By Ken Ukaoha
President Muhammadu Buhari has received flaks from highly placed Nigerians for not signing the Continental Free Trade Agreement (CFTA), but is the President wrong to have refused to sign the agreement?
Aspersions
Nigeria did not sign on to the framework arising from the negotiations of the African Continental Free Trade Agreement (AfCFTA), which held in Kigali, Rwanda on the 21st March, 2018. There have been several blames, lamentations and castigations (some constructive though) that have resonated the entire media space till this date even casting aspersions on the Nigeria’s leader-President Mohammad Buhari, for declining to sign the dotted lines. There have also been deplorable barrage of blames on some trade and private sector practitioners, albeit some indirectly, for convincingly advising the President into the decision of withholding his signature. As the dust around Nigeria and the CFTA gradually begins to settle down, it is perhaps needful to appropriately reflect and contextualize the needless stigmatization on the country, the President and indeed Nigerians for the well thought out decision on the CFTA.
AfCFTA hinged on three pillars
For the records, no right thinking Nigerian, nay, African would advise against the well-thought out arrangement called AfCFTA, which is even long overdue, especially with recourse to the thrust behind the establishment of the African Union (and right from when it was the Organization of African Unity – OAU). In the first place, if African countries have for long been enmeshed with trade agreements under different bilateral and multilateral arrangements and configurations, what makes it strange having an intra-African trade agreement that increases trade and wealth redistribution among Africans? In terms of objectives, the CFTA is well-couched and framed within the ultimate targets of delivering on the three pronged pillars of wealth creation, sustainable development and poverty reduction.
African single market
The foregoing intendment is gorgeously dressed with the attractive provisions of Article 3 of the Framework Agreement establishing the AfCFTA which seeks to create a single African market for goods, services and movement of persons with a view to deepening economic integration of the continent in line with the vision of Agenda 2063. By these provisions, every patriotic African who has travelled or transacted business across the continent can only copiously applaud this abundant expression of freedom and borderlessness associated with the AfCFTA in the making.
In view of the above context, it is therefore important to categorically state that the President of Nigeria did not refuse to sign the CFTA as has been (mis)conveyed by many castigators. Rather, what the President has done is to withhold his signature to allow for proper buy-in and ownership of the outcomes of the negotiations through stakeholders and citizens consultations (including sensitization). Such consultations are appropriate mechanisms required for contemporary socio-economic development, especially for agreements having international and cross-border dimensions that specifically commit the country and her citizens to certain obligations. Perhaps what critics have refused or ignored to appreciate is that the AfCFTA is loaded with implications on the food security and overall socio-economic livelihoods of the people; and therefore, any responsible Government must provide robust platform for vigorous and comprehensive scrutiny of the output. In this regard, Nigeria’s President stands tall and should be respected among his colleagues irrespective of the lenses worn by some observers and their dimensional view of his action.
Need for sensitisation
It is noteworthy that prior to the March 21st planned signing of the AfCTFA Framework in Kigali, there was a window created for member states to engage their citizens in consultations with the AfCFTA draft text. The truth is that while the duration of that window was not enough to mobilize and sensitize citizens on such a highly technical subject; essentially and regrettably, many Countries in Africa did not effectively undertake such needful journey of sensitization of their people. To many Governments, they preferred to embark on sensitization after signing of the Agreement (putting the cat before the horse) thereby condemning the citizens to a secondary and irrelevant status to the Agreement. This action completely negates the concept of good governance especially within the confines of democracy which pre-supposes that persons in Government are trustees to the citizens.
Specific reference should be made to Article 2 (10) of the African Charter on Democracy, Elections and Governance which seeks to “promote the establishment of the necessary conditions to foster citizen participation, transparency, access to information, freedom of the press and accountability in the management of public affairs”. This provision was Inspired by the objectives and principles enshrined in the Constitutive Act of the African Union, particularly Articles 3 and 4, which emphasise “the significance of good governance, popular participation, the rule of law and human rights; and the determination to promote and strengthen good governance through the institutionalization of transparency, accountability and participatory democracy”. Therefore, if the African leaders could negate these clear provisions by side-lining and ignoring citizens participation, what is the guarantee that the signed AfCFTA would be effectively implemented and that the commitments therein honoured by those who speedily signed? Why must we then crucify the man who paused for citizens to reflect in obedience to the tenets of the AU Charter?
Perhaps most laughable is that most of those who cried foul against Nigeria President’s withholding of his signature had neither seen the copy of the concluded Framework Agreement nor gone through the contents of the 253-paged document. Yet, one more bullet for those critics is that the President’s withholding of his signature has even provided them the only opportunity to discuss, perhaps analyse or even organize meetings around the subject of the AfCFTA, and for such Nigerians, yes Africans, they should be most grateful to Nigeria’s Government.
Patient and proper articulation of the collective needs
The message is that while we all need and crave for the AfCFTA, however, African citizens need to determine the kind and contents of the AfCFTA they want. Opportunities must be given for questions to be asked perhaps long before wrap up with signature. For instance, how many people have asked what was responsible for the unprecedented speed and velocity applied in concluding the CFTA, and who is chasing or pursuing Africa that we cannot slow down for a patient and proper articulation of the collective needs and interests of the people? African citizens equally wish to know, what is the place of the Regional Economic Communities (RECs) within the AfCFTA implementation? What is the status of the Regional FTAs and existing Customs Union processes within the AfCFTA? How does the ECOWAS Trade Liberalization and the ECOWAS Common External Tariff (CET), for instance, operate within the AfCFTA? What is the place of the Economic Partnership Agreement (EPAs) with the European Union within the AfCFTA implementation? How are these numerous Trade Agreements African countries have signed to be managed without conflicts and frictions? The negotiators may know (or claim to know) the answers to these questions, but the citizenry need to know even more and therefore be provided the opportunity.
Application of 60% liberalisation
Furthermore, the AfCFTA Framework provides for the liberalization of 90% of Goods and Services sectors. African citizens are entitled to further query and rightly too how the 90% was arrived at? Are there empirical evidences that led to such decision? Given that the African Union had during the EPA negotiations cautioned member states over the scope of liberalization, would it not have been perhaps more instructive or convincing to apply an experimental 60% liberalization with a gradual movement (towards “substantially all trade”) that essentially reflects the status of development of the Member Countries?
Ukaoha, is a Trade Lawyer and member of ECOWAS Task Force on Trade, and President of NANTS.
