South Africa Youth Submission to the APRM: 2020-2021
Problems and Purpose
The South Africa Youth Submission (2020–2021) African Peer Review Mechanism( APRM) tackled youth marginalisation in national governance straight away by having more than 150 youths participate in discussions for the Second-Generation APRM Review of South Africa (Dooms & Fayoyin, 2021). This tactic is especially valid considering that more than 60% of the population in South Africa is youths under the age of 35, thus, making it unavoidable to engage them meaningfully in one way or another in the APRM processes.
The Youth Submission to the APRM is revealing the central dilemma: however, though, youth voices are given a platform, their actual influence on democratic governance is still limited. Youth Parliament is one of the examples of such a situation that often leads to tokenistic engagement and hence does not allow for real youth input. Therefore, real structural reform is a must if the youth are to play a role in policy-making that tackles the governance shortcomings of the election process continually, which are high unemployment, poverty, and inequality. There is a need for the introduction of effective programmes that will promote education, entrepreneurship, and local economic growth to attain a more equal society (South African Institute of International Affairs, 2021). Besides collecting the opinions of the youth, one of the aims of this project was to promote democratic accountability alongside empowering the young people through their capability to participate based on evidence. However, the extent of the change was limited due to the existing economic and social disparities which made it hard for some people to access digital means, apart from poor enforcement of policies. That is why the case illustrates both the potential and the limitations of participatory governance in regard to the youth marginalisation issue.
Background and Context
The APRM (African Peer Review Mechanism) is an autonomous project of the African Union that was set up in 2003 with the aim of enhancing transparent, responsible, and inclusive governance throughout the states that are members of the union. The participation of civil society is critical in facilitating the implementation of proposals derived from the APRM Country Review Reports. Digital governance has been accorded a full theme area of concentration, and ensuring sufficient representation of under-represented groups is paramount not only for the attainment of APRM's objective but also for future consideration. Being affected by the COVID-19 pandemic, the APRM turned to an online model, and the South African Institute of International Affairs ( SAIIA) played a major role in the whole process. The SAIIA's collaboration with the APRM was to boost public engagement, which led to writing a joint report on report-writing capacity development. There were three papers highlighting the endurance amid the challenges brought about by the pandemic (Vania, Monyae, & Naidoo, 2025).
The change of course that happened pointed out how important the digital mechanism was in the keeping of civic engagement during times of crisis, and this is an argument that could win favourable consideration for future participatory governance models. In South Africa, the COVID-19 pandemic made it essential to have a youth submission process that was completely virtual, thus increasing interaction via digital platforms. The online transition facilitated the procedure to reach a wider audience and increased the availability of the process. This scenario reveals the persistent tech gap in South Africa and illustrates how digital governance could still keep the public involved during crises if adequate improvements were made. Young people were involved in a consultative process that led to the Youth Submission to the African Peer Review Mechanism (APRM) The findings of the report are available for stakeholders to contribute to a discussion of its findings with the youth authors (South African Institute of International Affairs, 2021). Informed by writing workshops and a background paper crafted by youths summarising their views, the nine working groups were created to craft evidence-informed responses. After validation workshop responses on 24 February 2021, the final report was produced (Dooms & Fayoyin, 2021).
Organizing, Supporting, and Funding Entities
The project illustrated a multi-stakeholder model common in participatory governance, rooted in cooperation between a continental organisation, a regional think tank, and a consulting company. It was commanded primarily by youth and civil society groups (CSOs), with significant guidance and implementation by the South African Institute of International Affairs (SAIIA) and coordination by Jasoro Consulting, secretariat to the African Peer Review Mechanism (APRM) Civil Society Working Groups. SAIIA has been actively involved in the APRM process since the early 2000s, with Director of Operations Ms Shanitha Govender pointing out the organisation's commitment to civil society capacity building and congratulating the APRM Secretariat on its efforts in creating effective cooperation. Steven Gruzd, SAIIA Programme Head, provided a historical overview of how SAIIA became involved in the APRM, tracing it from its initial workshops to its present national-level involvement that enables CSOs to produce solid evidence-based submissions (African Peer Review Mechanism, 2025).
The SAIIA not only facilitated the youth engagement initiatives and policy papers but also provided both logistical and intellectual support. The consulting firm Jasoro, as the secretariat, made sure that the youth networks were in sync with the APRM standards. The APRM Secretariat, by being part of the formal assessment of South Africa, had oversight over the institution and thus gave credibility to the results. The alliance is proof of the co-governance model, which is an essential element of participatory democracy
Participant Recruitment and Selection
The manifesto highlighted the importance of diversity, inclusiveness, and the necessity for real youth participation in order to consider these factors as the governing ones. But it also emphasises the role of the youth as active citizens and even as co-designers in governance, which is the major point of the manifesto. In his criticism of the civil society's role as a mere token, Mr Dalmar Jamar proposes that the civil society involvement is to be secured through the APRM process from the very beginning, that the civic space is to be safeguarded, that diversified representation is to be provided and that different, marginalised groups are to be included (Vania, Monyae, & Naidoo, 2025).
In the month of September 2020, more than 150 youths coming from various networks took part in the drawing up of a youth-initiated written submission to the South African Peer Review Mechanism (APRM). The programme, which was very inclusive and looked at different aspects such as socioeconomic status, education, and geography, was able to attract around 200 youngsters from all over the country. The pandemic led to the transition to an online platform that allowed participation from areas outside Johannesburg due to the reduction of cost and increased accessibility. The age, race, and location diversity of the youth was acknowledged, and representation was ensured through the recruiting strategy, which aimed at bringing together different youth networks via both official and informal methods. The attending problems included the possibility of convenience sample biases working against the young people without technology access and those living in cities, particularly during the lockdowns. The consultation made it a point to focus on the inclusion of the less represented adolescents in its efforts to increase the partnership (Dooms & Fayoyin, 2021). Slowly but surely, more and more people joined the party, but the metropolitan and well-connected youth still took the lion's share, and this was a constant reminder of the problem of getting all voices heard equally in the digital participation processes.
To aid participants without web access during online sessions, data was supplied and connections to platforms like WhatsApp were made. This aimed to lower the digital divide, promote involvement, and ensure inclusion. The main aim of the ongoing session is to define success, where attendees are encouraged to think about key issues and propose solutions. This way needs a common grasp of the intended result, prompting participants to imagine the country's future and its impact on citizens (South African Institute of International Affairs, 2020).
Methods and Tools Used
The South African Institute of International Affairs (SAIIA) was the one that initiated a project that aimed at the inclusion of youth in the review of the APRM of the country. The methodology was based on Hart's 'Ladder of Participation' model, which aimed not only to give youth a real voice but also to encourage them to make substantial contributions. The report was improved by the contributions of a review class in February 2021, along with several writing meetings. A final report in May 2021 showed how young people participated through discussions on governance and how they were acknowledged in such discussions. The method tried to cope with the slowly changing status of youth in the APRM reviews by giving them the chance to express their views and having a great influence on the final submission (Dooms & Fayoyin, 2021).
To promote clear governance, the African Peer Review Mechanism (APRM) uses the COPPER framework: Candid, Open, Planned, Participatory, Explanatory. This conference tries to increase understanding of the APRM by getting young people involved in discussions about how things are governed. Ways to make things better include using media to raise awareness, sticking to COPPER principles, keeping Country Review Reports (CRRs) safe from government meddling, using political events for promotion, and putting educational programmes in place for civil society and officials. These plans seek to create real changes in governance all through Africa (Vania, Monyae, & Naidoo, 2025).
What Went On: Process, Interaction, and Participation
In the context of South Africa's youth-oriented governance, the participants established the governance aims by pinpointing nine major issues that impact their lives. This grassroots method required collaboration among the groups for research as well as the drawing up of thematic sections, all supported by evidence from a background study that was commissioned. Unemployment, gender-based violence, education, climate change, digital inclusion and peace & security were the main issues of discussion and hence considered the priority issues. This method had the effect of illuminating the youth's active participation in the resolution of their pressing problems (South African Institute of International Affairs, 2020).
The document acknowledges the fact that South African teenagers are often engaged in the decision-making process about governance and public policy. The officials and politicians were always present during the most significant gatherings and thus, the youth were treated as equal partners. This fact indicates the extent to which the youth are considered important citizens who, besides elections, can also influence policy discussions. The engagement of the African Peer Review Mechanism (APRM) was a direct reflection of a very good model of participatory governance where the highest level of engagement was seen according to Hart's ladder. This arrangement greatly enhanced South African democracy by allowing the adults and the youth to take turns in making the decisions and resolving issues (Dooms & Fayoyin, 2021). By adopting this ground-up approach, the youths not only determined the process but also the outcome. Moreover, the online discussions where both the youth and government representatives had equal participation added to the legitimacy of the process. According to Hart this case scenario attained one of the highest levels of participation: true partnership and power sharing (South African Institute of International Affairs, 2020).
Influence, Outcomes, and Effects
One of the most fundamental teachings is the necessity of the incorporation of the youth in political discussions from the very beginning, their non-involvement leads to feeling of detachment. The South African initiative to include youth in decision-making processes during online debates was an eye-opener which greatly impacted the course of the debate. Not only did it enable the youth to take responsibility but also gave them the power to issue a call for solutions to problems concerning their participation (Dooms & Fayoyin, 2021). The APRM Secretariat viewed the entire document consisting of the youth reviews and recommendations from the South African Youth Submission to the African Peer Review Mechanism (APRM) for the years 2020-2021 as a success story that should be followed by other nations. It encompassed the discussions by the Southern African non-governmental organisation representatives regarding the strengths and weaknesses of the APRM.
Vania, Monyae, and Naidoo (2025) claim that civil society is a major factor in the African Peer Review Mechanism (APRM) ,as it advocates great changes. They appreciate the professional leadership of the APRM but point at the issue of not implementing the review recommendations. Germain Tshinu from the APRM Secretariat emphasized that civil society suffers from hardships, such as restrictions imposed by governments on the number of registered groups, yet it remains very instrumental to the APRM. In a similar manner, Mr Dalmar Jamar, another APRM official, pointed out that the participation of the civil society sector is a means of making sure that the knowledge stays within the organizations.
Analysis, Theoretical Linkages, and Critical Reflection
2020–2021 APRM Youth Submission represents a transition from token involvement to true governance partnership. In transitioning from manipulation, tokenism, and decoration to genuine influence, the procedure relied on Hart's 'Ladder of Participation' model. The young people's voices were the ones that not only dictated but also directed the activities devised, instead of being just an afterthought. The young participants' voices were heard and valued by the aforementioned method, which also guarantees their expression. The model of participation not only made sure that the youth were engaged in a meaningful way but also built up the empowerment and collaboration between the government and the youth stakeholders (Dooms & Fayoyin, 2021). Also, it may lead to the empowerment of young people and the creation of collaborative partnerships between the public and the youth in Africa, where democracy is still a theoretical concept in some countries. Different points of view can be easily collected and presented by tackling urban biases and recognising the contributions of young people.
The South African youth consultation went beyond mere consultation and effectively tried to meet the high-level participation expectations. The youth, as equal collaborators and co-architects, actively played a role in defining the key issues, deciding on the method, and controlling the resources. They also shared the decision-making power by promptly reporting their results to the continental APRM bodies and the National Governing Council (NGC). This is getting us nearer to the Partnership stage of Arnstein's ladder, ensuring that the opinions of the public are acknowledged and promoting high-level engagement (Dooms & Fayoyin, 2021).
To eliminate low participation levels, such as manipulations and tokenism, is the principal aim of Hart's Ladder of Youth Participation. Rather, youngsters are seen as active citizens who help shape policy. They get respect, direction, and recognition as experts. The highest levels on Hart's Ladder are reached through empowering participants to set agendas, distribute resources, and approve the final documentation: adult-initiated, shared decisions with youth.
The APRM Youth Submission process in South Africa highlights the importance of public participation in governance directly, which aligns with the ideas of participatory democracy. The procedure involves Africa in its entirety, is a multi-stakeholder initiative, and uses citizens' comments as direct inputs to a formal governance assessment through discussions conducted in an inclusive manner. Although it was not without flaws, the procedure nevertheless gained recognition as a best practice exampleOn the contrary, short-term engagement, non-enforceable policy, urban bias in participation, and the digital gap were the main obstacles (Dooms & Fayoyin, 2021). The South African experience presents the argument that the young population's participation in African governance systems should be a requirement rather than an option. With the right backing, this young people the predominant segment of the population can bring to the table fantastic, policy-relevant knowledge.
The case highlights the necessity of giving preference to execution and responsibility instead of just reporting and, at the same time, making sure that the youths are involved early and constantly. To get early participation embedded in the system, to break the digital governance barrier, and to support peer learning as a way of making APRM and participatory democracy in Africa better. The APRM Strategic Plan (2025-2028) should strongly focus on moving from just doing reviews to real implementation, accountability, and monitoring of the proposed activities. Moreover, digital governance barrier removal and early engagement institutionalisation are equally vital And lastly, the other states can consider the South African Youth Submission procedure as an example for peer education and up-skilling, demonstrating the incorporation of governance institutions with the very observant, vigorous, and youthful-led techniques (Dooms & Fayoyin, 2021).
To sum up, the South Africa APRM Youth Submission reveals the potentials of participatory democracy when the youth are acknowledged as co-architects of governance. The hardship of the digital divide, the necessity of continuous financial support, and the full integration of the youth's voices in the official policy-making process are the main issues that need to be overcome in order for such engagement to last long.
See Also
References
African Peer Review Mechanism (APRM). (n.d.). About the African Peer Review Mechanism (APRM). African Union. https://www.aprm.au.int
African Peer Review Mechanism. (2025, June 9). Southern Africa reflects on civil society’s role in the APRM and plans for the future [Press release]. https://aprm.au.int/en/news/press-releases/2025-06-09/southern-africa-reflects-civil-societys-role-aprm-and-plans-f
Dooms, T., & Fayoyin, T. (2021). Youth perspectives on South Africa’s governance challenges (Policy Insights No. 114). South African Institute of International Affairs. https://saiia.org.za/wp-content/uploads/2021/07/Policy-Insights-114-dooms-fayoyin-1.pdf
South African Institute of International Affairs. (2021, February 24). Launch of the South Africa APRM youth submission. https://saiia.org.za/event/launch-of-the-south-africa-aprm-youth-submission/
South African Institute of International Affairs. (2020, October 8). SAPS event report: 8 October 2020 (LM). https://saiia.org.za/wp-content/uploads/2020/10/SAPS-event-report-8-October-2020_LM_.pdf
South African Institute of International Affairs. (2021). Youth submission to the APRM in South Africa 2020/2021. https://saiia.org.za/wp-content/uploads/2021/05/SAPS-Report.pdf
Vania, T., Monyae, L., & Naidoo, T. (2025). Engaging civil society in the APRM process: Lessons from Southern Africa (Workshop Report, 3-4 June 2025, Centurion). African Peer Review Mechanism & South African Institute of International Affairs. https://aprm.au.int/sites/default/files/files/2025-08/aprm-saiia-report.pdf
Zikalala, N. M. (2020, October 8). SAPS event report: 8 October 2020 (LM). South African Institute of International Affairs. https://saiia.org.za/wp-content/uploads/2020/10/SAPS-event-report-8-October-2020_LM_.pdf
