| dc.description.abstract | This study investigates the relevance of the principle of non-interference in internal affairs of a sovereign state provided for in the UN, the AU and its predecessor the defunct DAD. The practices of the DAU and AU in the context of the non-interference principle are compared with a view of showing how the AU has been able to inject innovation in circumventing this principle which is founded on another principle of international law: sovereignty. The aim of the study is to investigate the relevance of non-interference principle in the current globalised world system. The study adopted a descriptive research design which involves certain predictions and narration of facts and characteristics.
The study relies mostly on secondary data from written and recorded material that include both secondary documents and primary documents. The secondary documents used are textbooks, journals, newspapers, internet searches, AU pamphlets, articles and policy papers. Primary documents used include official government documents, minutes of meetings and speeches of relevant personalities and selected official UN, OAU and AU documents. This study is based on the theoretical tool of liberalism which assumes that anarchy and war can be policed by institutional reforms that empower international organizations. Liberalism probes the conditions in which diverse interests among independent transnational actors lead to cooperation hence regional integration.
To liberals sovereignty hence non-interference is not sacrosanct so intervention is necessary in permitted circumstances especially in the protection of human rights as provided for by the Constitutive Act of the AU, this transcends national interests and sovereignty. The theory as an analytical tool focuses on how influences such as international law and organizations, democracy, free trade, collective security, mass education and multilateral diplomacy can improve life globally. The analytical tool therefore sits on two broad themes of this study: regionalism and non-interference principle. The conclusion reached is that the principle of non-interference in internal affairs of another state meant to protect the newly independent African states became an inhibition to the working of the OAU.
The OAU therefore found it hard to handle massive human rights violations, crimes against humanity and genocide on the premise that internal conflicts attracted the noninterference principle. New developments like globalization, internationalization of human rights and conflicts, escalation of intra-state conflicts, interdependency and cross cutting environmental issues have diminished sovereignty and made it necessary for the AU to device policies that go beyond the DAU charter provisions. The change from OAU to AU involved a major charter shift to tackle new challenges of the 21 st century.
The new organization was to respond to these developments including spurring the continent to economic development. The AU has learnt from the loopholes and weaknesses of the OAU by providing for intervention and employing versatility in the interpretation of the non-interference principle, unlike the OAU which interpreted the non-interference principle dogmatically. The AU has focused on good governance, human rights, democracy and economic development. It has also employed creative ways to circumvent non-interference like the practice of peacekeeping, good offices mediation diplomacy, NEPAQ and its process of APRM. The threat of coups and endemic internal conflicts like in Somalia are among the challenges to the AU which force the Union to seek ways of going beyond indifference to being a brother's keeper through collective security interventions. | en_US |
