They will neither visit prisons nor knock at the doors of presidential palaces to get first hand information on how African leaders run their countries.
But a panel of evaluators, given the job of reviewing the governance and human rights records of African governments, say they have a credible process that is insulated from political manipulation and promise to tell it as it is.
Under an economic rescue plan, the New Partnership for Africa's Development (NEPAD) launched two years ago, African leaders agreed to tackle problems like corruption, civil strife and outdated infrastructure in return for more aid and foreign investment.
A key part of the plan is the so-called "peer-review" system, where governments are subjected to examination on commitment to democracy, peace and security, economic policy and business environment by a panel of seven eminent Africans.
Analysts say the peer review is going to be the yardstick with which donors are going to judge whether Africans are serious about NEPAD, which is already facing criticism that it is taking too long to show concrete results.
For donors and investors to consider the reviews credible, they should not vary too much from what the international community thinks about a country, one diplomat in Kigali said.
A situation like last year's elections in Rwanda where African monitors gave a highly rosy view of the polls in contrast with the gloomy picture painted by Western observers, would be unfortunate, he said.
It remains to be seen how frank, in-depth and critical these reports will be, he said.
But Anglique Savane, chair of the panel of experts, said such fears were unwarranted because her team is fiercely independent and will not succumb to any pressures.
"We are not bound by any of these heads of state, so I have the right to say what I think ... they cannot ask me or any of our panel members to change our views," she said in Kigali after attending a heads of state summit to launch the scheme.
"We are controversial people back at home and we cannot be manipulated," said Savane.
So far only 17 of the African Union's 53 member countries have agreed to be peer reviewed. Oil producer Angola is the latest inclusion.
Analysts say it will be interesting to see the evaluators report on Angola, where international agencies say as much as US$4 billion in oil revenues -- equivalent to 10 percent of GDP -- has been lost to graft over the past five years.
They have also set their eyes on Nigeria, where corruption has eroded billions of dollars in oil earnings and Zimbabwe, where human rights activists say abuses have escalated rapidly since disputed 2002 presidential elections won by President Robert Mugabe.
Academics say elections in Namibia, Malawi, Mozambique, Botswana and South Africa this year will also signal whether Africans are prepared to hold free and fair polls and open the closely guarded political space.
The first to be scrutinized is Ghana with preparatory work due to start this month in Rwanda, Kenya and Mauritius shortly after. The reviews will take six to nine months.
The evaluators will send questions and later visit countries for three weeks to talk to the government, opposition politicians, civic bodies and donors before they make a report.
Savane, a Senegalese political activist, said the process will ensure that the end product is credible without necessarily being overly intrusive.
"We are not an inspector-general," she said when asked whether the team will visit prisons to ascertain the truth.
"We will be dealing with the human rights groups. Do you think they will shut up and let us spend three weeks without telling us anything -- no way!"
Critics say the problem with the scheme is that it is voluntary, meaning countries with the worst records of democracy will avoid it. Another downside is that the reports will not be made public unless the heads of state agree.
Savane, who headed a UN peer program on adolescents, said the spirit of the review is not to chastise.
"The aim is not to put at the forefront the weakness of a country, the aim is to help the country to change," she said.
But heads of state will act against a government, pulling in sanctions and other measures, if a president refuses to embrace the changes recommended by the peers, Savane said.
The backers of the scheme say they are not surprised by the relatively small number of countries to have joined the group so far.
The fact that countries have to pay at least US$100,000 to participate coupled with a concern that the process gives opposition and civic groups too much voice will put some leaders off -- as will the thought of being sat down by fellow presidents, questioned and to be told what to do.
Officials say some countries have adopted a wait and see attitude to see what benefits come to those who have signed up.
"Our poor countries have been cautious embarking on new innovative things ... The main thing is that we must implement the peer review so that we can show what the benefits are going to be," NEPAD head Wiseman Nkuhlu told reporters.
Congressman Mike Gallagher (R-WI) and Congressman Raja Krishnamoorthi (D-IL) led a bipartisan delegation to Taiwan in late February. During their various meetings with Taiwan’s leaders, this delegation never missed an opportunity to emphasize the strength of their cross-party consensus on issues relating to Taiwan and China. Gallagher and Krishnamoorthi are leaders of the House Select Committee on the Chinese Communist Party. Their instruction upon taking the reins of the committee was to preserve China issues as a last bastion of bipartisanship in an otherwise deeply divided Washington. They have largely upheld their pledge. But in doing so, they have performed the
It is well known that Chinese President Xi Jinping’s (習近平) ambition is to rejuvenate the Chinese nation by unification of Taiwan, either peacefully or by force. The peaceful option has virtually gone out of the window with the last presidential elections in Taiwan. Taiwanese, especially the youth, are resolved not to be part of China. With time, this resolve has grown politically stronger. It leaves China with reunification by force as the default option. Everyone tells me how and when mighty China would invade and overpower tiny Taiwan. However, I have rarely been told that Taiwan could be defended to
It should have been Maestro’s night. It is hard to envision a film more Oscar-friendly than Bradley Cooper’s exploration of the life and loves of famed conductor and composer Leonard Bernstein. It was a prestige biopic, a longtime route to acting trophies and more (see Darkest Hour, Lincoln, and Milk). The film was a music biopic, a subgenre with an even richer history of award-winning films such as Ray, Walk the Line and Bohemian Rhapsody. What is more, it was the passion project of cowriter, producer, director and actor Bradley Cooper. That is the kind of multitasking -for-his-art overachievement that Oscar
Chinese villages are being built in the disputed zone between Bhutan and China. Last month, Chinese settlers, holding photographs of Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平), moved into their new homes on land that was not Xi’s to give. These residents are part of the Chinese government’s resettlement program, relocating Tibetan families into the territory China claims. China shares land borders with 15 countries and sea borders with eight, and is involved in many disputes. Land disputes include the ones with Bhutan (Doklam plateau), India (Arunachal Pradesh, Aksai Chin) and Nepal (near Dolakha and Solukhumbu districts). Maritime disputes in the South China