In early December, the New South Institute (NSI) hosted an online Migration Governance Reform in Africa Programme (MIGRA) webinar examining how Africa’s regional and continental institutions shape the movement of people across the continent—and whether existing frameworks are supporting more regular and predictable mobility in practice. The session brought together NSI researchers and external discussants to compare approaches across the African Union (AU), ECOWAS, the East African Community (EAC) and SADC, with a focus on what is working, what is stalled, and what implementation still requires.

The discussion was moderated by Yoliswa Makhasi. Alan Hirsch (Head of NSI’s Migration Governance Reform in Africa Programme (MIGRA)) argued that “free movement” is often misunderstood. In policy terms, it generally refers to regular, documented mobility—movement that is recognised in law, supported by documentation, and managed through functional border systems—rather than borderless travel. Hirsch noted that progress across Africa is uneven and slow, but not uniformly moving backwards. He linked stalled reforms to practical constraints that appear across regions: limited trust between states, weak or incompatible documentation systems, and border management systems that do not align sufficiently to support predictable movement.

Hirsch’s regional comparison highlighted why the EAC is often described as ahead of other regions, pointing to the Common Market Protocol and the development of one-stop border posts as mechanisms that make formal crossing easier. By contrast, he described SADC as having struggled to secure agreement on a movement-of-persons protocol, leaving progress to rely largely on bilateral initiatives and partial arrangements. He also noted that regional inequality and historical patterns of dependence—where labour markets pull workers from neighbouring countries—continue to shape political choices about mobility.

Victor Amadi’s presentation focused on the AU’s long-standing integration agenda and the gap between continental commitments and implementation. He reviewed the AU Free Movement of Persons Protocol, including its phased logic (entry, residence, establishment) and built-in safeguards, while noting that it has not yet secured the ratifications required to come into force. Amadi then turned to ECOWAS, where free movement has a longer history and practical tools such as regionally recognised travel documents have supported entry in particular—while progress on residence and establishment remains more limited. He also reflected on how the AfCFTA relates to mobility, especially through trade in services and the movement of natural persons, and what a more targeted, economically grounded approach to mobility could look like.

Two discussants responded to the research. Ottilia Anna Maunganidze (Institute for Security Studies) situated the conversation within the AU’s broader migration policy framework, emphasising that freer movement debates tend to advance where states can first agree on foundations such as legal harmonisation and data sharing, and where regular pathways reduce incentives for irregular movement. Brian Chigawa (legal, migration and trade consultant) stressed the central role of sovereignty in shaping what regional bodies can achieve, and argued that mobility gains are more likely when free movement is embedded within wider economic integration—particularly common market commitments and trade in services. He also pointed to the relevance of labour agreements, including provisions that support skills development, in addressing concerns such as skills losses.

The recording is available on NSI’s YouTube channel:

The webinar was anchored in NSI’s Migration Governance Reform in Africa Programme (MIGRA) papers on continental and regional approaches to mobility (AU/AfCFTA, the EAC, and ECOWAS). These papers are available on the NSI website for readers who want to engage with the underlying evidence and arguments alongside the discussion.