Writing a shadow report takes months of work and depends on the trust of the women who share their experiences. Before any of that begins, RFLD’s manual, Reporting on the Maputo Protocol: a manual for shadow reports, asks organisations to stop and answer four questions honestly. Module 3, on planning, starts here.
Question one: is there a State report to address?
Rule 79(3) of the African Commission’s Rules of Procedure says that shadow reports should “speak to the actual Report.” A shadow report responds to what a State has told the Commission. Without a State report, there is nothing to respond to in the formal sense.
This does not mean that groups in non-reporting States are powerless. Many States are years behind. At the Commission’s 87th Session in May 2026, 18 States were more than three reports overdue and 6 had never reported. For prolonged non-reporting, the Commission adopted Resolution 566 in August 2023. This “proactive approach” lets the Commission put written questions to a State and adopt concluding observations even without a report. That procedure gives civil society evidence a role even where the State is silent. The manual covers it in Module 8.
Where a State report exists, the first task is to read it in full and note every claim about women’s rights, paragraph by paragraph.
Question two: is there enough time?
Shadow reports must reach the Commission at least 30 days before the examination. A State report usually reaches the Commission 120 days before the session. That leaves a coalition roughly three months from publication to submission.
The manual asks groups to be realistic. Collecting evidence, securing informed consent, drafting, validating with coalition members and translating all take time. If the time is too short for a full report, there are alternatives. A short, sharp submission on one or two issues can still be useful. So can a two-page briefing note for the Country Rapporteur Commissioner, a contribution to a larger coalition’s report, or an oral statement delivered by a partner with observer status.
Question three: do you have credible evidence?
The Commission’s 2022 Guidelines on Shadow Reports ask for “reliable, and objective information”: court cases, official reports, research, surveys and up-to-date statistics. RFLD’s manual adds its own rule. Every major claim should rest on at least two independent types of source, for example official statistics plus documented cases.
The honest question is whether your organisation holds that evidence, or can collect it safely in the time available. Strong opinions are not enough. The manual’s evidence matrix template helps a team list each claim it wants to make and the sources that support it. Gaps in the matrix show where more work is needed, or where an issue should be dropped.
Evidence must also be collected ethically. If documenting an issue would put women at risk, the manual is clear that the issue should be handled differently or left out.
Question four: can you follow up after the session?
This is the question groups most often forget. A shadow report has its greatest effect when the same organisations take the Commission’s concluding observations home and push for their implementation. Concluding observations are adopted at the next session and published online soon after. Commissioners follow up through their promotion activities, but national pressure is what moves governments.
The manual asks whether the coalition will still exist after the session. Who will translate the concluding observations, brief the media, meet the ministries concerned and build a follow-up plan? Who will keep a file of evidence on each recommendation for the next report? If nobody can, the report may still be worth writing, but its impact will be limited.
After the four questions: planning the work
If the answers are positive, the manual moves to practical planning. A team selects its focus: the issues where evidence is strongest and where the State report is weakest or silent. It decides whether to work alone or in a coalition. The Commission’s Guidelines encourage joint reports, and the manual’s coalition agreement template helps partners agree on roles and sign-off, including how names appear.
The team then builds a work plan backwards from the 30-day deadline. The manual’s planning calendar sets out each milestone, from the close of evidence collection to the registration deadline for oral statements.
Why honesty pays
The four questions can feel like obstacles. They are a way to protect an organisation’s credibility and the safety of the people it works with. A smaller report that the Commission can use is worth more than a long report that arrives late or rests on weak evidence. The manual’s self-assessment rubric, in Annex B, lets participants rate their own confidence on each skill before they begin.
RFLD’s member organisations come to this work with very different resources. The questions help each one find the right level of engagement. For groups looking for the legal context in their country first, RFLD’s country law profiles are a useful starting point.
About the report
This article draws on RFLD’s report Reporting on the Maputo Protocol: a manual for shadow reports, published on 4 October 2026. Read the summary, download the English edition or the French edition.
