Purpose: This study provides a comparative analysis of the challenges and developments of anti-corruption measures in public procurement processes in Nigeria, China, and Brazil, focusing on regulatory frameworks, institutional mechanisms, and practices aimed at enhancing transparency, integrity, and accountability. Method: The research adopts a qualitative doctrinal approach, based on the analysis of national legislation, international treaties, reports from multilateral organizations, and specialized academic literature. A comparative method is employed to identify similarities, differences, and limitations of anti-corruption regimes in public procurement across the three countries. Findings: The findings reveal that despite relevant normative advances, significant weaknesses persist in the implementation and enforcement of anti-corruption measures. Nigeria faces institutional capacity constraints and limited adoption of e-procurement systems. China exhibits a centralized and punitive approach, with notable progress in digital tools, but ongoing transparency challenges. Brazil presents a relatively robust legal framework and advanced electronic procurement systems, although enforcement gaps and coordination issues remain. Originality/Value: The study advances the literature by demonstrating that effective anti-corruption strategies in public procurement require not only legal reforms, but also institutional strengthening, international cooperation, and the strategic use of digital technologies.

This paper evaluates the impact of the institutional resilience mechanisms of the African Union and the Economic Community of West African States on the sustainability of humanitarian interventions in conflict and disaster settings. Through doctrinal analysis of interventions in Mali, Niger and Burkina Faso, the paper concludes that, although both organisations have relevant frameworks, these are undermined by institutional fragmentation, resource limitations and political disputes over sovereignty. The paper argues that achieving sustainable outcomes requires adaptive governance, local ownership, financial predictability and harmonised mandates. These findings are aligned with the Sustainable Development Goals and Agenda 2063. Finally, the paper proposes policy recommendations arising from the reviewed literature, including strengthening institutional capacity, enhancing local engagement and fostering regional cooperation, with the aim of building more resilient and effective humanitarian responses in Africa.

Although the African Court on Human and Peoples’ Rights marks a formal legal milestone, the regional human rights framework remains deeply constrained because Art. 34(6) of its Protocol narrowly limits direct individual access. The voluntary nature of the direct access declaration compounded by State pushback, selective withdrawals, and institutional inertia within the African Commission’s referral framework generates structural jurisdictional obstacles that effectively exclude individual litigants and non-governmental organizations from accessing legal remedies. The paper critically analyze how jurisdictional limitations under Art. 5 and Art. 34(6) stifle public interest litigation. The paper employs a doctrinal legal methodology, conducting a rigorous exegesis through the systematic analysis of primary and secondary sources. Consequently, the core questions are: what specific State ratification patterns and Art. 34(6) declarations currently impedes individual and non-governmental organizations access to the African Court on Human and Peoples’ Rights? How can institutional frameworks be redesigned to protect applicants and local actors from State retaliation after filing a case? What structural lessons can the African Court learn from the European Court of Human Rights and the Inter-American Court of Human Rights regarding standing and direct petitions? What precise legal amendments to the protocol establishing the Court are required to make direct individual access universal and mandatory for all State parties? These core questions serve as the foundational axis of this paper, dictating the trajectory of the analysis. The paper finds that Art. 34(6) create a bottleneck, leading to severe under-utilization with only a handful of ratifying States and subsequent strategic State withdrawals. It concludes that optional direct access under Art. 34(6) of the African Court Protocol severely fragments regional justice, requiring mandatory institutional referral rules and universal State ratification to transition from a symbolic tribunal to an effective human rights remedy.

This paper investigates whether pregnant women with disabilities are adequately protected during warfare under the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (CRPD), 2006. Using a comprehensive literature review, it evaluates intellectual works, opinion papers, and case law on rights-based protections for women with disabilities in wartime. The aim is to assess the adequacy of policy frameworks, guidelines, and practices in addressing heightened threats to pregnant women’s rights during conflicts. The review draws on global policy documents, journal articles, book chapters, and reports, offering suggestions for current and future safety strategies. Findings highlight the need to revise existing regulatory frameworks to ensure sustainable protections. The paper evaluates systematic action plans, assessing their relevance, suitability, and adequacy for sustainable maternity care for women with disabilities in wartime. It argues that, as vulnerable individuals, they require special safety measures. The paper recommends a specific convention or additional protocol to the CRPD to address their needs effectively. This study contributes to the discourse on protecting women with disabilities during wartime, emphasizing the importance of policy reforms and robust legislation for sustainable rights-based protections. Abstrak Makalah ini meneliti apakah perempuan hamil penyandang disabilitas mendapatkan perlindungan yang memadai selama konflik bersenjata berdasarkan Konvensi Hak-Hak Penyandang Disabilitas (CRPD) 2006. Melalui tinjauan pustaka komprehensif terhadap karya ilmiah, kerangka kebijakan, yurisprudensi, dan instrumen hukum humaniter internasional (IHL), penelitian ini mengevaluasi efektivitas kerangka perlindungan berbasis hak dalam menangani kerentanan interseksional yang dihadapi kelompok ini. Temuan menunjukkan adanya kesenjangan signifikan baik dalam CRPD maupun IHL terkait perlindungan khusus bagi perempuan hamil penyandang disabilitas. Risiko utama yang teridentifikasi meliputi keterbatasan akses terhadap layanan kesehatan reproduksi, peningkatan risiko terpapar kekerasan berbasis gender, serta hambatan dalam evakuasi yang aman. Makalah ini menganjurkan pengesahan protokol tambahan terhadap CRPD atau konvensi khusus untuk memastikan perlindungan yang berkelanjutan dan inklusif bagi penyandang disabilitas di masa perang. Selain itu, penelitian ini merekomendasikan adanya sinergi yang lebih kuat antara kerangka kerja CRPD, CEDAW, dan IHL. Studi ini berkontribusi pada diskursus mengenai respons kemanusiaan yang inklusif dan menyerukan reformasi kebijakan serta hukum yang mendesak.

The paper examines the complementarity between international law (the law of nations) and municipal (domestic) law, emphasizing their roles in governance and human rights protection. While much research has explored the interaction between international and domestic law, there remains a gap in understanding how inconsistencies between the two systems directly impact human rights and human security at the national level. Municipal laws often rely on international standards to align national legal frameworks with global expectations, a synergy particularly noticeable in areas such as environmental law, trade regulations, and human rights. However, domestic implementation of international norms is frequently impeded by legislative, institutional, and political barriers. The paper illustrates how conflicts between international obligations and domestic legal principles can create friction and enforcement gaps, undermining human rights protections. The analysis uses a doctrinal research method and draws on examples from various legal systems, such as the challenges faced by countries like the United States, where domestic law sometimes conflicts with international human rights obligations, and the European Union, where the incorporation of international treaties into national legislation has led to more effective protection of human rights. In conclusion, the paper stresses the importance of bridging the gap between international and municipal laws through stronger legislative measures, such as treaty incorporation and constitutional mandates.