"The research paper is premised on the fact that NEPAD has the potential to reduce poverty and improve the observance of human rights in Africa. Both of these outcomes are relevant because they address the right to an adequate standard of living. It is, however, doubtful whether the economic path chosen by NEPAD to addres the key issue of poverty is actually going to have a positive impact on realisation of this rigts. This is particularly important given the fact that NEPAD's economic plan is premised on free market economics, private sector led growth and Foreign Direct Investment (FDI), which it hopes, will improve the quality of life of the poor. There are problems with this approach because previous economic programmes that were imlemented in Africa with similar economic programmes failed because they never put people at the core of their develoment plans. The success of NEPAD's programme will depend on whether people are put at the core of its programmes, otherwise its contribution to improving living conditions in Africa will be minimal. Secondly, the institutional framework for human rights in NEPAD is not strong enough to address human rights. As a result, human rights issues are not likely to attract the seriousness that they deserve. This paper therefor intends to suggest ways of strengthening the human rights mechanism in NEPAD. ... The study is divided into five chapters. Besides this chapter, the seocnd chapter will trace the historical development of NEPAD. It will also examine what NEPAD is all about, its institutions and proposed programmes. The third chapter will discuss the concept of the right to an adequate standard of living as enunciated in the Internaitonal Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (ICESCR) and the African Charter on Human and Peoples' Rights (ACHPR). The chapter will seek to define the scope of the right to an adequate standard of living and discuss the obligations of the state towards the realisation of this right. The fourth chapter deals with how NEPAD addresses the right to an adequate standard of living as elucidated on in the previous chapter. The fifth chapter will address the issue of how NEPAD can be made more responsive to addressing the right to an adequate standard of living. The conclusion will be contained in this chapter." -- Chapter 1. / Prepared under the supervision of Mr. Martin Nsibirwa, Centre for Human Rights, Faculty of Law, University of Pretoria, South Africa / Thesis (LLM (Human Rights and Democratisation in Africa)) -- University of Pretoria, 2002. / http://www.chr.up.ac.za/academic_pro/llm1/dissertations.html / Centre for Human Rights / LLM

The thesis explores the potential of African higher education institutions in assisting the New Economic Partnership for Africa’s Development (NEPAD) in its quest to affectively achieve its goals. My contention is that higher education institutions need to be favourably positioned in terms of institutional autonomy and academic freedom to assist the achievement of the NEPAD goals. Moreover, there is a need for deliberative democracy, if the NEPAD goals are to be achieved affectively, especially from the perspective of higher education institutions.

Thesis (MA (Political Science))--University of Stellenbosch, 2010. / ENGLISH ABSTRACT: The purpose of this study was to describe the factors that led to the creation of warlords in Angola and Sierra Leone so as to better understand the dynamics and origins of warlord politics. The two warlords that were focused on, and compared, were Jonas Savimbi (Angola) and Charles Taylor (Liberia and Sierra Leone). Authors like Mary Kaldor (2006), William Reno (1995, 1997, 2000, 2001, 2002, 2006, 2007) and Collier and Hoeffler (2004) contributed toward the base of this study. Their work captured the issues contributing toward the warlord phenomenon and generated thought surrounding the context in which these warlords arose. John Mackinlay (2000) was used to describe and analyse the origins of warlordism and how the warlord phenomenon has changed with the onset of new wars, especially in the late 20th and 21st centuries (Kaldor, 2006). Furthermore, the work of Thomas H. Greene (1984) was used in guiding this thesis into a systematic study, focusing mainly on the leadership, following, organization, techniques and external support of both Jonas Savimbi and Charles Taylor as examples of contemporary warlords. Through utilizing the contributions of the above authors on this topic, the similarities and differences between the two warlords were explored. The study found that while Jonas Savimbi and Charles Taylor emerged from different eras and contexts (Savimbi out of the Cold War and Taylor as a result of globalization), they both became typical warlords. Savimbi only became a warlord after 1992. Before, Savimbi used Maoist ideology while an insurgent against Portugal, whereafter he became a rebel in the Angolan civil war. Taylor was a warlord in diamond-rich neighbouring Sierra Leone. Both used identity politics to gather a following while Taylor used brute force and the manipulation of the youth. They both manipulated illicit criminal networking and operated internationally, smuggling diamonds. The main difference, however, is that Taylor was an insurgent in Liberia where he seized power in 1990 and became president in 1997, while a warlord in neighbouring Sierra Leone. Savimbi, on the other hand, never attained presidential power even though he participated in the 1992 Angolan elections which he lost, whereafter he ceased to be a revolutionary, and became a real warlord without the external support he previously had. Savimbi was assassinated in 2002 and Taylor abdicated in 2003, currently standing trial in the International Criminal Court (ICC) in The Hague. He stands trial for the human right atrocities committed in Sierra Leone. Their legacies live on. / AFRIKAANSE OPSOMMING: Die doel van hierdie studie was om die faktore te beskryf wat gely het tot die ontstaan van krygshere (“warlords“)in Angola en Sierra Leone, en om die dinamika van krygsheerpolitiek beter te verstaan. Die twee krygshere waarop gefokus en vergelyk was, is Jonas Savimbi (Angola) en Charles Taylor (Liberië en Sierra Leone). Die denke van skrywers soos Mary Kaldor (2006), William Reno (1995, 1997, 2000, 2001, 2002, 2006, 2007) en Collier & Hoeffler (2004) het bygedra tot die basis van hierdie studie. Hulle werk het ingesluit die aspekte wat bygedra het tot die krygsheer fenomeen, en het besinning aangemoedig oor die agtergrondsfaktore waaruit hierdie twee krygshere ontstaan het. John Mackinlay (2000) se werk is gebruik om die oorsprong van krygsheerpolitiek te beskryf, asook hoe die krygsheerfenomeen verander het met die uitbreek van “nuwe oorloë“ (Kaldor, 2006), veral aan die einde van die 20ste en 21ste eeue. Verder is die werk van Thomas H. Greene (1984) gebruik om hierdie tesis ‘n sistematiese struktuur te gee wat gefokus is op die leierskap, volgelinge, organisasie, tegnieke en eksterne ondersteuning van Jonas Savimbi en Charles Taylor. Hierdie twee persone is albei voorbeelde van kontemporêre krygshere in die jongste verlede. ‘n Vergelykende studie verg dat ooreenkomste en verskille tussen die twee krygshere verken word deur gebruik te maak van die bydraes van bogenoemde skrywers. In die studie is bevind dat alhoewel Jonas Savimbi en Charles Taylor uit verskillende eras en agtergrond kom (Savimbi uit die Koue Oorlog en Taylor as gevolg van globalisasie), albei tipiese krygshere geword het. Savimbi het Maoistiese ideologie gebruik terwyl hy ’n insurgent teen Portugal was. Daarná het hy ’n rebel in die Angolese burgeroorlog geword. Hy het eers na 1992 ‘n krygsheer geword nadat hy die verkiesing verloor het en sy buitelandse steun verloor het. Taylor, aan die ander kant, was ‘n krygsheer in die diamantryke buurland, Sierra Leone. Altwee krygshere het identiteitspolitiek gebruik om volgelinge te kry, terwyl Taylor ook brutale krag en die manipulasie van die jeug gebruik het. Hulle het beide internasionale diamante gesmokkel deur kriminele netwerke te gebruik. Die groot vi verskil is egter dat terwyl Taylor ‘n krygsheer in Sierra Leone was, was hy ook ‘n insurgent in Liberië, waar hy in 1990 mag gekry het en in 1997 president geword het. Savimbi, aan die ander kant, het nooit presidensiële mag verkry nie, alhoewel hy deelgeneem het aan die 1992 Angolese verkiesing. Hy het daarna opgehou om ‘n revolusionêr en ‘n rebel te wees en het ‘n ware krygsheer geword (sonder die eksterne ondersteuning wat hy voorheen gehad het). Savimbi is in 2002 vermoor en Taylor het in 2003 abdikeer. Taylor is tans onder verhoor in Den Haag waar hy tereg staan by die Internasionale Strafhof vir oorlogsmisdade en menseregteskendings in Sierra Leone. Beide hierdie krygshere se nalatenskap leef egter voort.

Thesis (MDF (Development Finance))--University of Stellenbosch, 2010. / ENGLISH ABSTRACT: Infrastructure and related services are crucial for facilitating economic activities, creating employment opportunities and generating economic growth. The African continent has a huge infrastructure gap estimated by the World Bank at US$75 billion per annum. However, the current levels of public sector resources and foreign capital inflows in Africa are insufficient to fund this infrastructure gap. Africa, therefore, needs to explore new sources of funding to finance its infrastructure backlog. It is then natural that Africa should encourage the private sector to invest in the infrastructure sector. According to the Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD), the worldwide funded pensions market is about US$24.6 trillion of which US$16.2 trillion is held by pension funds (Inderst, 2009). Infrastructure investments provide important benefits including long-term and inflation-hedged cash revenues which are compatible with pension fund interests. Pension funds around the world have been already investing in infrastructure assets, for example in Latin America, Australia, Canada and the United States of America (US) amongst others. However, such experiences of pension fund participation in infrastructure financing in Africa are very rare. Anecdotal evidence suggests that African pension funds currently manage assets of about US$300 billion. If a small portion of the pension fund assets could be invested in infrastructure projects in Africa, the continent’s infrastructure gap could be partly addressed. The New Partnership for Africa’s Development (NEPAD), a programme of the African Union, seeks to address the infrastructure gap and mobilise the necessary resources domestically and from outside the continent. NEPAD, together with the African Development Bank (AfDB) and the regional economic communities, has developed an Infrastructure Plan for Africa. This study explores the possibility of utilising some of the Africa pension fund assets for infrastructure investments especially in the NEPAD infrastructure projects. The global trends in pension fund investments in infrastructure are reviewed to propose a model for infrastructure investments by African pension funds and some recommendations are put forward on how to increase such investments. AFRIKAANSE OPSOMMING: Infrastruktuur en verwante dienste is krities vir die fasilitering van ekonomiese aktiwiteite, die skep van werksgeleenthede en om ekonomiese groei te genereer. Die Afrika-kontinent het ’n groot infrastruktuur-gaping wat deur die Wêreldbank op US$75 biljoen per jaar beraam word. Die huidige vlakke van openbare-sektor hulpbronne en buitelandse kapitaalinvloei is egter onvoldoende om hierdie infrastruktuur-gaping te befonds. Afrika moet daarom nuwe bronne vir befondsing ondersoek om sy infrastruktuur agterstand te befonds. Dit is dan natuurlik dat Afrika die privaatsektor sal aanmoedig om in die infrastruktuur-sektor te belê. Volgens die Organisasie vir Ekonomiese Samewerking en Ontwikkeling (OECD), is die wêreldwye pensioenmark omtrent US$24.6 triljoen waarvan US$16.2 triljoen deur pensioenfondse gehou word (Inderst, 2009). Infrastruktuur-beleggings bied belangrike voordele insluitend langtermyn- en inflasie-verskanste kontantinkomstes wat versoenbaar is met pensioenfonds belange. Pensioenfondse regoor die wêreld het alreeds begin om in infrastruktuurbates te belê, byvoorbeeld in Latyns-Amerika, Australië, Kanada en in die Verenigde State van Amerika. Sulke gevalle van pensioenfonds deelname aan infrastruktuur-finansiering in Afrika is egter seldsaam. Daar word gespekuleer dat Afrika se pensioenfondse tans bates bestuur van ongeveer US$300 biljoen. As ’n klein gedeelte van die pensioenfondsbates in infrastruktuur-projekte in Afrika belê kon word, sou die kontinent se infrastruktuur-gaping gedeeltelik aangespreek word. Die nuwe vennootskap vir Afrika se ontwikkeling (New Partnership for Africa’s Development, NEPAD), ‘n program van die Afrika Unie, streef daarna om die infrastruktuur gaping aan te spreek en die nodige hulpbronne binnelands en van buite die kontinent te mobiliseer. NEPAD, tesame met die Afrika Ontwikkelingsbank (AfDB) en die streek se ekonomiese gemeenskappe, het ’n infrastruktuur-plan vir Afrika ontwikkel. Hierdie studie ondersoek die moontlikheid om ’n gedeelte van Afrika se pensioenfondsbates vir infrastruktuur-beleggings aan te wend, veral in die NEPAD infrastruktuur-projekte. Die wêreldwye neigings in pensioenfondsbeleggings in infrastruktuur word ondersoek om ’n model voor te stel vir infrastruktuur-beleggings deur Afrika pensioenfondse en ’n paar aanbevelings word gemaak om sodanige beleggings te verhoog.

Transmits decision SS.VII/2 of UNEP Governing Council/Global Ministerial Environment. / UN Job no.: N0230044 E. Material type: Resolutions/decisions (UN). Issued under agenda item 1, agenda document A/CONF.199/PC/1.

South Africa is seen as a major destination for refugees and asylum-seekers and is, according to the 2010 Report of the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees, the world’s highest destination country for asylum-seekers, mainly from Sub-Saharan Africa. Following the 1994 democratic elections, there was a transformation in foreign policy, embracing the African Agenda, and South Africa became a major country of destination because of its relative prosperity in Africa. As a State Party to the 1951 United Nations Refugee Convention on the Status of Refugees, South Africa is under a legal obligation to protect refugees and grant them legal rights. At the same time, South African citizens, who had legitimate aspirations that the 1994 democratic government would address their development challenges, opposed the significant flow of refugees into the country by violent acts of xenophobia. The government, seen as a moral authority internationally with human rights being a key principle underpinning its foreign policy, found itself between the promotion of the African Agenda and its commitments to its own citizens. The refugee issue was addressed in the United Nations where the government made multilateral diplomacy a central platform of its foreign policy, a policy embedded in Africa and the South. South Africa is used as a case study to determine how it used multilateral diplomacy in the United Nations refugee regime through its coalition, the African Group, to address the migration issue. The study draws out the weaknesses of the international refugee regime by discussing the roles of two important diplomatic actors: the sovereign states in the United Nations General Assembly, and the international organization mandated to supervise the international refugee regime, the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees. South Africa’s foreign policy objective of promoting the African Agenda at times conflicts with the promotion of its national interest. Its progressive Constitution (1996) provides economic, social, and cultural rights to refugees, to the resentment of its own citizens, who view the refugees as beneficiaries of the United Nations. The study provides a critical analysis of South Africa’s multilateral diplomacy, and also provides the following recommendations where South Africa could use this mode more effectively to address the migration issue: Reform the international refugee regime; Allocate funds from the United Nations regularly assessed budget to the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees; and, Develop an international normative regulatory framework for irregular migrants. / Dissertation (MDiplomatic Studies)--University of Pretoria, 2012. / Political Sciences / Unrestricted

Thesis (MPhil)--Stellenbosch University, 2003. / ENGLISH ABSTRACT: This thesis is an interpretation of the New Partnership for Africa's Development paradigm as explained in the policy document released in October 2001, in terms of Manuel CasteIls ' theory of the Network Society. This research is simply structured into three sections: an explanation and criticisms of NEPAD, an explanation of CasteIls ' theory, and a synopsis of correlations between the two. The NEPAD is a development paradigm aimed at the socio-economic development of the African continent. It is envisioned to be a partnership between the developed world and African leadership to lift the continent from the depths of poverty, corruption and exclusion, in which it now finds itself The document was created through a merger of the Omega Plan, the Millennium Action Plan and the ECA Compact. The main proponents of the initiative are Presidents Mbeki, Obasanjo and Bouteflika. Although NEPAD has been well received internationally, it has come under severe criticism from African civil society. Concern has been raised that NEPAD will serve to further consolidate the neo-patrimonial state and existing elite networks through providing the requested funding; in this context the argument for increased foreign direct investment is especially questioned. The authors of the document are especially criticised for excluding civil society from the drafting process. Due to this lack of consultation, it is argued that NEPAD does not reflect the true will of the African people. The neo-liberal undertones of the document, the recognition of the process of globalisation, and Africa's resulting marginalisation as well as the threat this poses for global security are further points of critique that are explored in this thesis. Manuel CasteIls provides an explanation of the new global economy in his theory of the Network Society. He argues that the dominant system today, is a result of the advances in information and communications technology (ICT) as well as the capitalist pursuit of profit. The new global economy is therefore not only the new dominant international economic system, but also the new historical reality. Against this backdrop, he proposes a Technological Marshall Plan which essentially is a call for massive technological investment into Africa to assist the continent to leap-frog the industrial age and connect with the new global economy. There are several points of correlation between NEPAD and Castells. Essentially NEPAD takes the worldview explained by Caste/Is as its point of departure. NEPAD then builds a development strategy in full coherence with the logic of the theory of the Network Society. NEPAD concurs with CasteIls on the role played by ICT in the process of globalisation. The disarticulation of space and time has led to an instantaneous, global expression of social and economic life, specifically in financial markets and the production process. The result is the inclusion of valuable people and assets into the global network, while the devalued are excluded. Both NEPAD and CasteIls argue that the current state of affairs is both morally wrong and economically and politically unstable. It is therefore, as both ague, in the interests of the developed world to engage in this new partnership. This thesis exposes fundamental correlations between the theory of the Network Society and the New Partnership for Africa's Development. / AFRIKAANSE OPSOMMING: Hierdie tesis is 'n interpretasie van die "New Partnership for Africa's Development" (NEPAD) paradigma, soos uiteengesit in die beleids dokument wat in Oktober 2001 uitgereik is, aan die hand van Manuel CasteIls se teorie van die Netwerk Samelewing. Die narvorsing is gestruktureerd in drie seksies: 'n verduideliking van NEPAD en die kritiek daarop, 'n verduideliking van CasteIls se teorie en 'n samevatting van die ooreenkomste tussen die twee. NEPAD is 'n ontwikkelings paradigma, gemik op die sosio-ekonomiese ontwikkeling van die Afrika kontinent. Dit word voorgehou as 'n venootskap tussen die ontwikkelde wêreld en Afrika leierskap, waarin die kontinent uit die situasie van armmoede, korrupsie en uitsluiting gehelp sal word. Die dokument is 'n kombinasie van die Omega Plan, die Millenium Aksie Plan (MAP) en die ECA Compact. Die hoof voorstanders van die initatief is Presidente Mbeki, Obassanjo en Bouteflika. Ten spyte van NEPAD se goeie ontvangs in die internationale samelewing, het die burgelike samelewing van Afrika dit nie sonder kritiek aanvaar nie. Kommer is uitgespreek dat NEPAD net die belange van die neo-patrimoniale staat en die bestaande elite netwerke sal konsolideer, deur die voorsiening van fondse. In die konteks word die vraag vir die vergrote buitelandse direkte investering veral bevraagteken. Die outeurs van die dokument word veral gekritiseer omdat hulle die burgerlike samelewing uitgesluit het uit die ontwerp van die konsep. Juis om die rede word daar geargumenteer dat NEPAD nie die ware wil van die mense van Afrika reflekteer nie. Die neo-liberale ondertone van die dokument, die erkenning van die proses van globalisasie en Afrika se marginalisasie wat gevolg het, as ook die bedreigings wat dit vir globale sekuriteit inhou, is verdere kritiek waarna gekyk sal word in die tese. Manuel CasteIls voorsien ons van 'n verduideliking van die nuwe globale ekonomie in sy teorie oor die Netwerk Samelewing. Hy argumenteer dat die dominante sisteem vandag voorspruit uit die ontwikkeling van informasie en kommunikasie tegnologie, as ook die kapitalistiese strewe na profyt. Die nuwe globale ekonomie is daarom nie net die nuwe dominante internationale ekonomiese sisteem nie, maar ook die nuwe historiese realiteit. Teen die agtergrond stel hy 'n Tegnologiese Marshall plan voor, wat essensiël 'n vraag vir substansiële tegnologiese investering in Afrika is, om die kontinent te help om die industriële tydperk te oorbrug en aan te sluit by die nuwe globale ekonomie. Daar is heelwat ooreenstemmings tussen NEPAD en CasteIls se teorie. Essensiël gebruik NEPAD CasteIls se wêreld beeld as vertrekpunt. Daarna bou NEPAD 'n ontwikkelings strategie in ooreenstemming met die logika van die teorie van die Netwerk Samelewing. NEPAD stem ooreen met CasteIls oor die rol wat IKTs speel in die proses van globalisasie. Die verplasing van spasie en tyd het gelei tot 'n skielike, globale uitdrukking van sosiale en ekonomiese lewe, spesifiek in finansiële markte en die produksieproses. Die gevolge is die insluiting van waardevolle mense en bates in die globale netwerk, terwyl dit die wat in waarde verminder uitstluit. Beide NEPAD en CasteIls argumenteer dat die huidige stand van sake beide moreel en ekonomies verkeerd is, as ook polities onstabiel. Dit is daarom, soos beide argumenteer, in die belang van die ontwikkelde lande om deel te neem aan hierdie vernootskap. Die tesis lig fundamentele ooreenkomste tussen die teorie van die Netwerk Samelewing en NEPADuit.

The object of this study is good governance, the context for its consideration is the New Partnership for Africa’s Development (NEPAD), and the disciplinary perspective from which it is considered is Public Administration. Good governance is a conceptual problematique. It is multi-dimensional, value-laden, trans-contextual and nebulous. The question of what good governance means is a subject of contestation. Good governance is used in NEPAD as a principle without the attempt to clarify its meaning at the conceptual level. Much of the existing body of scholarship on NEPAD also considers good governance largely as a principle rather than a concept. This erroneously presupposes unanimity on its meaning. The African leadership is divided on what good governance means in the context of NEPAD. In this regard scholarship largely fails to provide an intellectual solution. The extent of complexity of the concept in the study lies in the fact that the context of its consideration [NEPAD] is itself a subject of contestation whereas the disciplinary perspective [Public Administration] from which it is considered has not yet reached a consensus with itself about its theoretical base. Against this background the question that the study asks is, what does the concept good governance in the context of NEPAD mean for Public Administration? The study examines this question to make a contribution towards a better insight into, and broadening of, the body of scientific knowledge by engaging in conceptual, theoretical and philosophical studies to understand good governance in the context of NEPAD and determine its meaning for Public Administration. The study finds that the paradigm of engagement in the existing body of literature is framed in the binary logic, which is rooted in realist epistemology or positivism. This approach to scientific discourse is limited in dealing with complex conceptual, theoretical and philosophical questions. The study develops, as a contribution to science, an alternative epistemological framework from which good governance in the context of NEPAD could be understood. Such epistemological framework is, for the purpose of this study, termed the contingent co-existence of opposites. It is used to conceptualise good governance in the context of NEPAD and determine its meaning for Public Administration. / Public Administration / D.Litt. et Phil. (Public Administration)

The object of this study is good governance, the context for its consideration is the New Partnership for Africa’s Development (NEPAD), and the disciplinary perspective from which it is considered is Public Administration. Good governance is a conceptual problematique. It is multi-dimensional, value-laden, trans-contextual and nebulous. The question of what good governance means is a subject of contestation. Good governance is used in NEPAD as a principle without the attempt to clarify its meaning at the conceptual level. Much of the existing body of scholarship on NEPAD also considers good governance largely as a principle rather than a concept. This erroneously presupposes unanimity on its meaning. The African leadership is divided on what good governance means in the context of NEPAD. In this regard scholarship largely fails to provide an intellectual solution. The extent of complexity of the concept in the study lies in the fact that the context of its consideration [NEPAD] is itself a subject of contestation whereas the disciplinary perspective [Public Administration] from which it is considered has not yet reached a consensus with itself about its theoretical base. Against this background the question that the study asks is, what does the concept good governance in the context of NEPAD mean for Public Administration? The study examines this question to make a contribution towards a better insight into, and broadening of, the body of scientific knowledge by engaging in conceptual, theoretical and philosophical studies to understand good governance in the context of NEPAD and determine its meaning for Public Administration. The study finds that the paradigm of engagement in the existing body of literature is framed in the binary logic, which is rooted in realist epistemology or positivism. This approach to scientific discourse is limited in dealing with complex conceptual, theoretical and philosophical questions. The study develops, as a contribution to science, an alternative epistemological framework from which good governance in the context of NEPAD could be understood. Such epistemological framework is, for the purpose of this study, termed the contingent co-existence of opposites. It is used to conceptualise good governance in the context of NEPAD and determine its meaning for Public Administration. / Public Administration and Management / D.Litt. et Phil. (Public Administration)