The State review is over and the delegation has gone home. For many organisations, the work stops there. RFLD’s manual, Reporting on the Maputo Protocol: a manual for shadow reports, argues that it is where the most important work begins. Module 8 is devoted to follow-up, because concluding observations change nothing on their own.
What happens after the review
The African Commission’s 2020 Rules of Procedure set out the next steps. Under Rule 82, concluding observations are adopted at the next session, and never more than two sessions after the examination. They are sent to the State within 30 days and then published online.
Rule 83 adds detail on content and follow-up. Concluding observations identify priority issues and set the date of the State’s next report. Commissioners follow up through their promotion activities, and the concluding observations are cited in the Commission’s Activity Reports to the African Union Assembly.
In practice, this means a gap of several months between the review and publication. Kenya’s report under the Charter and the Maputo Protocol, for example, was examined at the 87th Session in May 2026, and concluding observations were adopted at the 88th Session in July 2026. Coalitions can use that time to prepare.
Reading the concluding observations
When the concluding observations are published, the manual suggests reading them alongside the shadow report. Which recommendations did the Commission adopt, in whole or in part? Which issues were left out? Which formulas did the Commission use? Which questions went unanswered during the dialogue?
The manual highlights one formula in particular: a request that the State “provide in its next periodic report information on” a specific issue. The Commission’s concluding observations on Malawi, adopted in March 2022, asked the State to report in its next report on the status of the Termination of Pregnancy Bill and the reasons for its delay. Wording of this kind creates a clear obligation and sets up the next shadow report.
Building a national follow-up plan
The core tool in Module 8 is a follow-up plan. For each recommendation, the template asks the coalition to identify:
- the institution responsible for acting on it
- the action required
- an indicator that shows progress
- the coalition member who leads on it
This turns a list of recommendations into a work plan. It also makes clear which ministries and agencies need to be engaged. A recommendation on budget allocation goes to the finance ministry and to parliament’s budget committee, while one on a stalled bill goes to the ministry of justice and the relevant parliamentary committee.
Engaging government
Concluding observations are addressed to the State, and the State is not a single actor. Ministries often learn about the Commission’s recommendations only when civil society brings them to their attention. The manual points to an example from Namibia. In November 2024, the Centre for Human Rights at the University of Pretoria held two separate meetings in Windhoek. The first, on 12 November, brought together civil society organisations to work on shadow reporting. The second, on 14 November, brought together government ministries to discuss implementing the Commission’s recommendations. Issues still open at the time included restrictive abortion law and incomplete comprehensive sexuality education.
That two-track approach, with civil society and government in separate rooms, is a model the manual suggests for a post-session follow-up module.
Keeping a file on each recommendation
The manual recommends a documentation file for each recommendation. Over the months and years before the next review, the coalition adds evidence: new laws, budget figures, court decisions, statistics and documented cases. When the next State report appears, the coalition already holds the material for its next shadow report.
This also helps when the State reports. If the State claims to have implemented a recommendation, the coalition can test that claim against the evidence it has collected.
Using the media and public pressure
The manual encourages coalitions to share the concluding observations widely when they are published, including in national languages. National media coverage can create pressure that a regional body alone cannot. The same care applies as before the session: one spokesperson, and no exposure of survivors or members at risk.
When the State does not report again
Follow-up also prepares for silence. Many States fall behind on their next report. The Commission adopted Resolution 566 in August 2023, its “proactive approach” for prolonged non-reporting. It allows the Commission to send written questions to a State and adopt concluding observations without a report. A coalition that has kept its follow-up files up to date is well placed to feed evidence into that procedure.
Follow-up is where the investment pays off
A shadow report takes months to produce. Without follow-up, much of that investment is lost. The manual’s fourth planning question asks whether a coalition can follow up after the session. Module 8 shows what that follow-up looks like in practice.
The manual’s self-assessment rubric lists designing national follow-up plans as one of eight core skills. For a reminder of how the follow-up cycle connects to the rest of the process, see the summary of the manual.
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.
