(2017) 1 African Human Rights Yearbook 153 Committee (PRC), the AU Commission (AUC), and the Pan-African Parliament (PAP), will be touched upon but not be dealt with fully here. 2 WHAT ROLE SHOULD THESE BODIES PLAY? It is first worth reiterating that it is clear from our research that the African Commission and African Court should themselves play some role in monitoring implementation of their own decisions and judgments. Firstly, it gives them a sense of ownership, as interviewees told us: the African Court ‘still need(s) to know if the decision has been implemented or not in case [it needs] to issue other orders, or draw parties to other cases’;7 further: ‘it is good to see that your decisions are implemented and monitored’.8 In addition, the bodies are then able to assess their own impact and consequently amend their practices accordingly. The ability to indicate examples of where states have implemented also contributes to enhancing the legitimacy and credibility of the body itself. This will then ‘build confidence in the institution’,9 so that the Court should work towards the ideal position, where compliance with its decisions impacts on the Respondent State’s legitimacy among its peers, in other words, non-compliance with the Court’s decisions will have adverse consequences to States which they cannot afford to ignore. The Court should continue undertaking its work with independence and integrity without fear of repercussions from Member States. It should avoid self-censoring, which could arise from a fear of non-compliance with its decisions or a fear of active backlash against it.10 From our research we would suggest grouping monitoring and implementation into two categories: (i) monitoring and implementation that can be viewed as reactive (for example, receiving information on the extent to which the State has implemented any recommendations or orders); and (ii) monitoring and implementation that is proactive (for example, going out and seeking information where it is lacking; cross-checking that evidence and validating what has been said; and then also making assessments on whether this is sufficient or not, based on some clear criteria of what is satisfactory implementation). Our research has found that the African Commission and African Court play, or are considered to play, a variety of different roles when it comes to ‘monitoring’ implementation. These roles include: information-gathering; reporting; dialogue with the parties; interpretation and technical assistance; assessment; coordination; and enforcement. Our terminology recognises, but does not necessarily 7 Interview D6, held May 2017. See also Interview D1, May 2017; Interview D3, April 2017. 8 Interview D8, held May 2017. 9 Interview D5, held May 2017. 10 Communique/Outcome of the International Symposium on the 10th Anniversary of the African Court on Human and Peoples’ Rights, A Decade of Human Rights Protection in Africa, 21-22 November 2016, Arusha, United Republic of Tanzania 5.