Covid-19 and State Compliance with Human Rights Standards in SADC

Since March 2020, governments in Southern Africa have implemented measures to combat the spread of COVID-19, with the attendant effect of restricting some fundamental freedoms. International and domestic law allows reasonable limitation of some human rights when faced with a natural disaster such as the COVID-19 pandemic. However, limitation of rights must be consistent with the principles of proportionality and non-discrimination. Further, some rights are non-derogable and must be respected even during the subsistence of a national disaster or public emergency. In order to support the rule of law and encourage good governance, the Africa Judges and Jurists Forum (AJJF) undertook a study on state compliance with human rights in the context of the pandemic. The study focuses on four jurisdictions in Southern Africa: Botswana, Mozambique, Zambia and Zimbabwe. It compares domestic law and practice with regional and international obligations and best practices. Key findings: i. Emergency measures have resulted in the limitation of non-derogable rights including the right to life, freedom from torture and degrading treatment and the right to human dignity. ii. Some restrictive measures do not meet the requirements of reasonableness, necessity and proportionality. These include, but are not limited to, demolition of vending market stalls and the criminalizing public critique of government responses to the pandemic. iii. Unreasonably restrictive measures have been deleterious to the right of access to livelihoods. iv. Several rights and fundamental freedoms have been curtailed as part of the response to the pandemic and these include, but are not limited to the right to social security, adequate health care, adequate housing, access to water, dignity and equality. v. The COVID-19 pandemic has been used as a cover to deprive people of political representation, restrict civil space and strengthen authoritarianism.

Download Here