Any promotion within the armed forces is done by merit and/or choice based on open positions and in accordance with the pyramid of officer ranks of each army. Merit is assessed on the basis of the following: grades; seniority in the job; the category ; rank; the degree; the rewards obtained. For example, the rank of captain is given for 2/3 on merit and 1/3 on choice with 5 effective years at the rank of lieutenant. On the other hand, promotion to the rank of captain-major is possible if the soldier has served for 4 years in the rank of captain. In addition to this, the soldier gets 1/2 on merit and 1/2 on choice.[1] [2].

Promotions to the ranks of non-commissioned officers are pronounced by the Chief of Major Staff of the Beninese armed forces. For non-commissioned officers who must be promoted to the rank of sergeant, they are promoted according to the conditions clearly defined by law. In addition, the rank of Corporal Major, and Corporal are obtained by decision of the Chief of Staff of each Army [1]. Article 75 of the law specifies that proposals for the advancement of officers up to the rank of colonel-major are developed by the army chiefs of staff and are submitted to the national advancement commission chaired by the Chief of General Staff. The commission sends a report to the Minister of Defense on all the elements of assessment, particularly on the criteria of merit and choice. The minister then establishes the progress table [1].

As for senior officers, who must be promoted to the rank of brigadier general, division general, army corps general, their list is made by the Minister of Defense, and sent to the President who appoints by decree taken during the Council of Ministers [1].

There is no independaent scrutiny of the process. (32).

There is no exception provided by the special status of personnel of the Beninese Armed Forces. [1] [2] [3].

For military personnel who have been promoted by the President, the decree is released for civil servants counterparts but also publicly on website of the General secretary of the government [1]. For others, promotions is published internally on the notice boards [2]. Often, the national press publishes the list of those promoted, or this is relayed on social networks [3]. Once the promotion is approved the list of the military promoted is out. The decision mentions the name, rank, former and new post, and effective date [2].

The details of posting and promotion are regularly published and released on the website of the General secretary of the Government and/or on the internal notice boards, in the national press and social network as soon as they are available, so in advance of their effective date. [1] [2].[3]

There is a formal system for promotion to higher grades . Normally, after three years in a grade, when a soldier has accomplished his missions, he is promoted to the next grade. The assessment is made by managers who are part of the chain of command [1]. It also happens that a soldier is promoted to a higher rank without fulfilling the required conditions, up to the rank of colonel [2]. However, promotion to general is considered a political decision at the discretion of the Head of State [2].This is also based on the fact that promotions within the Burundi National Defence Force and the Burundi National Police are published by the relevant authorities [3].

Promotions to higher ranks for exceptional reasons are not limited by law, but are at the discretion of the national defence force authorities. [1] [2].

All information on promotions in the Defence sector is provided to anyone who wishes it ,with the exception of newly occupied positions, namely the locations and structures of assignments. [1] [2]. They will give the name and the new rank but they do not give details on the new position or the date of taking office [2]. There are schools to enter the military and training programs to rise through the ranks, at least at the lower levels of the system and there is available information about it [3] [4] . As for the higher levels, there are not many sources available, as the president holds discretionary power overmost appointments and promotions.

Promotions within the Burundian army are generally published once a year, on July 1, the anniversary of Burundi’s independence [2]. These are presidential decrees which are published on the website of the Presidency of the Republic of Burundi [3]. But exceptional promotions may be published at other times of the year. This is particularly the case when a soldier is promoted by commission to meet the rank conditions required to participate in peacekeeping missions [1].

The Ministry of Defense of Cameroon uses formal frameworks for the evaluation and promotion of military personnel. These frameworks include established procedures that take into account criteria such as seniority and performance. However, these processes are often managed within the chain of command, which limits their transparency and objectivity. In the absence of independent oversight mechanisms, promotions are carried out within closed hierarchical structures, often by committees composed mainly of senior military officials aligned with political elites. This lack of external supervision prevents the establishment of real checks and balances, compromising the integrity of the promotion process [1].
A recurring issue in this system is political influence, where promotions are often tied to loyalty to the regime rather than being based on objective criteria such as merit or competence. Promotions to sensitive roles, such as those in the Gendarmerie or the Presidential Guard, are particularly affected by this phenomenon. Allegations of favoritism and nepotism, where individuals with personal connections to high-ranking officials are favored, are frequently reported. This highlights the entrenchment of the patronage system, where political or personal ties often take precedence over professional qualifications [2] [3].
Although evaluation systems exist to assess military performance, their application remains inconsistent. The evaluation criteria are sometimes subjective, influenced by factors such as personal connections or political affiliations, rather than by a genuine assessment of skills and accomplishments. This subjectivity undermines the objectivity of the promotion system, making it difficult to establish a merit-based system [1].

Moreover, the absence of an independent body to validate promotion decisions prevents the establishment of a transparent and objective process. Decisions are made by committees dominated by senior officers, who are closely aligned with political powers, further weakening the control and regulatory mechanisms necessary for effective human resource management within the military [1] [2].

To improve the transparency and fairness of the system, it would be essential to establish an independent oversight mechanism and adopt more transparent and standardized evaluation systems. Such reforms would help reduce political influence on promotions and ensure that decisions are based on merit and the actual qualifications of military personnel, thereby strengthening the integrity and performance of the Cameroonian military [1] [2].

Cameroon has formal processes for military promotions, including performance appraisals and tenure requirements. However, these are inconsistently applied and often influenced by favoritism, political ties, or personal connections, undermining fairness [1] [2]. Promotions are typically managed by senior officers, raising concerns about bias and lack of accountability. Independent promotion boards are rarely used [1]. Informal networks often influence promotions, eroding integrity [1]. Exceptions like battlefield promotions exist but are rarely regulated, allowing discretionary decisions by senior officials [1]. Performance evaluations often prioritize seniority over measurable performance, weakening meritocracy [2]. Appraisals are often subjective, diminishing their fairness [2]. Nepotism and favoritism are common, with political ties enabling rapid advancement for some. Cases where political connections facilitated quicker promotions have been highlighted [3]. The absence of independent oversight complicates the process, allowing unchecked practices. [1] [2].

The issue of publishing promotions and the level of detail provided in Cameroon’s military promotion system is critical to understanding the broader transparency and fairness of the process. Typically, promotions within the Cameroonian military are not fully transparent. While the process is officially intended to be merit-based, using performance evaluations and established criteria, decisions are often made behind closed doors by senior officers [3]. These decisions are not made public or disclosed in a way that provides clarity regarding the rationale behind them. Moreover, public announcements of postings and promotions for military officers above OF-4 are rare. Even when such promotions are published, usually in official decrees or in the government gazette, they often omit essential details like the individual’s rank, effective date of promotion, and the specific criteria used [1][2]. Consequently, the public and even lower-ranking personnel lack access to the necessary information to understand why certain individuals are promoted over others. This lack of visibility limits external scrutiny and fuels perceptions of bias, favoritism, and political interference [5].
A major issue lies in the inconsistent application of performance evaluation systems. Rather than relying on a transparent set of indicators, such as professional accomplishments, leadership, or specialized skills, promotion decisions often prioritize seniority and length of service [4]. This undermines merit-based progression and creates room for personal or political networks to influence promotions [3]. Furthermore, while legal frameworks do exist to guide military promotions, including internal directives and general statutes of military personnel, these are not always consistently enforced [4]. Legal standards meant to ensure fairness are often overlooked or bypassed, further eroding the integrity of the promotion system [5]. Thus, the overall system lacks transparency and accountability. There is little to no publicly available information on promotion cycles or the rationale behind appointments and postings [2][3].

In the Cameroonian military system, promotions and postings are published regularly on an annual basis. Typically, the promotions take effect at the beginning of each year, usually in January, and personnel are informed in advance of the timing and details of their new ranks [1][2].

This regularity means that every year, military personnel and relevant stakeholders know who will be promoted and when these changes will occur, ensuring a predictable and transparent promotion cycle [3].

If there are occasional deviations from this schedule, or if the publication becomes less consistent, the score for this indicator should be adjusted accordingly.

Promotion procedures and conditions are explained in official documents, but they are not always followed. For example, once in post, access to senior positions does not follow a defined logic and political influence can be exerted. [1][2][3][4]

There is a possibility of promotion “on an exceptional basis”, but this is not regulated. Only line managers can decide whether a promotion is exceptional and they are not required to justify their decision [1, 2].

All details are published at the time of appointment. They are included in a public decree for officer positions. A message is sent to all defence and security units to announce the appointment. In addition, Ivorian military personnel are systematically identified by name tags [1, 2, 3]. However, there is no indication that equivalent information is available on request for their counterparts in the civil service.

All promotions, assignments and appointments are officially published. At least one message is published in all units [1, 2, 3].

The Armed Forces Regulations Act, Volume 1, Chapter 11, (11.01) establishes the authority and the conditions for promotion. 11.02 states explicitly that “no officer shall be promoted to a higher rank unless he or she has passed such qualifying examinations”. (1) Those of the rank of Colonel equivalent and above are promoted by cabinet with the advice of the Armed Forces Council. Promotion processes are not open to independent observation. (2) In practice the President appoints the various service chiefs of the Ghana Armed Forces in accordance with Article 212 of the 1992 constitution. As a result, President John Dramani Mahama appointed new service chiefs of the Ghana Armed Forces. As reported by Joy News, the president had made appointments for Chief of the Defence Staff in the person of Brigadier General William Agyapong; Chief of Army Staff in the person of Brigadier General Lawrence Kwaku Gbetanu; Chief of Naval Staff, Commodore Godwin Livinus Bessing; Chief of Air Staff – Air Commodore Eric Agyen-Frempong and Chief of Staff, Brigadier General Glover Ashong Annan (3).
This reflects a distinction in practice, where junior and mid-level promotions follow formal appraisal and examination processes (2), while senior-level promotions are subject to political appointment and lack independent scrutiny (3).

Ghana’s Armed Forces Regulations and the Constitution formally set out promotion procedures, but at the senior level (Colonel and above), ranks can be awarded via presidential appointment (1). There are no exceptions to the process within the amed forces as indicated in the Armed Forces Regulations Act or any arbitrary process to suggest that. (1) (2)
If a force permits any other means of awarding rank, there are no regulations that limit the possible circumstances and place requirements on further progression.

The promotion and postings of the GAF are not regular and updated as and when they are made, but there are instances where such promotions are published, usually on the website of the GAF. For instance, the promotion and induction ceremony of Lieutenant Colonel (Lt Col) Dominic Ampomah as the Commanding Officer (CO) of the Ghanaian Battalion 11 (GHANBATT 11) serving the United Nations Mission in South Sudan (UNMISS) on Sunday, October 22, 2023. Also that of Lt Col ES Appiah as the Commanding Officer of the United Nations Interim Security Force for Abyei (UNISFA) Second Ghanaian Battalion (GHANBATT 2) was also published on the website of the GAF. This is to suggest that there are cases of publication of promotion of the GAF to the general public but not regularly.

There is limited information available to the public on the appointment and promotion regime of the GAF; there are, however, publications of such promotions and appointments. There are few cases of appointments that are made public, especially external appointments from the UN and also momentous promotions. An example is the appointment of Major General Anita Asmah as Head of Mission and Force Commander of the United Nations Disengagement Observer Force. (1) Also the promotion of the Chief of Defence Staff General Thomas Oppong-Peprah to the rank of a 4-Star General. (2)

The Kenyan military’s promotion process combines meritocratic elements with traditional hierarchical structures. While efforts have been made to implement objective criteria and independent oversight, challenges remain in achieving full transparency and fairness. The KDF rank system is hierarchical, reflecting a soldier’s expertise, responsibility, and authority [1].
The system is divided into Officers and Service Members. Officers, commissioned by the Commander-in-Chief, range from Second Lieutenant (lowest) to General (highest, four-star). Only one four-star General serves as Chief of Defence Forces at a time. Officers’ ranks are displayed on the shoulder, and promotions are based on merit, requiring exams, discipline, and integrity [2]. Formal appraisal processes and promotion boards are used for personnel evaluations, particularly for lower and mid-level ranks. These boards often include members from different service branches, providing some independent perspective. For senior ranks, there is some level of scrutiny by personnel outside the immediate chain of command [4].
While the Kenyan military has made progress towards a more meritocratic system, cultural and institutional factors continue to influence the promotion process. In response to these challenges, Defence Cabinet Secretary Hon. Aden Duale inaugurated a 15-member study team to work on the Defence-Civilian Policy. This team, comprising members from the Ministry of Defence (both military and civilian) and the Public Service Commission, aims to recommend ways to achieve a more integrated Defence Workforce and make the ministry more attractive for career progression and retention of civilian staff. The Cabinet Secretary’s initiative addresses concerns about civilian personnel stagnating in their careers for years despite providing critical services, highlighting the ongoing efforts to improve the fairness and effectiveness of the promotion system within the Kenyan military. For instance, the Ministry of Defence officially confirmed the inauguration of a 15-member study team led by Cabinet Secretary Aden Duale, aimed at integrating civilian and military workforce planning [5].

The force permits other means of awarding rank, such as acting rank or battlefield promotion. The KDF Act provides for Defence Council to develop regulations that guide on appointments and promotions in Section 304 [1]. The field ranks are established and clearly defined and personnel that achieve something remarkable or perform exceptionally well are promoted [2].

Promotion details are typically recorded in circulars and board minutes, but these documents are classified [1]. The publicly available information on the MoD website mainly includes announcements of senior officials’ promotions and investiture ceremonies for senior officers, which include names and new rank [2, 3].

The board convenes biannually to deliberate on matters related to promotions and postings. The outcomes of these sessions are subsequently made public and encompass announcements pertaining to retirements, as well as recommendations for retirements and personnel-related notifications [1]. The retirements are usually not announced publicly.
Since the last GDI, promotions and postings within the Kenya Defence Forces have taken place multiple times in July 2021, July 2022; April and July 2023; as well as March, May, and July of 2024. The promotions that occurred in May 2024 were prompted by the unfortunate passing of the Chief of Defence Forces (CDF) and nine other individuals, which necessitated significant changes within the military structure [2].

There is a whole system laid out for merit-based promotion.[1] The Armed Forces of Liberia (AFL) operates under a structured framework for merit-based promotion. A key mechanism is the Promotion Examination (PROMEX), which tests professional knowledge and performance as part of the eligibility assessment.[2] In addition, formal Promotion Boards are convened to review candidates for advancement. In 2023, for example, the AFL High Command assessed 18 officers and 332 enlisted personnel for possible promotion, reflecting the institutionalisation of meritocratic processes.[3]
However while these systems exist, concerns remain regarding the consistency of application and the potential for political influence at higher levels of decision-making,[4] and effectiveness of the oversight at the senate and in the Lower House.[5] Potential influence from senior roles positions in the formal process can impact the merit-based efforts in the legal framework.

The Act establishing the Ministry of National Defense clearly outlines the procedures for promotions.[1] It states that the process of identifying candidates for commissioned service, including the rank to be held, should be prescribed by the Chief of Staff and approved by the Minister of National Defence. This process must also consider geographical representation to ensure balanced inclusion across Liberia’s regions.
Promotions are generally determined through a formal mechanism known as the Promotion Examination Board (PROMEX), which evaluates candidates based on merit and performance.[2]

However, the 1986 Constitution grants the President the authority to appoint and commission all officers of the armed forces, subject to Senate consent (Article 54(e)).[2] This provision constitutes a formal legal exception, allowing presidential discretion in senior officer promotions beyond the standard PROMEX and MoD process. There are no additional exceptions codified in law for lower-level promotions.

For senior officers (e.g. Chief of Staff appointments or key command changes), announcements are sometimes made publicly through presidential ceremonies, Armed Forces Day programmes, and MoD press releases.[1] Similarly, the Ministry of National Defense has reported on promotion exercises such as the PROMEX (Promotion Examination) process for officers and enlisted personnel.[2] However, the system does not extend to regular and comprehensive publication of all promotions for officers above OF-4, including names, new posts, and effective dates. Information outside of high-profile leadership changes is largely limited to internal communications within the Armed Forces of Liberia (AFL) or veteran networks.

Information about promotions and awards is not public beyond the defence sector. It is mostly internal, not external.[1][2] Even if some information is released on the website, MoD press releases,[3] there is no systemic or regular publication of all promotions/postings, for example, no annual gazette, no MoD bulletin listing all senior promotions, and no online database.

The Ministry of Defence is generally regulated by Code de travail la loi n°2024-014 but there is also a special status for appointments to posts which is publicly accessible on their site loi n°96-029/ loi n°98-030[2]. Regarding the promotions of military personnel, a committee exists and meets every year to evaluate each soldier (soldier, non-commissioned officers and officers) [1]. There are two types of assignment: assignment by necessity of service and assignment in the interest of the service (disciplinary assignment no longer exists).
There is an internal assignment committee which decides on the positions in relation to the agents and their skills, characteristics and the criteria required for the position. The General Statute of the Military establishes the terms of promotion of each soldier. Article 160 of the Statute stipulates that “the conditions required for appointment to a rank as well as the conditions and terms of advancement of military personnel subject to national service activity obligations are established by regulation” [2]. The evaluation committee studies the files of each soldier and compliance with the Statute and in particular with article 121 which stipulates that “No one can be promoted to a higher rank if he has been the subject of a disciplinary sanction recent or if he is in the process of being brought before a “military” tribunal. The terms of these provisions are established by regulation” [3]. The promotion of military personnel is thus regulated like that of any civil servant according to seniority or training. No individual outside the military institution sits on the committee.

Article 126 of the General Statute of the Military establishes the conditions for advancement in rank. It stipulates in particular that “No one can, except for brilliant action or exceptional service, be promoted to a grade if they do not have a minimum of two years of seniority in the lower grade”[1]. However, the definition of the terms “brilliant action” and “exceptional service” remains vague. They can mean acts of bravery in carrying out a mission or even an act of thanks following the support given to a political leader [2].

Little information is published regarding assignments and the promotion cycle. Sometimes, exceptionally as provided for in the General Statute of the Military, certain officers benefit from exceptional promotion for acts of bravery. In this case, their names, ranks and assignments are published [1].

Generally, advancement and promotion are only known to those concerned and no notice exists in this area[1].

There is not enough infornaiton to score this indicator. The law on the general status of military personnel formalises personnel promotions. The criteria for rating military personnel are defined[1] and supplemented by an order or an interministerial order of the ministers responsible for the Armed Forces and Security, in order to regulate the maintenance of military personnel files. These ratings are taken into account in promotions. The promotion process is, therefore, well supervised according to pre-estabished criteria. Advancement in rank takes place by choice or by seniority. Promotions take place either directly or in the order of the advancement table.[2]
Advancement in the military hierarchy always takes place continuously from one rank to the immediately higher rank with the exception of:
– Corporal, Brigadier, Police Brigadier or Corporal Firefighter to Sergeant, Police Sergeant or Firefighter Sergeant; – from Chief Warrant Officer, Chief Warrant Officer of Police or Chief Warrant Officer Firefighter to Second Lieutenant, Deputy Police Commissioner or Second Lieutenant Firefighter;
– from Colonel, Controller General or Colonel Firefighter to Brigadier General, Brigadier General Commissioner or Brigadier General Firefighter.
The advancement of the military takes place on the basis of the diploma, the function, the rating, the decoration, the seniority in the rank and in the service.[3] The promotion of staff, with some exceptions, is subject to criteria which are subject to intern control rather than external scrutiny. However, no information has been found showing that these processes are respected or not in practice.[4]

Circumstances may allow a rank to be granted, but the process relating to it is regulated even if it seems vague. Indeed, appointments and promotions may be made, on a temporary basis, either to fulfill functions of limited duration or during times of war. The rank held in this capacity includes all the rights, advantages and prerogatives attached to said rank, it has no effect on the rank in the seniority and advancement list. Appointments and promotions may also be made, exceptionally, to reward brilliant actions and exceptional services, regardless of the minimum length and diploma of service required for promotion to thr next higher rank. In recognition of sacrifice made, a soldier who dies in operation, on active duty or a wounded soldier proposed for final reform is promoted, either exceptionally or posthumously, to the next higher rank and may also receive an honorary distinction alongside this promotion.[1]

In the nomination cycles, the public is informed of the names, ranks, new positions, and effective date via a decree or order of the assignments or promotions of officers. No information is available on these promotions decrees on civilian personnel.[1]

In the nomination cycles, the public is informed of the names, ranks, new positions, and effective date via a decree or order of the assignments or promotions of officers.[1] Other lists may be published during the year, particularly between March and April.The frequency is twice a year at most. However, there may be specific appointments or promotions depending on the context. Promotions and appointments are available on the website of the General Secretariat of the Government.

Usually, the personnel promotions follow formal and administrative processes and military personnel are promoted in the hierarchical scale according the order established in Article 26 of Military Statute: the promotion methods are qualification with an appropriate course, seniority, selection, distinction and exceptionality [1]. The promotion depends also on the performance assessment, which is carried out in accordance with the vectors of the Public Administration Performance Management System (SIGEDAP), which includes the Assessment of the Individual Performance of Personnel in Management, Leadership and Trust Functions, the Assessment of the Individual Performance of Technical and Administrative Personnel and the Assessment of the Individual Performance of General and Technical Support Personnel [2]. There is a patenting law that guides the promotion of military personnel in the Armed Forces of Mozambique [3]. However, some decisions are unjustifiable and based on non-objective criteria such as political trust and subjective elements such us patrimonialism, members of military families, proximity, disparities in relation to seniority [4].

The personnel promotions follow formal and administrative processes and military personnel are promoted in the hierarchical scale according the order established in the Articles 26, and between 46 and 54 of Statute of the Military of the Armed Forces for the Defence of Mozambique, approved by Decree No. 20/2018, of April 26, which establishes the promotion methods to encapsulate qualification with an appropriate course, seniority, selection, distinction and exceptionality [1]. The promotion depends also on the performance assessment, carried out in accordance with the vectors of the SIGEDAP, which includes the Assessment of the Individual Performance of Personnel in Management, Leadership and Trust Functions, the Assessment of the Individual Performance of Technical and Administrative Personnel and the Assessment of the Individual Performance of General and Technical Support Personnel [2]. There is a patenting law that guides the promotion of military personnel in the Armed Forces of Mozambique [3]. Hence, there are regulations that clearly guide the processes, procedures, circumstances and specific requirements for promotion and future progression in the Armed Forces of Mozambique: Law on Military Ranks [3], Performance Management System in Public Administration – SIGEDAP [2] and Statute of Military Personnel of the Armed Forces of Defence of Mozambique outlining promotion by qualification with an appropriate course; seniority; seniority; by choice; distinction; and exceptionality [1].

The promotion of military officers is published and presented in the Official Gazette, Official Publication of the Republic of Mozambique, with name, rank, new post and effective date [1]. Publication is made by means of a Presidential Order [2] if it is a General Officer and by decree, diploma or Service Order if it is other ranks [3]. Promotion publications are available upon request for consultation to public service colleagues or other entities, as it is published in the Boletim da República, the official publication of the Republic of Mozambique. República is an open source, since the Statute of the Military of the Armed Forces of Defence of Mozambique directs that the promotion must be published in the Boletim da República, in the Order of the Armed Forces and transcribed in the Service Orders [4].

Frequently, during the five-year presidential term and whenever necessary the promotion of military officers is published and presented in the Official Gazette, Official Publication of the Republic of Mozambique, with name, rank, new post and effective date [1, 2].

While Niger’s military promotion system is formally structured and governed by clear personnel regulations, it is frequently undermined by undue influence and favoritism. Promotions follow two main pathways: level promotion, which is automatic and based on length of service and good performance evaluations, and grade promotion, which requires additional qualifications, accumulated years of service, and adherence to personnel distribution frameworks [1][2]. However, despite these formal criteria, political loyalty, personal connections, and patronage networks often play a decisive role in determining who advances within the ranks. The absence of independent oversight or external review mechanisms further weakens the integrity of the process, allowing discretionary decision-making to override meritocratic principles.

In Niger, while the military promotion system is formally structured around merit-based criteria such as years of service, performance evaluations, and educational qualifications, exceptions to standard promotion pathways exist, and their regulation is unclear [1][2]. Alternative means of awarding rank—such as promotions granted for exceptional service, wartime necessity, or political considerations—are permitted, but the criteria governing these exceptions are vague and inconsistently applied [3]. The military hierarchy has, on multiple occasions, been influenced by political loyalty, with promotions sometimes granted outside the formal framework, particularly following the July 26, 2023, military coup, when appointments and promotions were largely discretionary and based on allegiance to the ruling junta. While there are some regulations that theoretically limit the circumstances in which exceptional promotions can be granted, they lack clarity and consistency in their enforcement. This ambiguity allows for discretionary interpretations and political favoritism, making it difficult to assess whether such promotions adhere to professional military standards.

In Niger, information on postings and promotions within the military is publicly available to some extent, particularly for senior officers. Announcements regarding promotions and appointments are regularly published in official government bulletins, communicated through press releases and reported by media outlets, listing the names, ranks, and new positions of promoted personnel [1][2]. For senior officers, promotions and appointments are typically made by decree during cabinet meetings, and the date of the decree issuance generally corresponds to the effective date of appointment, ensuring a degree of transparency for high-ranking personnel.
However information regarding lower and middle-ranking personnel promotions and postings is less comprehensive and inconsistently reported and the effective dates for non-senior personnel appointments are not systematically disclosed. Moreover, broader issues of opacity in defense sector governance, especially after the military coup of July 26, 2023, further weaken overall transparency standards.

In Niger, postings and promotions of military personnel are publicly announced, although the consistency and predictability of these publications vary depending on the level of the personnel and political circumstances. Most senior-level promotions and postings are published in the Official Journal of the government, announced through official press releases and/or reported in national media, typically on the same day that decisions are made during cabinet meetings [1][2]. Decisions concerning high-ranking officers are generally adopted via formal decrees during cabinet meetings (Conseils des Ministres), ensuring an official record and immediate media coverage of the appointments. An example can be seen in cabinet meeting summaries that frequently include both adopted legal texts and nominative measures [3]. However, lower and middle-ranking personnel postings are less systematically reported and there is no fully standardized or predictable publication schedule across all ranks. Following the July 26, 2023 military coup, there has been a noticeable decline in the overall transparency and regularity of postings and promotions information. Thus, while major appointments are largely transparent, the system does not yet meet the criteria for complete consistency and predictability across the full military structure.

The Nigerian military operates a promotion board mechanism to determine personnel’s eligibility for advancement to the next rank. The board is made up of high-ranking officers who evaluate the personnel’s efficiency and discipline among other criteria laid down for the promotion. And any candidate promoted must have been deemed to have passed a merit-based examination, as well as attending and passing courses [1]. It is interesting to note that the military is guided by the Federal Character principle, and the Harmonised Armed Forces Terms and Conditions of Service. The respective services council or board approves the promotion of personnel. In addition to consideration for federal character, a source noted that political influence plays a key part in the promotion of officers, especially from the rank of a colonel and its equivalents in the other services to a brigadier or its equivalents in other services [2,3]. Promotion in the Nigerian military follows a laid down procedure, even though there could be isolated cases of external influence to favour certain candidates.

In certain circumstances, especially as regards the display and achievement of extraordinary feats in the course of an assignment, may warrant consideration for promotion to a rank above their rank or before dedicated timeline for the promotion exercise. For instance, the Nigerian Air Force was reported to have promoted four officers to retirement outside the formal schedule for such exercise [1]. In January 2021, the Chief of Army Staff, Farouq Yahaya, promoted a soldier from private to lance corporal for excellent performance while executing a task far above his rank [2]. In the Nigerian army, it takes a private soldier five years to be promoted lance corporal. Mr Mohammed still has about three years more to be due for the promotion. Getting promoted outside the dedicated timeline for the exercise is based on the recipients’ contributions to the service and the nation.
However, there is no clear indication of publicly accessible, formal rules or codified guidelines governing these exceptions. The Nigerian Armed Forces Act gives broad powers to the President and the respective Chiefs of the Services to appoint, promote, and retire officers. Promotions are usually subject to recommendations of promotion boards, seniority, and performance; there is no specific mention is made of clear criteria or codified rules for exceptions to timelines [3].

Name, rank, new post and effective date are publicly declared at least one month ahead, but not for all officers above OF-4. Quite detailed circulars on new postings are made internally, but that information is not made public, or at least not in such explicit detail [1]. However, promotion and posting off senior officers from the rank of Brigadier General above are often given enough media visibility [2,3].

Details of promotion, postings and redeployment in the Nigerian military are made at least annually [1,2,3]. The promotion of officers to higher ranks and redeployment exercises to various command, staff and instructional positions are meant to enhance operational effectiveness and administrative efficiency. The circulars on new postings are made public, although sometimes it may not be in such explicit details [4]. For instance, the Nigerian Army in January 2025 approved the posting and redeployment of no fewer than 975 officers. The Army’s last redeployment was done in June 2023, and the number of the affected officers was not disclosed [5]. Military postings are regular exercises carried out within the Nigerian military to reinvigorate the system for greater performance [6].

Staff promotions are carried out through formal appraisal processes and promotion boards for all staff. Promotions to higher ranks are made by independent units in the chain of command. Military personnel from different branches sit on boards as independent observers. [1] . Promotions in the army are based on a number of criteria that are well defined in the military code. bBeyond these standard criteria, there are other characteristics that make a difference and it is here that the assessment process can be subjective. It should also be noted that there are no people from outside the army on the promotion committees. [2]

There are criteria for awarding ranks in the army, but these are well regulated with specific requirements for progression. Good performance in the field, rigour and discipline can also facilitate promotion to a higher rank, but there are no clearly defined criteria, it only depends on the appreciation of the hierarchical superior who commands the soldier [1] . The rank constitutes the status of the officer. The hierarchy of ranks is laid down by a decree issued by the Council of Ministers. The hierarchy of grades in each corps and the number of steps in each grade shall be laid down in the specific statutes of the cadres. There are other criteria, such as rigour, discipline, ethics, distinctions, etc., which may work in a soldier’s favour or against him/her. [1] [2] .

All appointments appear on the report of the Council of Ministers and are published in the Official Gazette with full details of the appointees. [1] There is equivalent information is available on request for civil service counterparts. [2] Bassirou Diomaye appointed 20 senior defence officials from 25 ministerial departments. While for Macky, the profiles were mixed, i.e. civilians and military personnel, senior civil servants and serving or retired senior officers, President Faye chose only reserve officers to occupy these positions. [4] General Magatte Ndiaye will become the new Deputy Chief of the Armed Forces General Staff (Sous-Cem) on 5 January, according to a presidential decree published the day before yesterday. Three of his fellow students from the 10th graduating class of the École nationale des officiers d’active (Enoa) will be promoted to the rank of general. [5] However, comprehensive reporting on lower-level appointments is lacking.

There is movement at the top of the Senegalese army. A number of appointments and promotions have been made in recent hoursly. First of all, colonels Abdoul Latif Camara and Ousmane Aly Kane have been promoted to the rank of brigadier general to take up the posts of Director of the Senegal Defence Institute and Deputy Inspector General of the Armed Forces respectively. Brigadier General Simon Ndour has also been appointed Chief of Staff of the Army, with effect from 5 January 2025. He replaces Major General Magatte Ndiaye, who has been promoted to Sous-CEMGA, following the admission of Major General Fulgence Ndour to the 2nd general officers’ section. Brigadier General Koly Faye, former Director of the IDS, becomes the new Director General of External Intelligence, replacing General Jean Luc Diène, who has been admitted to the 2nd section of general officers. [1] These appointments and promotions are published regularly in the official journal whenever they happen. All information relating to appointments and promotions within the army, whenever applicable, are made public with their effective dates. [2]

South Africa’s Public Service Commission (PSC) prescribes transparent merit-based appointment and promotion processes, particularly at senior management levels. [1] However, reports, including PSC internal investigations, highlight that in practice appointments are influenced by political patronage, especially for top defence and ministerial posts. [2]

The SANDF has a formal Human Resources and Appointments Policy, requiring screening panels and multi-stage assessments with representation from multiple structures. Yet, oversight bodies’ findings report that these processes can be circumvented, revealing manifestations of unethical behaviour during recruitment and selection processes [1].

In terms of the Reserve Force Regulations, the Chief of Defence may promote a member of the reserve force to a higher rank based on certain conditions. [1] Exceptions are, however, possible if the Chief of Defence seeks permission from the Minister of Defence. Equivalent provisions for the standing force are unclear as this is not addressed in existing regulations.

Senior appointments above OF-5 are published annually by the Department of Defence including information on the name, rank, new post, and effective date of appointment for officials. [1] [2] Information for promotions of civilian equivalents in the defence sector are not published.

Postings are generally published annually [1] in advance of their effective date, but there are cases where announcements are ex ante. [2]

Personnel promotions within the South Sudan army are not conducted through an objective, merit-based process, despite the existence of formal provisions in the SPLA Act, 2009. The Act outlines Internal Promotion Framework which gives the President the authority to appoint, promote, or remove SPLA commanders, without requiring independent boards or external vetting. Promotion procedures and criteria are internal to the SPLA’s command structure, and do not involve external appraisal bodies or independent oversight. The Act does not establish formal performance appraisals, written promotion standards, or transparent appeals processes [1]. It leaves promotions subject to discretion—often influenced by rank, seniority, or loyalty—rather than standardized evaluations or competition. In practice, promotions are widely perceived to be based on political loyalty, ethnic affiliation, and personal connections to the presidency, rather than performance or competence [2] [3]. The also Act lacks clear performance appraisal frameworks or standardized criteria for advancement, allowing senior command to exercise broad discretion in decision-making [1]. As a result, the promotion system remains highly politicized and opaque, undermining professionalism and morale within the armed forces.

The criteria for promotion are well spelt out in Section 29 of the SPLA Act of 2009, [1] However recent promotions have opened up debate of the possibility of the president promoting officers at his own discretion. This was particularly a source of heated debate when President Kiir promoted five officers to high military management positions. Among them were presidential adviser on security affairs Tut Gatluak, energy minister Dhieu Mathok, deputy foreign minister Deng Dau, Lol governor Rizik Zachariah, and Northern Liech governor Nguen Monytui names that at the time of their promotion were serving different positions and not the Army. [2] What is crucial though was the response by Lul Ruai Koang, South Sudan’s military spokesman, who stated that “The president has the prerogative to promote those whom he deems fit to serve in this capacity, and nobody can question presidential powers stipulated in the country’s constitution.” [2] The comment that no one can question the president’s promotion is in itself problematic.
While the president has the legal authority to promote personnel, there are perceptions that the process is not strictly merit-based. This issue is particularly relevant in the context of the unification of forces under the Revitalized Agreement on the Resolution of the Conflict in South Sudan (R-ARCSS). The SPLM/A-IO and the South Sudan Opposition Alliance (SSOA) have several officers awaiting integration into the mid-level command structure. In March 2024, the SPLM/A-IO submitted a list of at least 21,000 officers for unification, raising concerns about how to accommodate the excess number of opposition officers who may not fit within the existing structures of the South Sudan People’s Defence Forces (SSPDF). The ongoing concerns over promotions and force unification highlight broader issues of military restructuring, meritocracy, and political influence within the armed forces.

When promotions are made, some of the information is provide especially for the highest ranks [1]. However, in other promotions which are often mass promotions not done on regular basis some details are not made public such as the names of the officers or the new post [2] [3].

Postings and promotions are published regularly but not frequently. Indeed, an assessment of media reports shows that promotions and postings also take a political dimension, for example, they happen sometimes due to negotiations between the government and former opposition fighters. [1] A good example is when the President promoted former rebel fighters loyal to Gen. Gai Yoach Dong, the former deputy army chief for marine forces, into new ranks. [2] This promotion is not a regular one but a product of negotiations.

While the UPDF Act establishes a formal promotion process, the reality is that these processes are not always strictly adhered to, primarily due to the significant prerogative granted to the President as Commander-in-Chief. Section 8 of the UPDF Act empowers the President to promote any officer to any rank of their choosing, effectively overriding the standard promotion board recommendations. This power, while legally sanctioned, can lead to situations where promotions are perceived as being based on factors other than the objective criteria outlined in Section 55 (1).
Deviation from formal processes may result from the fact that the President may prioritise loyalty and trust in key leadership positions, particularly in sensitive areas of national security. This can result in the promotion of officers who have demonstrated allegiance, even if their formal qualifications or performance records do not fully align with the established criteria. Secondly, political considerations can play a role, with promotions being used to reward or incentivize certain individuals or groups within the military. For example, in times of increased security threats or political instability, the President may choose to promote officers who are perceived as being particularly effective or reliable, even if they have not followed the formal promotion track [2]. Additionally, historical precedents and established practices within the UPDF may contribute to the acceptance of presidential prerogative in promotions, even when it deviates from the formal processes. While the increased professionalisation of the army has led to a greater reliance on formal appraisal processes and promotion boards, the President’s constitutional authority remains a significant factor in shaping the leadership structure of the UPDF.[3]

The promotion system of the UPDF while grounded in the UPDF Act 2005, operates within a framework that grants significant discretionary power to the Commander-in-Chief. Specifically, Section 8 of the UPDF Act empowers the President, in their capacity as Commander-in-Chief, to promote any officer to any rank of their choosing. This provision essentially allows the President to bypass the standard promotion processes, including the recommendations of promotion boards and the adherence to established service brackets and qualification requirements. This prerogative grants the President the ability to shape the leadership structure of the UPDF according to their strategic vision and perceived security needs.[1]
The rationale behind this broad authority stems from the President’s ultimate responsibility for national security and the need to maintain operational effectiveness within the military. In times of crisis or strategic realignment, the President may deem it necessary to promote individuals based on factors beyond formal qualifications, such as demonstrated loyalty, exceptional leadership in challenging circumstances, or specialized expertise crucial to national security [2]. Additionally, the UPDF Act includes provisions for temporary, acting, and honorary ranks. Section 14 of the Act outlines conditions under which temporary or acting ranks may be awarded, ensuring flexibility in operational command structures. Section 16 further details how honorary ranks may be granted in recognition of distinguished service or exceptional contributions. These provisions allow for targeted promotions that acknowledge merit and service outside the standard promotional pathway. [1]
While the UPDF Act establishes a formal framework for promotions, the Commander-in-Chief’s discretionary power ultimately plays a significant role in shaping the leadership of the military, reflecting the complex interplay between legal provisions and presidential authority in the context of national security.

The UPDF personnel promotions are detailed including name, rank, new post and effective date promotion. The major difference between the civilian agencies and the UPDF is that UPDF promotions are made public while civilian agency promotions are noted public but confined to the ministries. For example, in the recent army promotions, the President and Commander in Chief of the Uganda Peoples’ Defence Forces have promoted 898 and confirmed 20 Senior and Junior Officer ranks of the UPDF. The details of the promotions are published on the UPDF website and in the newspapers. [1]

The promotions in the UPDF vary based on factors like performance, vacancies, and organisational need.[1] For example, this year there have been 2 promotions – the President and Commander in Chief of the Uganda Peoples’ Defence Forces has promoted 898 and confirmed 20 Senior and Junior Officer ranks of the UPDF, July 10, 2024, and has promoted 382 and confirmed 13 Senior and Junior Officer Ranks of the UPDF, January 31, 2024. [2,3] These promotions are widely published in the official newspapers and the UPDF websites.[4]

While the Constitution of Zimbabwe, Section 216 (2) mandates the president with the powers of the commander in chief of the defence forces who has the powers to appoint commanders of the defence forces, Section 15 of the Defence Act provides the formal process on how the officers are promoted [1,2]. For example, a President may promote any officer to higher rank but when appointing the present seek advice from the Minister of Defence, after consultation with the commander [2]. Also, the Minister may promote an officer to the rank of Major or squadron leader, and the Commander may promote an officer to the rank of Captain or flight lieutenant [2]. Non-commissioned officers are promoted by the commander as well. However, there are instances in which the president is thought to have promoted those who are thought to be his political allies [3].

There are no exceptions as the promotion is guided by the Constitution of Zimbabwe and the Defence Act with no limitations in the exercise of his power as the president. Both the Constitution of Zimbabwe and the Defence Act give power to the president to exercise his power in appointing the commanders of the defence forces with no limitations or exceptions. [1] [2]

The information on the promotion of senior officers such as Lt Colonels, Colonel, Brigadiers, Maj Generals, Lt General and the General is shared with the media through the Army Public Relations Department on the day on which the members of the force are promoted [1]. However, promotion of middle rank officers like Majors, and Captain is not published in the press, so is the junior officers like Lt and second lieutenant. This is also the case with all non-commissioned officers such as Warrant Office Class 1 and below, their promotion is not shared with the media [2]. In addition, this equivalent information is not available on request for civil service counterparts [2]

The frequency and transparency of promotion announcements in Zimbabwe’s defence forces vary significantly by rank. Promotions for senior officers are generally made public and are reported in the media, often accompanied by official statements from the Ministry of Defence or the Office of the President [1,3]. These public announcements occur irregularly throughout the year, typically when high-ranking individuals retire, are reassigned, or are elevated due to service needs.
Promotions for middle and junior officers are not publicly disclosed. These promotions are typically conducted annually and are communicated internally within the military structure through formal notices at battalion and brigade levels [2]. There is no legal requirement or standard practice for publishing the promotion lists of these lower ranks externally, and neither the Constitution nor the Defence Act specifies a schedule or publication procedure for such announcements [4,5].