Policy dilemmas: how Africa’s lockdown preventative and containment measures for the pandemic were implemented
It is essential for human rights to not be curtailed by lockdowns and for livelihoods to be maintained
The African Peer Review Mechanism (APRM) report on Africa’s governance response to COVID19 pandemic has highlighted at its core the issue of preventive and containment measures. The preventive and containment measures include total or partial lockdowns, which have either been applied to entire countries or only parts thereof.
Take South Africa, for instance. Since the first case of COVID-19 was confirmed in South Africa on 5 March 2020, the national government has taken steps to minimise the spread and impact of the virus.
On 18 March 2020, Dr Nkosazana Dlaminizuma, Minister of Co-operative Governance and Traditional Affairs, issued regulations to prevent an escalation of the COVID-19 pandemic in South Africa.
On 23 March 2020, nine days after detection of the first locally transmitted case, President Cyril Ramaphosa announced a nationwide 21-day lockdown. On 9 April 2020, the President extended the lockdown for a further two weeks. The lockdown restrictions were among the most extreme globally.
According to the report, the duration of these lockdowns varies, ranging from 10 days in Libya, for example, to indefinite, as is the case in South Africa, although here the government periodically scales down the applicable preventive and containment measures.
These lockdowns entail the closure of schools; the banning of public gatherings, including religious gatherings in most cases, (Tanzania was an exception); restrictions of movement and the closure of businesses, save for providers of what the government declares to be “essential services,” which included transport services, essential food and medicine production and retail operations, health workers, and those who maintain key infrastructure such as power, water and sanitation.
Some countries have established thresholds for public gatherings. In Zambia, for example, a meeting of less than 50 people is not considered a public gathering.
“It should also be noted that what amounts to essential services may vary from country to country. In some countries, such as Egypt and Kenya, the preventive and containment measures also entail dusk-to-dawn curfews, which again are either imposed nation-wide or only in regions or localities considered to be most affected,” states the report.
“Countries such as Algeria have imposed total lockdowns in their most affected areas or provinces, while permitting free movement in other areas. Conversely, countries such as Egypt and Ethiopia have imposed nation-wide curfews. Unlike most countries, Tanzania has imposed the least restrictions on its citizens. Here, government and private enterprises continue to operate normally.”
Invariably, the prevention and containment measures have either been preceded, or accompanied by declarations of national states of emergency, or national disaster, as in the case of Malawi and South Africa, or national alarm as in the case of Equatorial Guinea. The result is that most countries are under both states of emergency and lockdowns.
Countries have also closed their borders, particularly with a view to reducing their exposure from high-risk countries.
In addition, countries such as Uganda have suspended refugee reception services, says the report.
Other commonly used containment measures are quarantines, the tracking and tracing of the contacts of infected persons, the encouragement of social distancing, encouraging citizens to wash their hands frequently, and the wearing of protective and preventive equipment such as face masks.
With respect to hand washing, the report notes, Sierra Leone has installed hand washing stations in many of its health facilities, markets and schools.
The quarantines are administered in different ways. In some cases, the affected individuals are required to self-quarantine. In other cases, they are quarantined in government facilities or hotels, either at their expense or at the expense of the government.
For example, in Kenya and Ethiopia, affected travellers are quarantined at their own expense. A common challenge, however, is that the affected travellers may not be able to afford the quarantine expenses. In addition, requiring infected persons to meet the quarantine costs may be counterproductive, as it could discourage people from getting tested.
Another challenge for member states has been ensuring the availability and accessibility of personal protective equipment (PPE).
Egypt has sought to resolve this challenge by tasking its state-owned enterprises linked to the military to produce the required preventive and protective equipment.
Similarly, Mozambique has sought to redirect its industrial sector toward the production of goods required for the prevention and mitigation of the pandemic.
As far as treatment of those suffering from COVID-19 is concerned, Cameroon has established specialised treatment centres in its regional capitals. Senegal is also spearheading the development of affordable ($1) testing kits, working with its research institutions.
The disease containment and prevention measures have implications for citizens’ enjoyment of human rights. For example, quarantines may have adverse impacts on the ability of vulnerable groups to earn a living (since they are likely to lose their jobs as they cannot go to work) and access basic necessities such as food and healthcare.
Such groups also often do not have access to social security, and so measures such as quarantines are likely to have harmful consequences for them.
These measures should therefore be imposed and implemented within a framework that respects the rule of law and the human rights of citizens.
In this respect, the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights permits states to take measures that deviate from their obligations under this covenant in emergency situations.
However, the covenant only permits such deviations when a state officially proclaims a state of emergency and the measures it proposes are proportional, meaning that they are strictly required by the exigencies of the emergency.
The covenant prohibits deviations from certain fundamental rights, including the right to life, prohibition of cruel or inhuman punishment, and the principle of legality. In contrast, the African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights does not allow member states to deviate from their treaty obligations during emergency situations.
In countries such as Kenya and Malawi, the courts have therefore ruled that declarations of states of emergency must be made within the framework of the law, and that the use of force in enforcing curfews is unreasonable and security forces need to respect citizens’ rights to life and dignity.
These courts are also insisting that individuals who are being temporarily held in quarantine are to be treated at all times as free agents, except for the limitations necessarily placed upon them in accordance with the rule of law and on the basis of scientific evidence.
Thus, the containment and prevention measures should not constitute punishment. Further, member states need to ensure that these measures are implemented in a manner that does not undermine livelihoods, particularly of vulnerable populations.
By all accounts, the COVID-19 pandemic represents a global threat for the least developed or most vulnerable countries, and poses an additional level of risk to an already complex situation. The outbreak has wreaked havoc on states in west and central Africa where conflict, violence, displacements of population, natural disasters, climatic or economic shocks have weakened the resilience capacity and where systems are on the verge of collapse.
The pandemic is definitely not just a health crisis and its impact has devastated the region, putting millions at risk and requiring an urgent scale-up of inter-sector support and resources.
According to the APRM report, various countries have established special funds to help them manage the social and humanitarian impacts of the pandemic.
South Africa established special funds to cater for workers with an income below a certain threshold for the duration of four months, assist SMMES under stress — particularly the tourism and hospitality sectors — and help the most vulnerable members of society to absorb the economic impact of the pandemic.
Several other countries, such as Sao Tome and Principe, have received grants from international institutions such as the World Bank to fund their emergency responses.
Kenya received funding from the World Bank, as a contribution to its COVID-19 Emergency Response Project Fund. Zimbabwe also launched a domestic and international humanitarian appeal for $2.2-billion to cater for the pandemic, including critical health spending, water and sanitation, hygiene, food security and social protection.
Mali dedicated $10.4-million to dealing with the pandemic while Togo established a $663-million National Solidarity and Economic Relief Fund to support agricultural production and ensure food security.
Countries such as Angola, Djibouti, Mozambique and the Republic of Sudan have substantially increased their healthcare spending to respond to the coronavirus and are granting tax exemptions for humanitarian aid and donations.
Morocco and Tunisia have tasked their national social security institutions with responding to the vulnerabilities introduced by the pandemic. Their strategic monitoring committees support employees who are registered with national security institutions. They also assist the vulnerable, particularly those in the informal sector, who are vulnerable to shocks and require economic, social or medical protection.
Egypt has extended social protection to support vulnerable families while Ghana has suspended the payment of utility bills for a period of three months, which terminates in June 2020.
Ghana has also established a Coronavirus Alleviation Program, which is a social protection initiative that seeks to support vulnerable households and SMMES.
Some governments, such as Botswana and Lesotho, issued subsidies to supplement the wages of workers in the private sector affected by lockdowns.
According to the report, the Republic of Sudan is considering boosting its social safety net by $1.5-billion within three months. It has also announced a significant increase in the salaries of public sector employees and dedicated funds to support families affected by lockdown measures.
Togo has also launched a money transfer program to help citizens most affected by the crisis. It is also providing vulnerable social groups with free water and electricity for a period of three months.
The majority of African countries are helping their economies to stay afloat by implementing various financial relief measures
Most African Union member states are implementing various fiscal and monetary policies to manage the pandemic and its economic impacts. Through various measures, countries are helping businesses stay afloat, supporting households and helping to preserve employment.
South Africa’s Reserve Bank has accelerated reimbursements and tax credits and allowed SMMES to defer certain tax liabilities. It has also reduced the lending rate by 100bps to 4.25% and instituted measures to ease liquidity strains in funding markets, while the government has launched a unified approach to enable banks to provide debt relief to borrowers.
In April 2020 President Cyril Ramaphosa announced that other measures included the release of disaster relief funds, emergency procurement, wage support through the UIF and funding to small businesses.
“We are now embarking on the second phase of our economic response to stabilise the economy, address the extreme decline in supply and demand and protect jobs,” said Ramaphosa.
“As part of this phase, we are announcing this evening a massive social relief and economic support package of R500-billion, which amounts to around 10% of GDP.”
Egypt announced a $6.13-billion relief package, part of which is intended to support its health and tourism sectors. It has also postponed the payment of real estate tax for three months, lowered energy costs for industries, lowered interest rates by 300 points, and postponed debt repayments by six months for firms and individuals alike.
“The package of decisions taken by the government reflects its determination to quickly support the industrial sector and confront [the] current repercussions,” Prime Minister Mostafa Madbouly said in a cabinet statement.
Similarly, Tunisia has established an emergency package plan that entails the postponement and exemption of debt payments, and the rescheduling of taxes for low-income individuals. Angola has postponed the filing of taxes.
The Reserve Bank of Malawi deferred interest rate payments and imposed a threemonth moratorium on interest and principal repayments for loans for microfinance institutions and financial co-operatives.
Namibia has launched an Economic Stimulus and Relief Package to meet increasing expenditures in health, wage subsidies, income grants, and guarantees to support low interest loans for small agricultural businesses and individuals.
Among others, Senegal has dedicated $490-million towards those economic sectors directly affected by the pandemic, including tourism, transport and agriculture. Part of these funds are being used to pay the salaries of retrenched staff. Cote d’ivoire is facilitating the postponement of debt repayments, particularly for SMMES.
The Gambia Revenue Authority has extended the filing and payment of 2019 taxes by two months. Senegal has escalated tax refunds to companies, deferred payment of taxes for small, medium and micro enterprises up to 15 July 2020 and provided support through the renewal of all fixed-term contracts.
In East Africa, Kenya’s central bank has lowered its policy rate by 100bps to 7.25% and lowered commercial banks’ cash reserve ratio by 100bps to 4.25%.
It has also increased the maximum tenor of repurchase agreements from 28 to 91 days, announced flexibility for banks regarding loan classification and provisioning for loans that were performing up to 2 March 2020 but were restructured due to the pandemic.
Further, Kenya suspended the listing of negative credit information for borrowers whose loans became non-performing after 1 April 2020 for six months, and encouraged commercial banks to extend flexibility to borrowers’ loan terms.
Kenya’s measures include full income tax relief for persons earning below the equivalent of $225 per month, and reductions of the top pay-as-you- earn rate from 30% to 25%, lowered the base corporate income tax rate from 30% to 25%, the turnover tax rate on small businesses from 3% to 1%, and the standard VAT rate from 16% to 14%.
The Bank of Uganda has reduced its Central Bank Rate (CBR) by 1 percentage point, directed Supervised Financial Institutions (SFIS) to defer payments, provided liquidity to commercial banks, purchased treasury bonds held by microfinance deposit-taking institutions and credit institutions, and granted exceptional permission to the SFIS to restructure loans of corporate and individual customers. It has also issued guidelines for the SFIS on credit relief and loan restructuring.
The Gambia’s central bank has increased its monitoring of commercial banks’ forex net open positions and committed to maintaining flexible exchange rates to absorb balance-of-payments shocks. Many of the central banks are also increasing their financial surveillance.
Many countries have established special funds to manage COVID-19 and its impacts. Tunisia has established a special fund for businesses that the pandemic has affected significantly, while Botswana has established a relief fund and seeks to stabilise businesses and ensure the availability of strategic supplies.
Lesotho has set up a Contributory Fund and is using it to pay a subsidy to affected textiles workers, pay business rentals in May 2020 and defer certain taxes until September 2020, as well as improve credit facilities for SMMES.
Zambia established an emergency fund to strengthen its preparedness and enhance public security during the pandemic. Ethiopia is planning to support enterprises and job creation in urban areas and industrial parks.
It is also working to expand its Urban Productive Net Program in collaboration with the World Bank. Cote d’ivoire has established a $490-million fund to support communities
and corporations. Ghana has established a $1.5-million National Trust Fund.
Countries are also bolstering their financial and banking sectors. Various central banks have sought to ease liquidity conditions by reducing reserve requirements for banks and easing payment system transactions.
Angola’s central bank, for example, has reduced the rate on its seven-day permanent liquidity absorption facility by 3%, provided about 0.5% of its GDP as liquidity support to banks, and created a liquidity line equivalent to $186-million for the purchase of government securities from non-financial corporations.
Zimbabwe has reverted to a multicurrency system, reducing the bank policy rate from 35% to 25%, reducing the statutory reserve ratio from 5% to 4.5%, and increasing private sector lending facilities from Zw$1-billion to Zw$2.5billion. Its central bank has also moved from a managed floating exchange rate system to a fixed exchange rate management system.
The Bank of Uganda is providing exceptional liquidity assistance for a period of up to one year to financial institutions that need it, ensuring that the contingency plans of supervised financial institutions guarantee the safety of customers and staff. It has also instituted measures to minimise the likelihood of sound businesses going into insolvency due to lack of credit, and waiving limitations on restructuring of credit facilities at financial institutions that may be at risk of going into distress.
Yet another significant set of measures relates to taxation. In this respect, several governments have imposed various tax relief measures.
To minimize the use of bank notes, the governments of various AU member states such as Cote d’ivoire, Kenya, Mozambique, Uganda and Zambia have persuaded mobile money operators to either reduce or remove user fees and charges for periods of about three months. These countries have also lowered fees and charges for other digital financial transactions.
There are also cases of innovation happening across the African continent that should be recognised. An example is the Senegalese Ministry of Health, which, in collaboration with the Virology Laboratory of the l’institut Pasteur de Dakar, created the $1 COVID-19 diagnostic testing kit.