THE year 2025 is halfway through, and it is critical to revisit the African Union (AU)’s theme for 2025, Justice for Africans and People of African Descent Through Reparations, which spotlights the quest for reparatory redress for historical injustices such as slavery, colonialism and apartheid. This theme underscores the growing demand for accountability, acknowledgement and redress for systemic harms inflicted upon African nations and people of African descent globally.
Colonialism left deep-rooted socio-economic and political challenges in many African States. The AU’s focus on reparations seeks to address these disparities and provides a framework for healing and restoration. The AU positions reparations as a necessary step towards justice, recognising the ongoing impact of these historical injustices.
The theme intersects with various international legal principles, including human rights law and the responsibility of States to address historical wrongs. The UN’s International Decade for People of African Descent (2015-2024) supported initiatives aimed at recognising and rectifying injustices. Reparations can take many forms, including financial compensation, land restitution and formal apologies. The challenge lies in establishing a legal basis for these claims, as international law often lacks enforceable mechanisms for reparations.
Not only does AU’s thrust promote unity among African nations and the diaspora, fostering a collective identity that emphasises shared struggles and aspirations, but the debate over reparations also raises questions about national sovereignty and the role of international bodies. Balancing local demands for justice with global political dynamics is a complex challenge for the AU.
One of the biggest challenges is translating the theme into actionable policies. The AU must navigate diverse political landscapes and varying levels of commitment among member States. The theme opens up opportunities for dialogue with international organisations, NGOs and civil society to create a comprehensive approach to reparations.
The foundations of international law are distorted by historical injustices. Legal frameworks like the Berlin Conference (1884-1885) reflect the facilitation and institutionalised colonial exploitation through legal means. International law historically complied with the transatlantic slave trade, which was foundational to the economies of colonial powers. This system provides no legal recourse for the enslaved people and the colonised nations. The adoption of the International Convention on the Suppression and Punishment of the Crime of Apartheid (1973) came after decades of systematic inequality. The AU’s 2025 theme thus directly confronts these historical omissions.
As outlined in the International Law Commission’s 2001 Articles on State Responsibility, the legal basis for reparations within international law is grounded in principles like restitution, compensation and rehabilitation. However, reparations in international law is a contested terrain due to the doctrine of inter-temporal law or the principle of tempus regit actum, which emphasises that legal issues should be evaluated based on the law that was in effect at the time the relevant facts or events took place, not the law in force at the time of the legal dispute’s decision. The principle of statute of limitations, which emphasises that in international law, certain crimes may become immune from prosecution after a long period, is always used by former colonial powers to deny reparations. The principle of non-retroactivity prevents laws from applying to actions that occurred before the law was enacted, causing historical injustices like slavery and colonialism to be argued as legal at the time. International law ensures sovereign equality of States; therefore, demands for reparations may infringe on sovereign rights if not agreed upon through negotiation or treaty.
There is the responsibility and attribution principle in international law, which demands that, in the case of historical injustices, it can be difficult to assign responsibility to contemporary States or entities for actions taken by their predecessors. States may contend that they are not responsible for the deeds of private organisations (such as slave merchants), prior governments, or colonial powers.
- Govt adopts UN protocol on child rights
- UN spotlights Mat'land marginalisation
- Delays in ratifying AU human rights charter disconcerting
- Chefs attempt to sneak to UN
Keep Reading
The other challenge is that international law lacks a universally binding mechanism for regulating reparations for historical injustices, complicating enforcement and making claims reliant on political will, which are difficult to pursue in international courts. Reparations claims raise concerns about fairness, as they may disproportionately target certain States while overlooking global systems of exploitation, undermining the principle of equality among nations (other colonial powers or non-Western participants in the slave trade).
Reparations for slavery and colonialism face resistance, as former colonial powers argue that such claims are impractical and politically destabilising. This is despite precedents like Germany’s reparations to Holocaust survivors (1952) and Namibia (2021) for colonial-era genocide. A good example is Tanzania’s efforts to get reparations from Germany for the atrocities committed during the Maji Maji rebellion. Tanzania is demanding reparations from Germany, not merely for financial restitution but as a quest for acknowledgement and closure. Last year, Tanzania’s Constitutional and Legal Affairs minister, Pindi Chana, underscored the significance of this demand, emphasising the need for Germany to confront its colonial legacy.
The AU aimed to build solidarity among African nations and people of African descent in the diaspora by positioning 2025 as the Year of Justice. This theme also seeks to amplify the voices of marginalised communities in the Global South and challenge the dominance of the Global North in shaping international law. The main hurdle for AU is the eurocentrism in International law. The critical institutions in international relations are heavily influenced by the former colonial masters, for example, the United Nations (UN) and International Criminal Court (ICC) and the International Court of Justice (ICJ). This limits the ability of Africans to pursue justice effectively. Reparations for slavery and colonialism are entangled in broader North-South relations. African and Caribbean nations have pushed for reparatory justice through initiatives like the CARICOM Reparations Commission, but these efforts have been met with resistance from former colonial powers like the UK, France and the US.
The AU’s focus on reparations aligns with global movements like the UN’s International Decade for People of African Descent (2015-2024), which emphasises recognition, justice and development. Reparations are not only about financial compensation but also about recognition, apology and systemic reform. They serve as a form of transitional justice, addressing the structural inequalities that persist as legacies of slavery and colonialism.
Herbert Ndomba, a history professor at the University of Dar es Salaam, hailed the reparations process as a step towards diplomatic reconciliation that will help to heal the wounds and open a new chapter.
A comprehensive rethinking of the tenets and frameworks of international law is necessary to address its shortcomings. African countries must take the lead in creating legal systems that represent their values, circumstances, and goals. Reforming international organisations is one way to guarantee that African perspectives and interests are fairly represented. The AU Commission of International Law should take the lead in advising the AU of the appropriate course of action.
Strong regional legal frameworks must be established in order to assist the drive of the AU for “Afrocentric solutions to Afrocentric problems”. A positive start is the proposed African Court of Justice and Human Rights, which aims to give the continent a forum for resolving legal disputes independently of other organisations.
The AU’s 2025 theme is a pivotal moment in international law. It underscores the need for a collective response to historical injustices and presents both challenges and opportunities for meaningful change. There is a need to engage with these issues through a legal and political lens to achieve reparatory justice and foster a more equitable global community. Advocates for reparations often need to navigate the difficult principles of international law by focusing on political negotiations, treaties or alternative frameworks like restorative justice initiatives, rather than relying solely on existing international legal mechanisms.
