African Futures Lab welcomes recent statements by King Charles III and Prime Minister Andy Burnham indicating that the British Government may issue an official apology in a context of a structured, time-bound, inclusive and good-faith dialogue with affected parties addressing the transatlantic trafficking of enslaved Africans and its historical harms. Andy Burnham also stated that instead of providing financial compensation, the UK was willing to support debt restructuring for Commonwealth countries and promote investment in climate finance.
Following the Netherlands' apologies in 2022 (external link) and France's recognition in May 2026 (external link) of the need to repair, this step by the British government forms part of a long overdue global movement, reflecting the importance of historical truth, the acknowledgement of responsibility, and the need to address the enduring consequences of slavery and colonialism.
However, we believe that, as important as an apology may be, it cannot be an end in itself. The recognition of the crimes of slavery must necessarily lead to a process of reparative justice.
In this regard, African Futures Lab recalls that the historic United Nations General Assembly Resolution 80/250 (external link), adopted on 25 March 2026 - which declared the trafficking of enslaved Africans and their racialised chattel enslavement the "gravest crime against humanity" - calls on States to engage in reparative justice, including through official apologies, restitution, compensation, rehabilitation, satisfaction, and guarantees of non-repetition.
This imperative is further reinforced by General Recommendation No. 40 (external link) of the United Nations Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination (CERD), adopted in August 2026. The Committee highlights how the consequences of the transatlantic slave trade and racialised slavery persist in contemporary systemic discrimination and structural inequalities. It reiterates that States must take concrete measures towards reparatory justice and that acknowledgements and official apologies cannot replace other forms of reparation.
Reparations must not be conflated with development aid, debt relief or climate finance.
African Futures Lab also wishes to emphasize that reparations for the crimes of slavery must not be equated with traditional mechanisms of international cooperation, Official Development Assistance (ODA), debt relief or climate finance, as highlighted by the United Nations Special Rapporteur (external link) on the promotion of truth, justice, reparation and guarantees of non-recurrence in the context of Namibia.
Debt cancellation and debt relief initiatives are an insufficient response to demands for reparations. Their impact remains limited unless accompanied by structural transformation of the international financial architecture, including its governance mechanisms, financing rules and power relations, which continue to place many developing countries in situations of financial dependency.
The current debt crisis facing many formerly enslaved and colonised countries is deeply rooted in their colonial history, as many inherited debts incurred by colonial administrations to finance systems of exploitation and domination. This historical injustice is compounded by an unequal global financial system that imposes disproportionately high borrowing costs (external link) and debt-servicing burdens (external link) on African countries, limiting their capacity to invest in development.
As highlighted in our report, Debt Cancellation Is Not Enough, (external link) debt relief alone cannot dismantle the enduring economic structures of colonialism. Genuine reparative justice therefore requires far-reaching structural reforms of the international financial architecture, alongside recognition of historical responsibility and meaningful redress for these enduring injustices.
Similarly, the prevailing model of climate finance risks reproducing colonial patterns of debt and dependency. In 2024, 67% of public climate finance (external link) provided by developed countries to developing countries took the form of loans Requiring countries to repay support for responding to harm generated disproportionately elsewhere compounds financial burdens, while contributor control and complex access procedures can exclude affected communities from resources and decisions..
A reparative approach to climate finance must therefore change both the terms on which resources are provided and who has the power to determine their use. Finance should be adequate, predictable and grant-based, with contributions reflecting responsibility and capacity, and direct access and meaningful decision-making power for affected communities and women-led organisations. It must support community-defined repair, including ecological and cultural losses, without deepening debt or dependency.
Reparative justice cannot be reduced to a policy of development aid, debt relief or financial assistance. It requires recognition of colonial harm, redress for its consequences, and transformation of the structures that contribute to its perpetuation.