NHRC Chair: Africa’s Human Rights Crisis is Implementation, Not Law

By Seedy Jobe

The chairperson of The Gambia’s National Human Rights Commission (NHRC), Emmanuel Daniel Joof, has warned that poor implementation of human rights decisions remains the most significant challenge confronting Africa’s justice system.

Mr. Joof made the remarks during a side event organized by the Institute for Human Rights and Development in Africa on the margins of the 87th Ordinary Session of the African Commission on Human and Peoples’ Rights. He stressed that the continent is not lacking in legal rulings, but rather in the enforcement of those decisions.

“Africa does not suffer from a shortage of human rights decisions,” he said, noting that numerous judgments, recommendations, and declarations have been issued across regional bodies. “Our real problem is implementation.”

He criticized the tendency for such decisions to remain unexecuted, describing them as “beautifully bound reports” that often end up “collecting dust in air-conditioned offices.”

Mr. Joof emphasized that the disconnect between legal rulings and their practical enforcement leaves victims without meaningful remedies.

“Victims cannot eat judgments. Victims cannot sleep inside recommendations. And communities do not experience justice through only press statements,” he said.

While acknowledging the growing body of jurisprudence from institutions such as the African Commission on Human and Peoples’ Rights, the African Court on Human and Peoples’ Rights, and the ECOWAS Court of Justice, Mr. Joof warned that weak enforcement undermines accountability.

He cautioned that failure to implement rulings risks eroding public trust, normalizing impunity, and weakening confidence in the broader human rights framework.

Mr. Joof attributed the implementation gap to both structural and political factors, noting that regional mechanisms depend largely on the cooperation of member states and lack direct enforcement powers.

“Unlike a domestic system where after the judgment you have the sheriff’s decision, in the regional bodies, it depends heavily, mostly, on state cooperation,” he explained.

He also identified limited public awareness as a key obstacle, pointing out that many citizens—and even some government officials—are unaware of existing human rights decisions. He added that limited media coverage further reduces pressure on authorities to act.

To address these challenges, Mr. Joof highlighted the potential role of national human rights institutions (NHRIs) in bridging the gap between decisions and implementation. He said such institutions can track rulings, engage relevant government agencies, and monitor compliance.

In The Gambia, he noted, the NHRC already supports the Universal Periodic Review process, submits complementary reports, and monitors the implementation of recommendations from the Truth, Reconciliation and Reparations Commission.

“If we are already doing this and have the metrics, why can’t we extend the same approach to existing judgments?” he asked, urging African NHRIs to develop systems for tracking compliance with decisions of the African Commission and other bodies.

“Implementation is not magic,” Mr. Joof said. “It requires systems, pressure, coordination, and persistence. NHRIs should institutionalize this process in their work. They are the bodies mandated to promote and protect human rights.”