By Fortune Madondo

UN Resolution

On Wednesday, 25 March 2026, the Assembly adopted a resolution during the commemoration of the International Day for the Remembrance of the Victims of Slavery and the Transatlantic Slave Trade, which the Assembly marks on March 25. The United Nations (UN) adopted a historic resolution, Ghana Resolution A/80/ L.48, declaring the transatlantic slave trade as the “Gravest Crime Against Humanity“, finally saying what the whole world knew all along, but too many have been too cowardly to say so. A reminder that history must be remembered, not erased.

Experts say it is the furthest the UN has ever gone in its recognition of the atrocities of transatlantic slavery and the need for reparations. The resolution strongly condemns slavery and the trafficking of Africans and recognises the impacts of the “abhorrent regimes of slavery and colonialism” and contemporary colonialism of Africa. It calls on member states to have a wide-ranging dialogue about “reparatory justice”, as well as the restitution of cultural properties that were stolen by colonialist states.

Historic & Symbolic

In a historic and symbolic gesture, the West African nation of Ghana put on the table the resolution that the UN should recognise the transatlantic slave trade as the “gravest crime against humanity “. Indeed, historically, the world knows so, but no one had dared talk about it, let alone demand its adoption by the UN. Ghana did it. Remember, it was Ghana, the first African nation to gain independence from colonial rule in the year 1957, when the whole of  Africa was under colonial yoke and bondage. Fast forward, sixty- nine (69 years later…2026, Ghana has led the global community to formally acknowledge the transatlantic slave trade as the “gravest crime against humanity“. Befitting of Ghana. The resolution was introduced by Ghana’s President, John Dramani Mahama, who emphasised the importance of remembering the horrors of transatlantic slave trafficking.

“When slaves were captured, they were always stripped of their clothing while being kept in the dungeons of the fortresses that had been built on the African coast by the European traders.”

He said in remarks to UN officials this week.

 “They were forced with their limbs, chained, and shackled, into the hold of cargo ships,”

noting that many ships were sunk, killing all those aboard, while many others jumped off who “preferred death to captivity”.

“Whenever a ship arrived at its destination, the enslaved people, still naked, were taken to the market where they were inspected and appraised like livestock”.

Mahama went on.

“The people who were enslaved laboured on these plantations from sunrise to sunset. And the conditions under which they worked were brutal”.

A History We Must Never Forget

The transatlantic slave trade saw more than 12 million people transported from Africa over a period of around 400 years, with at least 2.4 million dying en route and millions more dying on arrival as a result of abuse, raids and exploitation. The Transatlantic Slave Trade stands as one of humanity’s darkest chapters — a system that brought unimaginable suffering.

The Middle Passage

From the 15th to the 19th century, over 12 million Africans were forcibly taken from their homes. Families were torn apart. Identities were erased. Lives were forever changed. The journey across the Atlantic — known as the Middle Passage — was brutal. Countless lives were lost to disease, starvation, and cruelty before even reaching distant lands. Those who survived were forced into labour across the Americas and the Caribbean, building economies while being denied their basic humanity. Even after slavery was abolished in places like the United States (1865) and the United Kingdom (1807/1833), the impact did not end. The legacy of the slave trade still lives on — in inequality, in culture, and in ongoing struggles for justice.

Aims Of The Resolution

Samuel Okudzeto Ablakwa, Ghana’s minister of foreign affairs, told  journalists after the Assembly vote that the resolution “is  not about apportioning blame across generations or nations,”

Nor is “…is it about reopening old wounds; it is about ensuring that those wounds are neither forgotten nor denied “.

and,

“…it is about creating space for truth for education and for a more honest conversation that allows us to move forward with greater understanding”.

The resolution, he added, “is to deepen our collective moral awareness”.

Introducing the draft text just before the vote in the General Assembly, Ablakwa of Ghana pointed out that the text did not target individual countries. Instead it was a framework for reconciliation.

“It is focused on truth, remembrance, education and dialogue”

Ablakwa said.

“It is grounded not in retribution, but in moral recognition, and it is intended to strengthen global efforts to combat racism, racial discrimination and xenophobia in all its forms. Its objectives are clear: to provide formal and unequivocal recognition within the United Nations system”.

Ghana President, John Dramani Mahma pointed out that,

“This resolution allows us as a global community to collectively bear witness to the plight of more than 12,5 million men, women and children whose homes, communities, names, families, hopes, dreams, futures and lives were stolen from them over the course of 400 years”.

Adding that the resolution, “is a pathway to healing and reparative justice”.

Before stating that, “This resolution is a safeguard against forgetting”.

Before the vote by the Assembly, UN Secretary-General António Guterres called for “far bolder actions”

from countries to end the pillaging of African resources and to ensure the continent’s

 “equal participation and influence in the global financial architecture and the UN Security Council”.

“We cannot continue to tolerate racial violence or bigotry,”

Guterres said.

“We cannot keep letting inequality and injustice be ignored. We must turn memory into progress and remembrance into responsibility”.

Annalena Baerbock, president of the General Assembly, said that while slavery was abolished in the 19th century, it has continued in modern-day form through forced labour, human trafficking and debt bondage.

“We must therefore be tireless in pursuit of justice,”

Baerbock said,

 “ensuring that we remain active participants in the pursuit of dignity, accountability and equality across generations”.

US & EU Objections

Dan Negrea, US ambassador to the UN, said at the Assembly.

“The United States also does not recognise a legal right to reparations for historical wrongs that were not illegal under international law at the time they occurred,”

Further stating that,

“The United States strongly objects to the cynical usage of historical wrongs as a leverage point in an attempt to reallocate modern resources to people and nations who are distantly related to the historical victims,

Negrea added.

Washington also objected to the financial implications of the resolution on the UN itself, as it grapples with shrinking liquidity flow, mostly brought on by the US nonpayment of its mandated UN dues of approximately $4.2 billion.

The European Union(EU) cited similar concerns as Washington in its abstentions. The representative of Cyprus, speaking for the (EU) bloc, said the proponent of the resolution failed to “adequately reflect ” concerns raised during negotiations.

One such issue raised by the EU was the use of the word “gravest” in the resolution, saying such a term is legally inaccurate.

“When no legal hierarchy between crimes against humanity exists, it risks undermining the harm suffered by all victims of these crimes and lacks legal clarity crucial for ensuring accountability,

Gabriella Michaelidou, the deputy permanent representative of Cyprus, said on behalf of the EU.

“We are also concerned by certain legal references and assertions that are either inaccurate or inconsistent with international law”,

 she added.

“This includes suggestions of a retroactive application of international rules which were nonexistent at the time and claims for reparations, which are incompatible with established principles of international law”.

The VOTE

Out of one hundred and seventy (178) countries that voted, one hundred and twenty-three (123 voted in favour of the resolution. Fifty-two (52 countries, mostly all European countries, Australia, Oman, and Japan, abstained. Three (3) countries, the United States of America (US), Israel and Argentina voted against the resolution.

Predictably, Shamefully & Disgracefully

Predictably, shamefully, and disgracefully, the US, Israel and Argentina voted against the resolution. European countries like the United Kingdom UK, France and many other European countries abstained from the vote. In simple terms, they could not bring themselves to stand on the right side of history. Let that sink in.

The US, a nation that built its wealth, power, and global dominance on the backs of stolen Black bodies, on rape, torture, forced labour, family separation, and generational dehumanisation, refused to fully acknowledge the magnitude of its crimes. The US did not just participate in slavery; it perfected it. Chattel slavery in America was not incidental. It was industrial. It was theologicalized (Ephesians 6 verse 5). It was codified into law and culture. It was a system so brutal, so comprehensive, that its aftershocks are still there for all to see, through mass incarceration, economic inequality, healthcare disparities, and state-sanctioned violence.

The UK, an empire that colonised the globe, trafficked millions of Africans, destabilised nations, extracted resources, and then dared to “abolish” slavery, only to compensate slave owners while leaving the enslaved with nothing but trauma and poverty. And now, when the global community dares to tell the truth, they hesitate. They abstain. They object.

Israel, which voted against the resolution, is caught up in a genocide storm and is the perpetrator of inhuman injustice against Palestinians. According to a report by a UN Independent International Commission of Inquiry, 16 September, 2025. The Commission categorically stated that,

“Israel is responsible for the commission of genocide in Gaza,”

said Navi Pillay, Chair of the Commission.

 “It is clear that there is an intent to destroy the Palestinians in Gaza through acts that meet the criteria outlined in the Genocide Convention.”

Argentina is a country hiding one of the darkest horrors perpetrated against people of African descent. Argentina committed the most severe and brutal acts against the blacks, from killing them, forming battalions that were sent to the frontlines to die, to allowing them to die in disease outbreaks. In short, Argentina massacred the entire black population which remained in the former Spanish colony. The truth is now coming to light for all to see. Exterminating a whole race from the surface of the earth.

No Blame Game

This is not about blame.

It’s about awareness, education, and truth. Because only by understanding the past can we build a more just and equal future. Surely, justice, equality, fairness, freedom, democracy, and human rights can only be achieved when truth, awareness and education about human crime, brutality, unfairness, and a travesty of justice in the past have been acknowledged and recognised by the global community.

Divide Between Global North & Global South

Adoption of UN Resolution A/80/ L.48 has demonstrated the deeper divide between Africa and Global South versus Global North in terms of past crimes, slavery, colonialism and how to address them and move into the future. Global South is pushing for recognition, reparations and justice, but the Global North is concerned, cautious about legal, financial and political consequences.

WHY?

Because truth demands accountability. And accountability demands repair. Repair demands reparations. The US and Europe claim that they oppose the language of the resolution because they fear a “hierarchy of crimes“. That’s not a serious argument; it is a deflection.  One cannot rank atrocities while standing on top of one of them. One cannot sanitise history while benefiting from its brutality. This is about refusal. Refusal to apologise. Refusal to repair. Refusal to reckon. Refusal to initiate reparations.

Conclusion

UN Resolution A/80/L.48 was/is not radical; it was/is restrained. It was/is not punitive, it was/ is truthful. And even truth was/is too much for the global North. So this development, the adoption of thi particular resolution is setting the record straight and its reflecting: When the world moved toward justice, the US, Israel, Argentina and the UK  and it’s European counterparts stood still, clutching their myths, protecting their comfort, and exposing, yet again, that their commitment to “freedom”  to “human rights”  to “justice” is not genuine and has always been conditional.

History is watching.

F. Madondo (African Teacher) fortmada123@gmail.com