Proposed African charter sparks alarm over rollback of women's rights

By A Representative  

Global health, legal and gender rights experts have urged African governments to reject a proposed Draft African Charter on Family Sovereignty and Values, warning that it threatens decades of progress on gender equality, sexual and reproductive health rights, and broader human rights protections across the continent.

Speaking at the June session of SHE & Rights, hosted by the Global Centre for Health Diplomacy and Inclusion (CeHDI), International Planned Parenthood Federation (IPPF), ARROW, APCAT Media and CNS, Dr. Tlaleng Mofokeng, United Nations Special Rapporteur on the Right to Health, described the draft charter as "yet another assault on sexual and reproductive health rights and justice, as well as bodily autonomy and human rights in general."

Dr. Mofokeng said the proposed charter seeks to persuade African governments to withdraw from progressive agreements, including the legally binding Maputo Protocol adopted in 2003. "This draft Charter is the first African continent-wide patriarchal push to dislodge human rights and replace rights with so-called moralistic viewpoints," she said. "Governments need to disengage with this draft Charter and instead honour and deliver on the promises they have made on gender equality and human rights to health."

She emphasized that gender justice and the right to health are "not negotiables" and remain essential foundations for human development, peace and security.

Legal experts participating in the discussion argued that the draft charter would fundamentally alter existing human rights protections. Sibongile Ndashe, Executive Director of the Initiative for Strategic Litigation in Africa (ISLA), said an analysis conducted by her organisation found that the document uses rights-based language while weakening rights protections in practice.

"The rights language is retained in form, but the rights protection is weakened in substance," Ndashe said. She argued that the draft charter invokes sovereignty to resist accountability, family protection to justify exclusion, and culture to limit equality protections.

According to Ndashe, the proposed charter defines family exclusively as a union between a man and a woman and prioritises family cohesion and authority over individual rights. She warned that such provisions could undermine protections for women, children and survivors of abuse.

South African legal practitioner Letlhogonolo Mokgoroane said the charter would effectively erase the rights of gender-diverse individuals by recognising only male and female genders and limiting family recognition to heterosexual marriage and biological parenthood.

"What it does to gender diverse persons is erasure—legal, political and physical," Mokgoroane said. He added that the document rejects comprehensive sexuality education despite evidence linking such education to improved health outcomes, reduced HIV transmission, fewer unintended pregnancies and lower rates of gender-based violence.

Concerns were also raised about the draft charter's emphasis on state sovereignty. Famia Nkansa, Communications Lead at the feminist organisation Purposeful, said the proposal attempts to shift the focus of rights from individual autonomy and dignity to state authority, parental control and cultural preservation.

"When they portray gender equality as a threat to social stability and sexual and reproductive rights as foreign agendas, it is not accidental," Nkansa said. She argued that the charter seeks to redefine human rights protections as foreign impositions rather than African aspirations.

Speakers stressed the importance of defending the Maputo Protocol, a landmark African Union treaty on women's rights ratified by 46 of the AU's 55 member states. Adopted in 2003, the protocol guarantees protections against discrimination and violence, promotes reproductive health rights, and calls for the elimination of harmful practices such as female genital mutilation and forced marriage.

Mokgoroane described the Maputo Protocol as "one of the most widely accepted and most progressive human rights instruments on the African continent," while Nkansa said it demonstrates that gender equality and women's rights are principles developed and embraced by Africans themselves.

Participants also warned that attacks on gender rights in Africa reflect a wider global trend. Dr. Pam Rajput, Professor Emeritus at Panjab University and former Chairperson of the Government of India's High-Level Committee on the Status of Women, said anti-rights movements operate across borders.

"Patriarchy is transnational and so are all anti-rights movements," Rajput said. "Rollback of rights in one region can become a precedent elsewhere."

Calling for international solidarity, Rajput urged governments, civil society organisations and women's movements worldwide to defend universal human rights principles and challenge efforts to roll back gender equality gains.

The discussion also highlighted concerns about the slow progress toward achieving the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals on health and gender equality by 2030. Shobha Shukla, Coordinator of SHE & Rights, noted that only 54 months remain to meet the targets.

"The world is not on track to deliver on either gender equality or health and wellbeing goals," Shukla said. "Instead of moving forward, in many instances we are slipping backwards."

Participants called on African governments to protect the Maputo Protocol, oppose the proposed charter and strengthen commitments to gender equality, sexual and reproductive health rights, and the broader right to health.

The SHE & Rights dialogue brought together advocates, legal experts, public health professionals and human rights defenders to discuss growing anti-rights pushbacks and strategies to safeguard gender justice and health rights across Africa and beyond.