A REPORT OF THE PAN-AFRICAN CSOUNECA CONSULTATIVE &

STRATEGY MEETING HELD ON FEBRUARY 18-19, 2015 IN NAIROBI,

KENYA.

INTRODUCTION
At the 24th summit of the African Union (AU) Heads of State and Government
held in Addis Ababa, Ethiopia on January 30-31, 2015, the leaders adopted
the final report of the AU/United Nations Economic Commission for Africa
(UNECA) High Level Panel on Illicit Financial Flows in Africa.
The leaders also adopted a Special Declaration on Illicit Financial Flows. On
February 1st, a public launch of the report was carried out by the AU and
UNECA in collaboration with Pan-African CSOs in Addis Ababa.
The adoption of the final report by African governments marks a significant
moment in the global fight against tax avoidance and evasion. Indeed, the
decision represents the clearest statement of political will by African leaders
on the corrosive impact of tax avoidance on African societies and the
continents resolve to take action to end the haemorrhage of Africas
resources.
The consultative and strategy meeting was thus a follow up to engagements
initiated between Pan-CSOs and the UNECA/AU at the 24 th African Union
summit.
OBJECTIVES
The consultative meeting had three primary objectives. These are:
1. Analysis of the AU IFF report with particular emphasis on the
recommendations;
2. Road map for popularising the AU IFF campaign (STOP, TRACK IT and
GET IT);
3. Development of the joint AU IFF CSO coalition and UNECA/AU advocacy
plan
In terms of format, the consultation was held in plenary and comprised of
presentations and discussions on:
1.
2.
3.

Analysis of the final report and the recommendations;

Civil society define CSO implementation of the of the
recommendations and
Develop a road map and calendar for joint advocacy between and
by UNECA and the CSO coalition on IFF.

Expected Outcomes

1. developed a draft civil society position and recommendations on IFF in

Africa
2. develop a 12 18 months joint advocacy and mobilization calendar for
CSOs
3. Joint ECA-CSO IFF coalition advocacy plan
Tax Justice Network-Africas (TJN-A) chair Michael Otieno opened the meeting
by recalling African Union leaders adoption of the Panels ground breaking
report and why it was important for CSOs to collaborate with UNECA and
other regional bodies to own, popularize and mobilise the larger African
populace, not least, to raise awareness about the reports findings and to
bring pressure to bear on African countries to implement the
recommendations.
Setting the scene | Savior Mwambwa| TJN-A
This session explored why the AU/UNECA HLP on IFFs in Africa process was
set. The Panel was set up by the African Union but received significant
technical support from the UNECA.
The February 2012 establishment of the High Level Panel followed a
resolution of the 4th Joint Annual Meeting of the AU/UNECA Conference of
Ministers of Finance, Planning and Economic Development in Africa in March
2011. At that conference, the finance ministers agreed to address the
debilitating problem of illicit financial outflows from Africa estimated at about
US$50 billion annually by authorising the establishment of the Panel.
The Panel was tasked to undertake:
a. in-depth studies on IFFs in Africa including to determine the nature,
pattern, scope and channels of illicit financial outflows from the
continent;
b. sensitize African governments, citizens, policy makers, political leaders
and development partners to the problem; mobilise support for putting
in place rules, regulations and policies to curb illicit financial outflows;
and influence national, regional and international policies and
programmes on addressing the problem of illicit financial outflows from
Africa.
c. Identify and streamline specific initiatives that Africa countries could
take as individual nations but also as a region to tackle IFFs.
At each stage, the Panel produced progress reports. The final report is what
the leaders adopted on January 31, 2015
The work of the Panel has officially come to an end but like CSOs, the UNECA
wants to see the work continued hence the desire to strategically collaborate
to both raise public awareness about the report and challenge African
countries to implement the recommendations to curb IFFs from Africa.

Why the report is important|

There is no innovation| Nothing new was found. The figures are pretty
much same as what CSOs have been articulating all these years
But the report is significant because this is a report by African nations.
The report serves as a basis to engage African governments.

Report back on advocacy work carried out by Pan-African CSOs|

Tigere Chagutah| OXFAM
The consortium of Pan-African CSOs had the following as objectives for
mobilisation work carried out in the lead up to and during the summit of
African heads of state and government:

Primarily for the adoption of the Panels report by African

governments;
Set up a mechanism (politically and institutionally) for
implementation of the Panels report recommendations at the
national, continental and global levels to curb IFF from Africa
Institution of a broad campaign to push for an international effort
against IFF, which recognises and incorporates the AU HLPs report
findings and recommendations
Set up mechanisms for implementation of the IFF report
recommendations, ensuring the necessary actions are carried out
and monitored at national, continental and global levels to curb IFF
from Africa;
The protection of a role for civil society and citizens in any
implementation mechanisms to follow the publication of the Panels
report on IFF.

Key activities CSOs undertook|

A joint CSO statement to Heads of State developed in January 2015;

Engaged African Ambassadors and Permanent Representatives in
Addis Ababa. This was facilitated by Oxfam. Requests were sent out
to 10 ambassadors namely Benin, Ethiopia, Guine, Kenya,
Mauritania, Nigeria, Senegal, South Africa, Tanzania and incoming
chair. Four countries responded favourably (Benin, Kenya,
Mauritania (Permanent Reps Chair) and Nigeria). Three meetings
were however held after Banin cancelled. The meeting with the
Nigerian ambassador was interesting as his team came across as
very engaged. They allso come out strongly in support of CSO

positions. They seem to have a willingness to champion the whole

issue of IFF in Africa.
High-level CSO-led event: The initial programme was reformatted
after discussions with UNECA in favour of CSO consultation and
movement building event plus representation of the coalition at
High Level launch of the IFF report on February 1, 2015 which was
chaired my President Mbeki. Speakers included members of the HLP
Panel and UNECA. Savior Mwambwa of TJN-A represented CSOs at
the official public launch of the report.
At the CSO consultation, there were approximately 25 participants.
The consultation took the form of updates on the HLPs process,
report on advocacy, update on CSO tax and IFF campaign.
Participants also identified key moments and opportunities for joint
advocacy in 2015.
Media engagement took place throughout the summit. It took the
form of a press statement which was reproduced and distributed
widely and interviews with a wide variety of media outlets including
Aljazeera, Africa Report and Channel Africa. The press release was
also share on Facebook, Twitter and other social media.

Outcomes|
The HLPs report was adopted and a special declaration passed which called
for actions that are consistent with key demands made by Pan-African CSOs.
Key victories for the coalition were:
Request by Heads of State for the AU Commission, AfDB and the RECs
to follow up on implementation of the reports recommendations, and
report progress annually to the Assembly;
Call for the international community to adopt and implement the
findings and recommendations of the HLP Report
Request by Heads of State for the continued engagement of HE Thabo
Mbeki and Panel members in advocacy efforts to mobilise multistakeholder support, including work with civil society, for
implementation of report recommendations, and
The need for the issue of IFF and their impact on domestic resource
mobilisation to form part of the agenda for the 3 rd Conference on
Financing for Development (FfD) to be held in July this year in Ethiopia.
Lessons drawn from the engagement include the need to start preparation
and engagement early; involve wider group with committed human and
other resources; need for bigger, coordinated and multi-skilled team on the
ground; and invest more time and resources in broader consultation to build
a groundswell of support base.

SESSION II| chaired by Joel Odigie| ITUC-Africa|

Session II of the first day focused on a presentation of the key
recommendations of the HLPs report followed by discussions by all
participants. Luckystar Miyandanzi of EATGN and Nora Honkaniemi of
Actionaid Kenya jointly presented the summary.
Plenary discussion of the report|
The report over plays the role of institution engineering in African
countries. There is an over emphasis on administrative issues;
The report barely touched structural issues and yet these lie at the
core of the issue of IFFs.
The report states that in the extractive sector, African ownership is
small and shrinking;
The remit of MNCs has widened and it is deepening;
That notion of where you should tax where the economic activity takes
place is outdated;
The problem is not administrative, it is structural;
The greatest outflow of resources has coincided with the time that
unprecedented resources have flowed to Africa;
[The report tackles two key sectors of the African economy:
o Natural resources and the other is
o Financial sector
Problematisation of the IFF in the report is limited; the conceptual
framing is narrow.
Nothing stops the group/CSOs to develop a paper that reconceptualizes the debate/report.
Difficulty with recommendation that AU countries should participate a
lot more in the OECD process. It may be more useful for AU countries
to rather engage the BRICS etc.
OCED is not accountable to African governments; they are accountable
to their members.
The analysis of the report is richer than the reports recommendations;
The HLP did not deliver on their entire manage, for example how to
raise resources etc;
How the report is written is political. They do not mention names;
Recommendation not in the report: There is no component on GET IT.
Yet the Slogan of the report is: Track it| Stop it and| Get it
Some expressed disappointment with the report: no thinking outside
the box. Nothing new
Theyre not tax incentives, theyre rather tax subsidies.
Two opportunities:
- Identify champions and

Engage African governments. The latest World Bank report on GDP

classifies Malawi as the poorest country and yet in the HLP report,
the country lost US$2.2 billion;
Need to push for the tax agenda to be in every policy;
There has been a restructuring of the relationship between MNCs and
African countries;
Producer misery and brand worth
There are good sides to the report BUT concerns remain on the
following two areas:
- On the recommendations of the report
- On the process
At the national level, therere groups ready to debate the issue of IFFs;
The report is too diplomatic but that was what the Panel was set up to
do;
What you have in the report is partial insight. In terms of the totality,
the reality could be distorted.
The sources of value extraction from foreign MNCs has expanded in the
last several years.
Contest of big picture versus small picture (details). Long-term and
short-term.
Need to share a common overarching goal, so the group does not get
comfortable with the short term elements.

SESSION III| chaired by Gyekye Tanoh| TWN-Africa

This session discussed and developed elements of to shape the CSO-UNECA
IFF joint engagement plan (in Africa and beyond). The session pulled
together elements to deepen the African process. The discussions revolved
around three broad areas: Process, themes (content) and infrastructure
(methods).
Specific ideas for the joint CSO-UNECA meeting on February 19th
PROCESS:
1.

Pan-African driven process situated in global institutional

landscape
CSOs-UNECA interface and communication to be led by TJN-A

2. Longer term consultations and institution building with

African bodies
Institutionalised involvement and participation of African civil
society within UNECA and AU processes;
Need to conceptualise, discuss and agree movements towards an
institutional arrangement for pooling African expertise to serve as

think-tank on IFF along the lines of the International Study Group

(ISG);
3. RECs How do we engage with RECS and others at sub-regional level
4. National level engagement?

CONTENT:
Deepen analysis and recommendations in HLP report:

(Strengthen what is already included) e.g; Get it and re-articulate

conceptual definition of IFF to reflect changes in global financial and
trading system vis- a vis MNCs
Add what is left out in the Report, e.g financialisation of African
economies, and specific sectorial issues such as the international
financial architecture

Others
(1)Strategies for targets e.g. MNCs
(2)Social service provision and implications of IFF
(3)Constituency building
(4)Monitoring and evaluation of the progress of implementation of the
recommendations of the report. CSOs need to be involved in the M&E
report/progress reports. So it is not just governments coming out with
the reports.
To ask UNECA:
How does UNECA see the role of CSOs in getting C-10 to do its work in
promoting the African position in the FfD process especially the groups goal
for the FfD March 2015 meeting.?

Part II of SESSION III chaired by Fanwell Bokosi| AFRODAD

The session explored how to operationalize CSO engagement, identified
entry points with regards to the HLPs report including mapping of key
opportunities and moment for joint CSO collaboration.

Mapping of African
opportunities|
No
1.
2.
3.

4
5

Event topic

advocacy

and

mobilisation

Venue

moments
Dates

and

Focal
organisati
Africa Finance ministers Addis
Ababa, March, 2015
Oxfam lia
conference
Ethiopia
AU. /TJN-A
World Economic Forum
South Africa
June, 2015
South
CSOs
Alternative mining indaba
Cape
town, 9
12 FBOs in
South Africa
February,
Africa
2015
Pan Africa MPs network on Malawi
March -15
TJN-A/MEJ
IFF convening
WTO Ministerial conference Nairobi, Kenya 15th-18th
TJNA and
December,

2015
6
7

AU June summit
World Social Forum

South Africa
Tunis, Tunisia

World Bank/IMF
Spring
Meetings
International Women Days
Labor Day
international public service
day
Africa Industrialisation day
International human rights
day
EAC Summit
SADC Summit
International
Anti
Corruption conference
World Day for decent work
Central
Bank
governors
meeting
ADB Annual meeting
Financing the Future
International
AntiCorruption Day
PRC- AU
Convening on IFF strategy
paper
Pan African Trade union
conference

Washington DC

9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24

SID= Tax & inequality

Case studies in East Africa
2nd
conference
on
inequalities, 2016
Transparency International
African regional meeting ,
KenyaCPI- On anti-corruption day

June, 2015
TJN-A/
23-28
March Our World
2015
for sale N
(OWINFS)
April
March
May
23rd June

ITUC

November

20th February
August
2
to
4th
September
7th October
Ababa, March, 2015

Nairobi, Kenya
Gaberone
Malaysia

Addis
Ethiopia

Accra, Ghana

17-18 March
9th December

Addis

April
March

Kigali

October

EATUC/EAT
AA/TJN-A/I
TI
ITUC

AA/TJN-A
TWN-A/TJN
A/AFRODA
ITUC

Action Aid

TWN-Africa
Strategy
position
on
AU/UNECA role
Activate process of mobilisation of national level/alternative
thinking
deepen coherence among the IFF initiative and other African
agenda/interim steering set up
produce
strateg
paper
on
IFF
(conceptualisation, app)
Papers
on
restructuring
global value chains
role of financial sector in
Africa vis a vis IFF
FfD process.
post 2015
PALU
study on legislation affecting IFF in Africa
-June/July

ZTP
WSF
SADC
AU summit
ITUC-Africa
CAADP
AMV
Econews - Africa
Mapping
of
PIDA
infrastructure ( PPP, Inv.

DAY TWO OF CONSULTATIONS

Opening session of Day 2 and chaired by Tigere Chagutah included three

representatives from the UNECA in attendance, namely Adeyinka Adeyemi,
Adeyemi Dipeolu and Edmond Johnson.
Context| Savior Mwambwa
The joint CSO-UNECA consultation and strategy meeting was a follow
up to the adoption of the Mbeki Panel report;
The focus of the meeting was not on the report itself but how CSOs and
UNECA could collectively create public awareness and push for
implementation of the recommendations contained therein
The UNECA has developed not blueprint by way of an advocacy plan.

Brief overview of the HLPs work and findings| Adeyinka Adeyemi |

UNECA
One of the underpinning elements of the work of the Panel was
consultations in other to get to the root of the problem
The tone of the report is calling/urging all stakeholders to work
together
General consensus that this report should not be another book on the
shelves: Want an active engagement of all stakeholders
AU leaders have tasked President Mbeki to continue the advocacy
work.
What are the key aspects of the report and what the adoption
of the report means: The adoption of this report and what it means
The first thing that struck the Panel when they started their work was
to ask the UNECA to conduct a study;
Getting to the nitty-gritty was very technical. What struck the Panel
most was that IFF was a political issue. Ultimately, it depends on
political will. It requires mobilisation.
The Panel also found that at the end of the day the problem is due to
lack of transparency. Either through information exchange; laws to get
people/owners to register ownership for example in the course of doing
the work, the Panel found out that the commercial route of illicit flows
was the biggest. The report was more focused on the commercial side
and that was not to belittle the corruption element. Besides there is a
UN and AU conventions on corruption. The Panel therefore wanted to
emphasis the point that the one area that needs to be emphasized is
the commercial end of illicit flows given also that not a lot of work has
been done in this area.

 Another thing the Panel noticed was the issue of over dependence on
natural resources and that makes African countries extremely
vulnerable to IFFs. The point is not ownership or even use of natural
resources. The point is that the natural resources are been extracted
without the countries knowing exactly what were been extracted.
Nearly all African countries depend on self-declaration.
Linked to the above is poorly negotiated contracts
Also of concern to the Panel was that with the rise of digital economy,
there was the tendency for more illicit flows and a growing use of
services e.g. through loans between the same companies to transfer
resources out of Africa.
The Panel also felt that there is tendency for Africa to inadvertently
promote IFFs
Financial secrecy jurisdictions | helping people to hide resources
generated.
Another observation by the Panel was the issue of Asset Recovery
The issue of capacities arose. Not only the ability to have institutions
but also the people who are well paid to manage them. Capacity in the
sense of running the system. The capacity to measure and how to
measure. A notable was the case of timber in Liberia where the tagging
enabled the country to rake in a lot more revenue than before
Again there is no global architecture on IFFs. UN Tax Committee and
OECD. There are fragmented approaches and also gold standards are
being set around the table that excludes Africa.
The Panel also found that when powerful countries have an interest in
an issue something gets done like money laundering and terrorism;
Finally, the Panel pushed for the issue to be brought to the United
Nations.
Adoption itself:
President Mbeki presented the report at a closed session. It was well
received and African heads of state subsequently passed a special
declaration.
The Permanent Representatives forwarded it to the Heads of State for
adoption
Summarized the declaration by African leaders. (See appendix).

After a summary presentation of Day One which is essentially captured under

the first part of SESSION THREE above (on process| content| infrastructure) a
discussion ensured.
DISCUSSIONS (CSO observations)

The report is an important reference point;

However the report does not go far enough. It could be deepened.
The report is very political and diplomatic. Structural issues are not
fundamentally tackled.
The findings are fine but the recommendations did not capture all the
findings;
Issues of procedure: how to engage. There is no global architecture at
the moment to tackle IFFs;
How to use the report to improve
Questions arose about the process status of the Panel. How it been
disbanded or reconstituted.
The role of banks and offshore companies
RESPONSE by UNECA officials
One reason for engaging CSOs is particularly because of Alternative
Thinking;
There is no agreement on national implementation. In working
together, we can tackle these issues. - Reference to tackling the IFF
issue through the APRM.
PROCESS issues: UNECA does not want the engagement to be one-off
either. Issues tend to bring people together rather than process
CONCEPTUAL issues: It is true that the report did not some issues were
not captured)all the issues. Choices had to be made. The Panel had
representation from all stakeholders with the notable exception of
governments.
STRUCTURAL issues: the Panel had to find/establish a balance and that
is why they want the Panels work to continue into the future;
The recommendations were tricky because the Panel did not want a
wooly recommendation and that was why they wanted to be specific
and concrete as possible in the recommendations. The Panel did not
think it was right to be generalist in their recommendations.
STATUS of the Panel: the Panel does not exist a Panel anymore. The
UNECA finance ministers declaration last year tasked President Mbeki
and the Panel members to continue their work in their individual
capacities.
The report may have emerged out of a political process but it is not a
political document. It is a very bold document. Track it, Stop it &
Get it.
Bickering about what is and what is not in the report could be
destructive
DISCUSSIONS PART II
Summary comments and questions by CSO participants:

Why the report recommends the use of institutions and groups that we
as Africans do not belong to or have a right to and an example is the
OECD?
Is it possible to consider country case studies to anchor country
specific advocacy?
How do we connect this IFF as an issue with other significant issues
going on around Africa.
The report is a huge game changer. IFF has to do with the global
architecture of doing business. How Africa and Asia are inserted and
how MNCs have gone ahead to re-craft the global rules/norms.
The equation of IFFs to corruption is misplaced.
RESPONSES by UNECA
Why OECD, IMF etc are in the report: There is a global
structure/process and Africa cannot afford to be absent. If youre not at
the table, you might be the meal.
In terms of country-specific case studies, the Panel did not have the
time to do all that. Mild as the report is, UNECA is already facing some
political pressure.
UNECA currently drawing a programme on Conflict and Development
and the role of IFFs.

SESSION II of DAY II|

Objective: To Identified and agree on specific proposals for be undertaken by
CSOs and UNECA aimed at promoting the implementation of the HLP report
Recommendations.
The meeting identified three (3) areas for joint CSO-UNECA action as follows;
1.) Advocacy/Consultation issues, 2. Infrastructure/Capacity building, 3.)
Analytical work/studies, 4.) Monitoring/progress reporting

1. ADVOCACY/CONSULTATIONS

There will be a structured interface and communication between civil

society organizations (CSOs) and UNECA with TJN-A as a focal
point/organization.
Use ISG approach in the interim,- Institutionalize the deepening of
policy work/Multidisciplinary institutions
Advocacy process aimed at supporting specific AU institution to
spearhead IFF (supported by ECA) (push this through e.g political &
social affairs commission/Labor& social affairs commission, Nigeria

ready to champion)(involve ECOSOC)/ AU wide policy(AMV type)/Legal

instrument on IFF to lead to Landing institution

Link Agenda 2063 with IFF and articulate institutional mechanisms or

set up including at RECs

Bring on board voices of ordinary people and broaden outreach beyond

governance sectors, and devise ways of how to bring in movements
outside through mass mobilization. Take the report down to the
people!

The above should be supported through;

Popularization of
HLP report and IFF issues(Popular version of the
HLP/documentary)
Petitions/Campaign
Response to inquiries ( communication)
Collaborate on contribution to the debate(policy dimension)
Media strategy
Outreach to RECs
Use commemorative days ( see mapping of moments)
Link with other sectors (e.g childrights, Gender)
Reach out to Western goverments
Engage private sector (SMEs) and volunteer initiatives
Advocacy to MNCs
Consider legal routes( e.g PALU is mapping legal instruments on the
continent related to tackling IFFs)
Link with AMV-how do we connect
Outreach to OECD in terms of regulation
Influence school curiculum
Identifying champions (inside and outside), which countries? On the
continent including TAs. (Panel members?)

2. INFRASTRUCTURE/CAPACITY DEVELOPMENT/BUILDING

Consider issues and address institutional issues regarding relationship

between UNECA and AU, joint Secretariat Office- UNECA/AU/ADB
Undertake consultations and mapping to identifying challenges within
African
governments in implementing HLP recommendations( at
National Level, UNECA consultative process)
Work with other African inst. E.g of ATAF, Pan African parliament,

3. ANALYTICAL WORK/STUDIES

 Data generation (UNECA/CSO- mapping of IFF studies exits, what are

the gaps in the existing studies?)
Shared analysis
Break down recommendations according to (Commercial ,Criminal,
Corruption) group recommendations according to type and identify
targets.
What analysis are we missing?: Specific country cases on concrete
things. Investigate case studies in report further.
Analytical model/Mechanisms for tracking?
Connect IFF with others
Studies in other sectors other than Extractives
Further regional analysis on other taxes e.g Robin Hood Tax, Financial
transaction tax
Big 4 accounting firms , ( advocacy, analysis)
BIS- role of the financial sector
Create/utilize central portal that include HLP website as well as
existing network media and information sharing lists ( Afritax)

4. MONITORING/PROGRESS REPORTING

Measure and quantify impact of measures to plug IFF

Steps for tracking, stopping , getting
( Framework for monitoring with political support)
By the June AU summit , come up with practical proposals for
monitoring IFF measures ( indicators)
CSO Targets for SDGs,? TJN-A will share
Isolate specific country case studies on dividends of
Check list of what ought to be in place to stop IFF ( must be
tailored to specific contexts- not one size fits)
Expert group meetings to review reports

Conclusion
It was resolved that a draft action plan with timelines will be jointly drafted
with UNECA to operationalize the above suggested ideas.

Concluding remarks

Adeyinka Adeyemi on behalf of the UNECA thanked all participations

and their organizations and pledged their individual and the UNECAs
institutional support.

Tigere on behalf of CSOs also thanked the UNECA for its role in
preparing the report and their commitment to involve non-state actors
and the larger African populace to root out IFFs from Africa.