By Stanley Olisa
For most of the post-independence era, debates over colonial reparations were confined to university halls, activist statements, or sporadic diplomatic remarks. That is no longer the case. In recent months, African leaders have begun to articulate a proposition that moves beyond rhetoric: a coordinated continental claim for reparations from the United Kingdom and other former colonial powers.
The latest indication of this shift came at a conference in Algiers, where diplomats and policymakers gathered to advance an African Union (AU) resolution calling for colonial crimes to be formally recognised, criminalised and addressed through reparations. As Algeria’s Foreign Minister Ahmed Attaf put it, this is about asserting that “Africa is entitled to demand the official and explicit recognition of the crimes committed against its peoples during the colonial period,” and that such recognition is “an indispensable first step towards addressing the consequences of that era” that still weigh heavily on the continent’s political and economic landscape.
This is neither symbolic nor academic. The AU resolution builds on discussions earlier this year in Addis Ababa, where member states debated, formally defining colonialism as a crime against humanity. That framing, if codified within international law, could reshape the legal architecture for claims against former colonial powers, allowing African states to pursue claims collectively rather than piecemeal.
One of the most notable contributions to this emerging climate came from Nigeria in September, when Senator Prince Ned Nwoko submitted a formal demand for $5 trillion in reparations to the British government, not as an isolated plea but as a potential blueprint for a broader AU strategy. While London rejected the claim, the incident highlighted that the moment has moved from the periphery into active diplomatic exchange.
The British government has consistently resisted legal reparations, asserting that its modern relationships with African nations should be viewed in terms of partnership rather than historical liability. But, official positions and public sentiment are increasingly at odds. Across Africa and the diaspora, there is a growing insistence that colonialism be treated not as a distant chapter but as a foundational force whose legacies persist in contemporary governance, economies and social structures.
Economic historians estimate the scale of colonial extraction in Africa in the trillions of dollars, as European powers siphoned natural resources- from gold and diamonds to rubber and agricultural commodities- with little benefit returned to local populations. What remains less debated but increasingly visible is the institutional design left behind: borders drawn without regard to ethnic or social realities, financial systems oriented towards external investors rather than internal development, and legal frameworks that privileged extraction over equitable governance. These structures did not dissolve at independence; they were inherited.
The reparations conversation is not limited to Africa’s borders. Caribbean nations, organised under the CARICOM Reparations Commission, have for years pursued reparatory justice from former colonial states, including Britain. Their 10-point plan encompasses a range of measures from formal apologies and debt cancellation to educational programmes and cultural restitution. Although European governments have largely rejected these claims, the persistence of the Caribbean agenda has kept reparations within the global diplomatic discourse.
For many African policymakers, the Caribbean example demonstrates both the complexity and the potential of a sustained, structured reparations strategy. A unified African approach could harness legal expertise, diplomatic leverage and historical research to make claims that are difficult to dismiss as purely symbolic.
There are also concrete legal precedents that illustrate how historical injustices have been addressed. A notable example is the settlement between the British government and Kenyan victims of the Mau Mau uprising, in which the UK agreed to pay compensation to thousands of former detainees and issued an official expression of regret. While not framed as reparations for colonial rule per se, it shows that legal avenues exist to acknowledge past wrongs and provide redress.
Beyond legal considerations, the cultural dimension remains potent. Artefacts removed during colonial conquests, such as sacred objects and royal treasures that now reside in European museums, continue to spark debate over cultural ownership and restitution. For many Africans, the return of such items represents a reclaiming of historical narrative and identity, an attempt to redress the erasures that often accompany conquest.
Read Also: Hakeem Shitta: Why Nigeria must cherish, preserve arts, cultural history — Curator
Another indicator of this broader intellectual shift is how younger generations are engaging with history. Access to digital archives, documentaries and online discussion has changed how young Africans view empire and its aftermath. Works like ‘From Slaves to Bond’ have circulated widely on social media, connecting historical events to present-day political and economic questions without reducing them to simplistic grievances. The impact of such content reflects a deeper public interest in understanding how the past shapes the possibilities of the future.
Critics argue that focusing on reparations could distract from domestic governance challenges. However, this framing obscures the fact that many of those challenges, like underdevelopment, debt dependence, and institutional fragility, are tethered to systems designed in the colonial period. Addressing historical injustice, therefore, is not a detour from development but part of disentangling post-colonial states from structures that have impeded self-determination.
The path ahead will not be linear. Legal definitions must be clarified, diplomatic strategies calibrated and political will sustained across diverse African states with differing priorities. Former colonial powers are likely to resist far-reaching claims, and there is no guarantee of swift or substantial material restitution.
But the significance of the current moment is not limited to financial equations. What is unfolding is a continental assertion that history cannot be compartmentalised or deferred. The conversation in Algiers and the ensuing discussions among African capitals demonstrate a growing consensus that the economic, political, and cultural legacies of colonialism still matter in concrete ways.
Whether Britain and other European states choose to engage with these claims seriously remains an open question. What is clear, however, is that the dialogue has shifted: from isolated national appeals to continental coordination and from moral lament to strategic planning. In doing so, African states are staking a claim not just to compensation but to a more equitable understanding of global history and its ongoing consequences.
