In AU practice, prolonged ratification pauses have often led to political stagnation rather than substantive reform, allowing states to evade both existing and new obligations. Moreover, a pause without a clear AU-mandated review process risks creating uncertainty and fragmented obligations across governments, with some proceeding with ratification and others not, running counter to AU norms of requiring all countries to meet the same standards.

Once the AU has adopted a treaty, it has not traditionally suspended or paused ratification, even when important gaps existed, but instead it has favored progressive development that complements existing requirements.

Consistent with its treaty-making norms, as happened with the  Malabo Protocol amending the African Court Statute, a mechanism to close the gaps could take the form of an amendment or interpretive protocol that clarifies the relationship between Maputo and the new convention and reinforces existing obligations, while avoiding creating parallel regimes, or interpretations that lower established standards.

The path to ending violence against women and girls in Africa requires first getting states to ratify the Maputo Protocol without reservations and to push for governments that have reservations to withdraw them. It means the AU should increase funding for robust implementation and monitoring mechanisms, including more resources allocated to the Commission to match the expansion of its mandates.

In the meantime, the AU should commit to addressing gaps in its new Convention on Ending Violence through inclusive consultations with civil society. Meaningful participation is not a courtesy; it is a foundational principle of the African Charter. A convention of this nature without robust consultation risks undermining its own legitimacy. We cannot afford to continue wasting time.

Distributed by African Media Agency (AMA) on behalf of Human Right Watch

 

The post AU Should Strengthen its Framework to Curb Violence Against Women appeared first on African Media Agency.

On the Termination of Pregnancy Bill: Just How Safe is ‘Safe Abortion’?

Abortion in Malawi
Churches in Malawi back proposed Pregnancy Termination Bill

By Precious Nihorowa

Recently, the Centre for Solutions of Journalism (CSJ) called on the Tonse Alliance government to look into abortion law reforms and enact the proposed Termination of Pregnancy Bill which, among other things, is meant to deal with what is called unsafe abortions among girls and women by allowing them to access abortion services in public hospitals rather than using other alternative means that are considered unsafe.

The call was made last week in Blantyre during the CSJ’s day-long training on sexual and reproductive health for traditional and religious leaders from Blantyre and Chiradzulu. According to the statement made by the executive director of the organization, Mr Brian Ligomeka, enacting the bill into law will ensure the safeguarding of human rights especially for women who are the main concern (or victims) in issues of abortion.

Mr Ligomeka pointed out that the new leader, Dr Lazarus Chakwera who is also a pastor, should not appeal to religion in handling the issue as Malawi is a secular state and some people who voted for him are not affiliated to any religion. The organization’s appeal comes from a background of a reported increase in unsafe abortions among girls and women in the country revealed by a research carried out in 2015 by the Malawi’s College of Medicine and Guttmacher Institute which indicates that 141,000 girls and women in the country induce abortions every year. Dr Francis Makiya who is also the secretary general for coalition of prevention for unsafe abortion (COPUA) also concurred with Mr Ligomeka and noted that unsafe abortions are one of the topmost five causes of maternal mortality and morbidity in the country.

This is not the first time that the bill has come to the limelight. In 2016, the parliament was also geared to table the bill and see the possibility of recommending it to be enacted into law. The Episcopal Conference of Malawi (ECM) and the Evangelical Association in Malawi (EAM) organized a pro-life march against the move. This, however, brought mixed reactions among different stakeholders in the society with some accusing the church bodies of diverting from their spiritual means of achieving goals to secular ones. And elsewhere in the world, especially in Africa, the issue of legalizing abortion has always sparked hot debates.

For instance, in November last year, there was an International Conference on Population and Development (ICPD25) which took place in Nairobi, Kenya and it was themed ‘Accelerating the promise’. Among the many things that the conference had on its agenda, it aimed to promote sexual health and reproductive rights especially for women and minority groups such as Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender and Intersex people (LGBTI). The conference resolved to improve accessibility of health care facilities and services for women which includes access to safe abortion. As is in the case of the proposed Termination of Pregnancy bill of Malawi, this entailed that women should be free to go to health facilities such as hospitals and clinics for abortion services rather than using other unsafe means to abort. In the words of Ms Gabriella, the President of the Inter-Parliamentary Union, “the substance of the debate is about the right of every woman to decide about her own her body.”

But the question that remains complex is, how safe is this so-called safe abortion? The Merriam Webster dictionary defines the word ‘safe’ as a state of being protected from or not exposed to danger or risk; not likely to be harmed or lost. It also defines abortion as the intentional and deliberate ending of a pregnancy by removal or expulsion of an embryo or fetus before it can survive outside the uterus.

This means that the death of the unborn child is not accidental as it may happen in some circumstances. It is rather well-intended and planned. Now when one looks at the process of abortion itself, it becomes unimaginable that one would call it safe. How can an act that eliminates the life of a human being, in this case the unborn child, be termed safe when the act is a threat to life? Whose safety is protected here. Some have argued that it is the woman who benefits from safe abortion since it gives her an opportunity to abort under the watchful care of competent professionals such as doctors and nurses. But, as Alveda King argues, “abortion is not health care. A woman has a right to her body, but that is not her body. What about the baby?” Moreover, it must also be noted that quite a number of women have died from complications that have developed from the so-called safe abortions. Does that, then, guarantee the intended safety even on the woman?

Furthermore, those arguing for the adoption of safe abortion are doing so under the guise of promoting sexual rights of women, that is, that a woman should have control over her body. But why should a person be legally allowed to infringe the rights of another in the name of exercising her rights? In this case, why should the right to life of the unborn child be compromised just because the woman wants to enjoy her rights? As far as the activism for sexual rights for women with regard to safe abortion is concerned, rights are sought without the duty that accompanies it and freedom is pursued without any sense of responsibility. Moreover, if all rights and freedoms were sought from such a perspective, the society would be in total anarchy. And so, even if it is worth acknowledging that cases of abortion are diverse, complex and have different motivations, abortion cannot be safe. The funny thing is that, as the former President of the United States, Ronald Reagan, argues, everybody that is arguing for abortion has already been born. Abortion of any kind has never been and is not safe. This is just common reason and does not appeal to any religion. Therefore, the reasoning that the proposed Pregnancy Termination bill should be enacted to ensure safe abortion for women is flawed and built on a shoddy premise.

The writer is a Malawian currently studying Theology at the Catholic University of East Africa in Kenya. He writes in his personal capacity. Feedback: preciousniho@gmail.com