A Half-Century of African Complaints: What Next for the World Bank’s Accountability?

In 1994, the World Bank made history by creating the Inspection Panel, the first independent accountability mechanism at any international organization. A breakthrough for communities in the Global South, who could finally denounce destructive projects without relying on diplomatic channels. Thirty years later, of the 186 complaints filed, 52 come from Africa — from Senegal to Kenya, Ghana to Zambia. These complaints tell an unvarnished story: botched consultations, ignored environmental assessments, forced displacements. Human tragedies that the Bank’s own policies were meant to prevent. Today, the World Bank wants to become 'bigger and better.' Under the banner 'One WBG,' it pushes for greater collaboration among its five institutions. But this merger of accountability mechanisms — the Inspection Panel, the Compliance Advisor Ombudsman, and the dispute resolution body — raises a crucial question for Africa: who will protect communities when projects become more complex and responsibilities more blurred? For while integration promises efficiency, it also risks diluting the independence of recourse bodies. A task force report commissioned in September 2025 outlines several scenarios. It acknowledges the exercise is 'feasible but complex.' The three current mechanisms have different cultures, policies, and practices. Merging them carelessly could create a bureaucratic monster less accessible to complainants — often peasants, fishermen, illiterate women who speak neither English nor French. The academics who helped create the Inspection Panel propose a solution: two distinct mechanisms, one for compliance reviews, the other for dispute resolution. The first would be chaired by a three-member panel appointed by the Board, with a permanent chair serving six years. The second would be headed by an experienced dispute resolution professional at the vice-president level, reporting directly to the Bank’s president. This architecture would ensure each function retains its expertise and independence. But beyond structures, political will is what matters. Precedents are not reassuring: in India, the Compliance Advisor Ombudsman found the Bank non-compliant in financing a coal-fired power plant — and its recommendations were ignored. In Uganda, a road project exposed women and children to serious risks, and the Inspection Panel had to fight for redress. If the Bank truly wants to be 'better,' it must ensure that African complaints do not remain dead letters. Africa, which receives the largest share of World Bank financing, has everything to gain — or lose — from this reform. Senegalese communities, who have seen farmland sacrificed for tourism or mining infrastructure, know that the devil lies in the details of safeguard policies. If the new integrated mechanism is not stronger, faster, and more accessible, it will be nothing but a fig leaf. The world is watching. From Senegal to the world, our culture teaches us to demand accountability. The World Bank must hear this demand.