CONFERENCE THEMATIC PILLARS
The conference is organised around five thematic pillars, each forming the basis of dedicated plenary and working group sessions.
Pillar 1 — The Normative Foundation: A judicial assessment of the 1951 Refugee Convention, the 1969 OAU Refugee Convention, the Kampala Convention, the African Charter on Human and Peoples' Rights, and their domestic application. Participants will examine how international and regional instruments interact with national constitutional frameworks and where conflicts or gaps have arisen in judicial practice.
Pillar 2 — Non-Refoulement and the Right to Seek Asylum: The cornerstone principle of refugee law of non-refoulement continues to be challenged in practice. This pillar examines how courts across Africa have interpreted and enforced non-refoulement, the procedural safeguards attached to asylum claims, and the judicial response to summary deportations, and the growing trend of externalizing asylum procedures through third-country processing agreements.
Pillar 3 — Statelessness, Identity, and Access to Justice: Stateless persons represent one of the most legally vulnerable populations on the continent. This pillar examines how courts have engaged with statelessness in the context of birth registration, nationality disputes, and the rights of stateless children.
Pillar 4 — Climate Change: This pillar examines the emerging international and regional jurisprudence on climate-related displacement, considers how African judges can and should interpret existing instruments to provide protection, and explores what, if any, normative innovations are required.
Pillar 5 — Judicial Independence and Institutional Capacity: Effective judicial protection depends on courts that are independent, adequately resourced, and accessible to those who need them. This pillar examines institutional challenges (for example, the administrative detention of asylum-seekers without judicial oversight; the limited reach of legal aid; the vulnerability of judicial independence in contexts of executive pressure) and considers what structural and procedural reforms would strengthen the role of courts in protection.