The countries that have already ratified the Protocol are Algeria, Burkina-Faso, Burundi, Côte d’Ivoire, Gambia, Lesotho, Libya, Mali, Mauritius, Rwanda, Senegal, South Africa, Togo and Uganda. Unsurprisingly, Zimbabwe is not among the first fifteen to ratify the protocol, but rather more disappointlingly, Kenya’s new regime has also not yet given its support for an African Court on Human and People’s Rights to be established. Kenya and Uganda are the only two African countries in which HRH is trying to establish Human Rights Houses.

Once it has been established, writes Amnesty International, the Court will consider cases of human rights violations referred to it by the African Commission on Human and People’s Rights. Unlike the African Commission, however, the African Court possesses the authority to issue a binding and enforceable decision on cases brought before it. The entry into force of the Protocol is, therefore, an extremely positive step towards demonstrating African governments’ commitment to realise the spirit and letter of the African Charter and ensure the protection of human rights in Africa. The establishment of an independent, effective, and efficient African Court would make a vital contribution to the efforts to strengthen the African regional human rights system, and could stimulate positive change throughout Africa. Furthermore, the Court would provide the platform for the articulation of international legal principles at the regional level, as well as direction and precedents for domestic courts. It would allow victims of human rights violations or their representatives access to a robust institution that is capable of holding states parties accountable to their obligations both under the African Charter and the Protocol as well. The next critical stage is to nominate, elect and appoint the Court’s judges and thus turn the formal establishment that has now taken place into an actually and fully functional court.