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 PanAfrican 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 24th 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 multi-stakeholder 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 3rd 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 re-conceptualizes 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 advocacy and mobilisation moments and opportunities|

No

Event topic

1.
2.

Africa
Finance
ministers Addis
Ababa, March, 2015
conference
Ethiopia
World Economic Forum
South Africa
June, 2015

3.

Alternative mining indaba

4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24

Venue

Dates

Focal
point
organisation
Oxfam liaison at AU.
/TJN-A
South African CSOs

Cape town, South 9 - 12 February, FBOs in South Africa

Africa
2015
Pan Africa MPs network on IFF Malawi
March -15
TJN-A/MEJN
convening
WTO Ministerial conference
Nairobi, Kenya
15th-18th
TJNA and KHRC
December, 2015
AU June summit
South Africa
June, 2015
TJN-A/
World Social Forum
Tunis, Tunisia
23-28 March 2015 Our World is not for
sale
Network
(OWINFS)/GATJ
World Bank/IMF Spring Meetings Washington DC
April
International Women Days
March
ITUC
Labor Day
May
international public service day
23rd June
Africa Industrialisation day
November
International human rights day
EAC Summit
Nairobi, Kenya
20th February
EATUC/EATGN
SADC Summit
Gaberone
August
AA/TJN-A/ITUC
International Anti Corruption Malaysia
2
to
4th TI
conference
September
World Day for decent work
7th October
ITUC
Central Bank governors meeting
Addis
Ababa, March, 2015
Ethiopia
ADB Annual meeting
Financing the Future
Accra, Ghana
17-18 March
International Anti-Corruption Day
9th December
PRC- AU
Addis
April
AA/TJN-A
Convening on IFF strategy paper
March
TWN-A/TJNA/AFRODAD
Pan
African
Trade
union Kigali
October
ITUC
conference

SID= Tax & inequality

Case studies in East Africa
2nd conference on inequalities,
2016
Transparency International

African regional meeting , KenyaCPI- On anti-corruption day

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 countryspecific 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.