Why the CGE Must Remain Present on the International Stage
Written by:Naledi Selebano – Provincial Manager: Gauteng
The participation of the Commission for Gender Equality (CGE) in international conferences during the current global moment can no longer be understood as a routine institutional function but as both a political and an ethical imperative. The urgency of this work lies within the context of a rapidly evolving and increasingly hostile global environment, reflecting mounting evidence of a “degendering agenda” across multiple regions. This refers to the deliberate political and ideological efforts to dilute, neutralise, or altogether erase gender as a critical category of analysis and prioritisation in policy and governance.
The agenda is neither abstract nor hypothetical but reflected in concrete policy shifts across different countries. At the multilateral level, blocs of states have increasingly challenged previously agreed-upon gender language in United Nations negotiations, often seeking to replace “gender equality” with less politically loaded terms such as “women’s empowerment” or “family well-being,” thereby weakening the structural intent of these frameworks.
In Hungary, for example, the government has removed gender studies programmes from universities and reframed the equality discourse around “family policy,” thereby narrowing the scope of gender analysis. Similarly, Poland has witnessed sustained political resistance to reproductive rights, alongside attempts to withdraw from or undermine commitments tied to gender-based violence frameworks. In the United States, the rollback of Roe v. Wade in 2022 marked a significant retreat from reproductive rights, with consequences that continue to reverberate globally, emboldening similar movements elsewhere.
In parts of Africa, such as Uganda, legislation has intensified the criminalisation of same-sex relationships, accompanied by strong anti-rights rhetoric framed around cultural and moral protection. Meanwhile, in countries like Russia, laws restricting so-called “LGBT propaganda” and reinforcing conservative family values have significantly narrowed the civic and discursive space for gender and sexuality rights.
Institutionally, the degendering agenda is equally evident. In several countries, national gender machineries have been downgraded or merged into broader ministries, with gender equality portfolios being subsumed under social development or family affairs departments, reducing their visibility and influence. Even where such institutions remain intact, chronic underfunding and political interference limit their capacity to operate effectively and independently.
These developments are neither isolated nor accidental. They represent a broader reassertion of conservative and patriarchal power structures, often framed through discourses of cultural sovereignty, religious conservatism, or resistance to perceived external influence. The cumulative effect is a shrinking of civic space, the erosion of hard-won rights, and the weakening of institutions mandated to advance gender justice. In such a context, progress is fragile, reversible, and constantly under threat.
Against this backdrop, South Africa’s position takes on heightened significance. South Africa’s Constitution remains globally acclaimed for its commitment to equality, dignity, and human rights. Its institutional gender machinery, including the CGE, has historically been regarded as a model for other nations. For example, the CGE has played an influential role beyond South Africa’s borders, contributing to the establishment and strengthening of gender commissions in countries such as Zimbabwe and inspiring similar institutional developments in others, including Zambia.
Yet, this legacy is not self-sustaining and must be actively reaffirmed and defended, particularly in international spaces where gender equality is increasingly contested. The CGE’s presence in these forums is therefore not only about national representation but also about safeguarding a global normative framework under pressure.
The CGE’s engagement in international platforms already demonstrates the value of such participation. At the 2025 Commission on the Status of Women (CSW69), for example, the CGE facilitated a critical dialogue on National Gender/Women’s Machineries and their role in implementing the Beijing Declaration and advancing the Sustainable Development Goals. These discussions revealed that, despite the proliferation of gender equality frameworks, the institutions responsible for implementation remain structurally constrained. Challenges such as weak mandates, inadequate funding, poor coordination, and limited autonomy continue to undermine their effectiveness.
Similarly, the CGE’s submission during the 85th Ordinary Session of the African Commission on Human and Peoples’ Rights (ACHPR) in 2025 highlighted the urgent need to establish gender machineries and expand, particularly through the establishment of gender commissions across the continent, and to strengthen coordination among existing gender commissions, pointing to the potential of collective advocacy to strengthen institutional voices.
What emerges from these engagements is a clear lesson that international participation must be understood not as procedural diplomacy, but as a form of strategic resistance and renewal. It provides a platform to defend established norms, to challenge regression, to build alliances, and to advocate for the strengthening of institutions essential to advancing gender justice.
In conclusion, the struggle for gender justice has always transcended borders. In an era defined by backlash and regression, maintaining a strong international presence for the CGE is not optional but essential. Now more than ever, the institution must exercise proactive vigilance rather than merely react to challenges. This means committing to intentional, ongoing, and collaborative efforts to protect and advance the gains that generations have fought tirelessly to secure.