African filmmakers have another reminder that continental coordination depends on decisions beyond a festival stage. Reporting from CANEX in Lagos on 5 November brings the African Audiovisual and Cinema Commission’s unfinished ratification process back into focus, with consequences for the policy support that the institution is intended to provide.

BusinessDay reports that African Union representative Sabelo Lyndon Mbokazi told a ministerial roundtable that no member state had yet ratified the commission’s statute. He urged governments to complete the process. That is the current statement attributed to the AU representative; the public register reviewed for this article is an older document.

The distinction is necessary because the commission’s name, a temporary secretariat and a fully operational institution can easily be conflated. They describe different stages of an initiative whose practical value depends on how governments put its mandate into effect.

### What the founding document requires

The official statute was adopted on 11 February 2019. Article 33 provides for instruments of ratification or accession to be deposited with the chairperson of the AU Commission. Article 34 says entry into force follows thirty days after the fifteenth ratification instrument is deposited.

Its ambitions extend across the industry. The document provides for cooperation between national, regional and continental structures and envisages connections with production, distribution, training and an audiovisual and cinema fund. Those provisions set out an institutional design. They do not establish that a particular fund is accepting applications or that a filmmaker can obtain finance today.

The statutory list also includes an African Film Library and an Inter-African Distribution Consortium. These envisaged structures connect preservation with circulation: keeping work accessible and helping it reach audiences are related tasks. Their usefulness would depend on the resources, procedures and partnerships through which those tasks are carried out.

The statute also envisages a practitioner forum, giving industry experience a place within the proposed structure. For a producer or distributor, that raises a practical question: how will professional knowledge reach the people setting priorities? The answer requires functioning arrangements for participation as well as a formal mandate.

### An older register needs its date attached

The status list linked from the AU treaty page is dated 28 April 2023. It records one signature, by Kenya, and no ratifications or deposits at that date. It cannot independently establish the complete position in November 2026.

There is, however, a further official milestone. The AU’s 23 May 2024 account of the temporary secretariat’s launch says the launch took place in Kenya on 10 May. It identifies advocacy for ratification as the temporary secretariat’s principal role and links full operation of the commission’s organs to the fifteen-ratification requirement.

This chronology explains why describing a launch as the completion of the whole process would mislead readers. Preparatory work can take place while the conditions for the next institutional stage remain outstanding.

### Why the issue belongs in a business discussion

The AU’s current CANEX programme places audiovisual policy alongside finance, intellectual property and digital transformation. It identifies the Lagos event as running from 5 to 8 November at the Wole Soyinka Centre for Cultural and Creative Arts.

For an independent production company, these subjects meet in ordinary decisions: finding collaborators, establishing who owns the work, preparing delivery materials and identifying a route to audiences. A continental institution could support better coordination, but that potential should be assessed through services and published decisions rather than its title.

RIM’s reporting on Nigeria’s creative-industry credit facility considers the conditions between a financing announcement and usable support. The same attention to implementation belongs here, although a treaty institution and a lending programme involve different processes.

RIM’s assessment is that useful follow-up should track updated deposit records, an agreed operational programme, resources and transparent routes for industry engagement. These would allow filmmakers to judge what changes in practice. The renewed call in Lagos is significant because it identifies an unfinished step; the next advance needs evidence that governments have completed it.

*Illustration: AI-generated film reel, blank folders and interlocking shapes; no treaty, AU meeting or commission premises are depicted.*

Why this matters

Producers and distributors need workable institutions as well as international attention for African stories. The commission’s intended remit reaches matters that affect how films are made, circulated and supported. Distinguishing a temporary secretariat from full institutional operation helps businesses understand what assistance exists now. An updated ratification record and clear programme of services would make progress easier to assess, while preventing proposed funding or coordination mechanisms from being mistaken for opportunities already available.

Sources

Topics: African cinema · African Union · AACC · CANEX · Film policy · Nigeria

← All news & insights