President Joseph Nyuma Boakai has called on Africa and the international community to redefine the global conversation on reparations for the transatlantic slave trade, arguing that justice for one of history’s greatest crimes against humanity must extend far beyond monetary compensation to include truth-telling, institutional reform, cultural restoration, and reconciliation.
Addressing the Two-day High-Level Consultative Conference on Next Steps for United Nations Resolution A/RES/80/250 on the Transatlantic Slave Trade in Accra on Thursday, Boakai said the adoption of the landmark United Nations resolution earlier this year presents a rare opportunity for the world to move from symbolic recognition to practical implementation.
“If we are to pursue meaningful reparatory justice, our efforts must extend beyond financial considerations,” the Liberian leader declared. “They must also embrace historical truth-telling, reconciliation, identity restoration, cultural healing, education, institution-building, and the strengthening of social cohesion.”
His remarks represent an important evolution in Africa’s decades-long campaign for reparations. While financial compensation has traditionally dominated public debate, Boakai argued that the enduring damage inflicted by slavery cannot be measured merely in economic losses.
Keep up with the latest headlines on WhatsApp | LinkedIn
“The consequences of slavery cannot be measured solely in terms of lost labor, stolen wealth, or economic deprivation,” he said. “They also include intergenerational social, cultural, psychological, and political impacts that can persist for centuries.”
Boakai’s speech comes at a moment when Africa’s reparations campaign has gained unprecedented diplomatic momentum.
On March 26, 2026, the United Nations General Assembly adopted Resolution A/RES/80/250, formally recognizing the trafficking and enslavement of Africans as among “the gravest crimes against humanity.”
While the resolution does not establish compensation mechanisms, it represents one of the strongest international acknowledgments yet that the consequences of slavery remain embedded in global inequalities.
For African leaders, the resolution is not the destination but the beginning of a new diplomatic phase.
“The question before us is simple,” Boakai told delegates. “What must we do next?”
His answer was a five-point implementation framework that includes a common African negotiating position with CARICOM and the African diaspora; Establishment of an African Union-United Nations Expert Commission; Expansion of education and historical research; Restitution of stolen African cultural artifacts, and development partnerships aimed at addressing structural inequalities rooted in slavery.
The proposals reflect a growing consensus that reparations should become a comprehensive framework encompassing economic justice, institutional reform, historical accountability, and cultural restoration.
The Accra conference also underscored Ghana’s emergence as the diplomatic center of Africa’s reparations movement.
President John Dramani Mahama has made reparatory justice one of the defining themes of Ghana’s foreign policy, building on initiatives begun under previous administrations such as the “Year of Return” and “Beyond the Return.”
Ghana has increasingly positioned itself as a bridge between Africa, the Caribbean, and the global African diaspora.
The latest conference sought to transform the newly adopted UN resolution into a coordinated implementation agenda by bringing together representatives from African Union member states; CARICOM governments; CELAC nations; the African diaspora; UN agencies; civil society organizations; and international development partners.
The gathering represents one of the most ambitious attempts yet to coordinate a united African and Caribbean strategy before negotiations begin in earnest within the United Nations system.
The objective, for most Africans, extends beyond symbolism.
Officials hope the country can become the principal diplomatic platform through which Africa negotiates reparatory justice with former colonial and slave-trading powers.
Liberia’s Unique Historical Perspective
Unlike many African countries, Liberia occupies a particularly complex position in discussions on reparations.
Founded in the nineteenth century by formerly enslaved African Americans under the auspices of the American Colonization Society, Liberia embodies both the trauma of the slave trade and the complicated legacy of resettlement.
Boakai acknowledged this complexity, “For Liberia, the legacy of the transatlantic slave trade is woven into the fabric of our national story and continues to shape our understanding of identity, belonging, and nationhood.”
That history gives Liberia unusual moral authority within current discussions.
Rather than focusing solely on economic compensation, Liberia’s experience illustrates how slavery reshaped identities, communities, governance systems, and social cohesion across generations.
Boakai therefore framed reparatory justice not simply as an economic issue but as one of national healing.
Africa’s demand for reparations is neither recent nor unprecedented.
Calls for reparatory justice have existed since the end of colonial rule but gained organized momentum during the 1993 Abuja Proclamation, when African leaders formally demanded compensation for slavery, colonialism, and resource exploitation.
Since then, advocates have argued that Europe’s industrialization and North America’s economic rise were significantly financed by wealth generated through the forced labor of millions of enslaved Africans, extraction of African natural resources, colonial taxation systems, unequal trade relationships, and destruction of indigenous political and economic institutions.
Historians estimate that more than 12 million Africans were forcibly transported across the Atlantic between the sixteenth and nineteenth centuries, with millions more dying during raids, marches to coastal forts, or the notorious Middle Passage.
The consequences, African scholars argue, continue to manifest today through weaker institutions, underdevelopment, demographic disruption, and persistent inequalities.
Boakai echoed this argument.
“There is no doubt that the slave trade and its aftermath contributed profoundly to inequality and underdevelopment in Africa and across the Global South.”
“The past has helped shape the inequities of the present.”
Despite increasing international recognition of slavery as a crime against humanity, Western governments have remained reluctant to embrace reparations in their fullest sense.
Several European nations–including Britain, France, Portugal, Spain, Belgium, and the Netherlands–have acknowledged aspects of their historical involvement.
Some governments have issued expressions of regret or formal apologies.
The Netherlands formally apologized for its role in slavery in 2022.
King Charles III has acknowledged Britain’s historical links while stopping short of endorsing reparations.
Portugal has recently witnessed growing public debate over compensation.
Yet Western governments generally oppose legal or financial reparations, arguing that present-day societies should not bear direct legal liability for actions committed centuries ago.
Others contend that existing development assistance already contributes toward addressing historical inequalities.
African leaders reject that argument.
They maintain that development aid reflects contemporary policy choices, whereas reparations represent recognition of historical responsibility and legal injustice.
Boakai carefully avoided framing the debate as one of assigning blame.
“The call for reparatory justice is not an effort to assign personal guilt to the present generation for the sins of the past,” he said.
“Rather, it is a call for understanding, empathy, and a willingness to confront uncomfortable truths.”
That distinction is increasingly becoming central to Africa’s diplomatic strategy.
Rather than demanding punitive measures, many African governments now emphasize partnership, institutional reform, education, cultural restitution, and equitable development.
Beyond Money
One of the conference’s most significant contributions may be its effort to redefine what reparations actually mean. For decades, public discourse has largely reduced reparations to financial compensation.
Boakai challenged that narrow interpretation. He argued that genuine repair must include recovery of stolen cultural heritage, preservation of African historical archives, educational reforms, investment in research institutions, strengthening governance institutions, reconciliation initiatives, and restoration of historical identity.
This broader framework closely aligns with longstanding proposals advanced by CARICOM’s Ten-Point Reparatory Justice Plan, which similarly advocates public health initiatives, educational exchanges, debt cancellation, technology transfer, cultural rehabilitation, and indigenous development alongside financial considerations.
The significance of the two-day consultation ultimately depends on whether it produces an actionable roadmap rather than another symbolic declaration.
Participants are expected to begin translating Resolution A/RES/80/250 into institutional mechanisms capable of sustaining long-term negotiations.
Among the anticipated outcomes are creation of a unified African negotiating framework, closer coordination between the African Union and CARICOM, recommendations for establishing an AU-UN expert commission, timelines for implementation, strategies for engaging former slave-trading nations, and frameworks for research, documentation, and education.
Perhaps most importantly, the conference seeks to prevent the new UN resolution from becoming another historic declaration that generates headlines but little policy change.
Boakai himself warned against precisely that outcome. “Let this not be remembered as another conference or another resolution that stirred consciences briefly before fading into history.”
“Let it be remembered as the moment when the world chose truth over silence, justice over hesitation, and moral courage over the comfort of the status quo.”
The reparations movement has entered what may be its most consequential period since the abolition of slavery.
With growing support from the African Union, CARICOM, the Global African Diaspora, and now formal recognition within the United Nations, the debate is increasingly shifting from whether historical injustice occurred to how the international community should respond.
Whether Western governments ultimately embrace that conversation remains uncertain.
What is increasingly clear, however, is that African leaders are broadening the discussion beyond financial compensation toward a more comprehensive vision of justice–one rooted in historical recognition, institutional transformation, cultural restoration, and sustainable development.
In Accra, President Boakai summarized that vision succinctly, “Today, through us, those voices speak again.”
“They call not for vengeance, but for recognition; not for division, but for reconciliation; not for charity, but for justice,” he added.
The debate over reparations, for Africa, is no longer simply about settling historical accounts. It is about reshaping the moral architecture of international relations by insisting that the legacies of slavery be confronted honestly–and repaired collectively.