The way the African Parks treat us here is violent
In the forests of the Republic of the Congo, where conservation and colonialism have long kept uneasy company, the Baka people say they are still being beaten and violated by the very rangers meant to protect the land they call home. Prince Harry, as a prominent board member and public champion of African Parks, now finds himself at the center of a reckoning that asks whether institutional reform can ever outpace institutional harm — and whether lending one's name and influence to a cause carries a moral weight that transcends press statements. An independent investigation confirmed the abuses in May 2025, yet indigenous rights advocates say the suffering continues, raising enduring questions about who conservation truly serves.
- Rangers funded by African Parks allegedly tortured, raped, and beat Baka indigenous people near Odzala-Kokoua national park — abuses confirmed by the charity's own independent investigation in May 2025.
- Survival International is calling for Prince Harry's resignation, arguing that his continued public fundraising for the organization — including an Arizona event seeking $1 billion — signals endorsement of a system that has failed vulnerable communities.
- African Parks has constructed an elaborate accountability framework on paper: grievance mechanisms, independent oversight panels, and partnerships with human rights organizations — yet advocates say none of it has translated into safety on the ground.
- A Baka community leader, too afraid to be named for fear of ranger retaliation, told Survival International simply: 'The way the African Parks treat us here is violent' — a sentence that cuts through every institutional promise.
- With powerful backers including Howard Buffett, Bill Ackman, the British Government, and the EU, African Parks is not a fringe operation — making the gap between its stated values and alleged conduct all the more consequential.
Prince Harry's position on the board of African Parks has come under fierce scrutiny after rangers employed by the conservation organization were found to have systematically abused the Baka indigenous people near Odzala-Kokoua national park in the Republic of the Congo. The alleged violations — beatings, torture, and sexual assault — first became public in early 2024, and an independent investigation commissioned by African Parks itself confirmed in May 2025 that abuses had occurred.
Rather than settling the matter, those findings deepened the crisis. Survival International, which advocates for indigenous peoples' rights, declared this week that African Parks' reform commitments have failed to produce real change for the communities affected. The charity had pledged a series of remedial measures: a grievance framework with independent oversight, partnerships with human rights organizations, and a review panel of African judges and specialists. Critics say the architecture exists on paper but not in practice.
The tension sharpened this week when Prince Harry attended an African Parks fundraiser in Arizona as the organization seeks to raise an additional $1 billion. Survival International's director, Caroline Pearce, called for his resignation, arguing that his public support lends credibility to an organization whose abuses remain unaddressed. A Baka community leader, speaking anonymously out of fear of retaliation, offered the starkest summary: 'The way the African Parks treat us here is violent.'
African Parks counts billionaires Howard Buffett and Bill Ackman among its backers, alongside the British Government and the European Union. The organization has reiterated its commitment to accountability, promising action against implicated staff where evidence exists. Prince Harry's representatives have pointed to that May 2025 statement as his response. But the question now shadowing the charity's expansion ambitions is whether continued leadership amid unresolved harm amounts to something more than silence.
Prince Harry's role leading a major African conservation charity has become untenable, according to indigenous rights advocates, after rangers funded by the organization were found to have systematically abused the Baka people in the Republic of the Congo. The allegations span years of violence—beatings, torture, sexual assault—inflicted on indigenous communities living near Odzala-Kokoua national park, where African Parks manages one of its 24 protected areas across 13 African countries.
The pattern of abuse first surfaced publicly in early 2024, when the Mail on Sunday reported that rangers working under African Parks' authority had committed serious human rights violations against the Baka. An independent investigation commissioned by the charity itself, completed in May 2025, confirmed that abuses had indeed occurred. Rather than closing the matter, the findings opened a wider reckoning. Survival International, an organization dedicated to protecting indigenous peoples' rights, issued a statement this week asserting that despite African Parks' public commitments to reform, the underlying problems remain unresolved on the ground.
The charity responded to the initial allegations by pledging to strengthen its safeguards. It established what it calls a "bespoke remedy framework" to address indigenous land access issues, created grievance mechanisms with independent oversight, and partnered with three independent human rights organizations to provide reporting channels for affected communities. A panel of African judges and human rights specialists was installed to review serious complaints. On paper, the architecture of accountability looked substantial.
But Survival International's director, Caroline Pearce, rejected these measures as insufficient. She pointed specifically to Prince Harry's continued public support for African Parks, including his attendance at a fundraiser in Arizona this week as the organization seeks to raise an additional $1 billion. The timing felt deliberate—the duke appearing to champion the charity even as communities it serves say they remain unsafe. A Baka community leader, speaking anonymously to protect themselves from potential retaliation by rangers, told Survival International: "The way the African Parks treat us here is violent." The need for anonymity itself underscores the fear that persists.
African Parks is not a small operation. It counts among its backers billionaire investors Howard Buffett and Bill Ackman, and has received funding from the British Government and the European Union. The organization's statement this week reiterated its commitment to action, promising to take measures against staff members implicated in previously undiscovered incidents or those inadequately addressed where evidence exists. Yet the gap between institutional promise and lived reality—between a grievance mechanism on paper and a Baka person's fear of speaking up—remains the story's central tension.
Prince Harry's representatives have pointed to African Parks' May 2025 statement as his response, declining further comment. But Survival International's call for his resignation reflects a broader question about accountability in global conservation work: when an organization's stated reforms fail to produce safety for the communities it affects, at what point does continued leadership become complicity? The duke's fundraising push suggests African Parks intends to expand its operations. Whether it can do so credibly while these allegations remain unresolved is now the question hanging over the charity's future.
Citas Notables
It is outrageous to see Harry's continued support to African Parks despite the horrific human rights abuses committed by its rangers against the Baka.— Caroline Pearce, director of Survival International
The way the African Parks treat us here is violent.— Anonymous Baka community leader
La Conversación del Hearth Otra perspectiva de la historia
Why does Prince Harry's presence on the board matter if the investigation already happened and reforms were announced?
Because his name and status give the charity legitimacy when communities say they still don't feel safe. He's not just a figurehead—he's actively fundraising for them right now, in Arizona, while people are saying nothing has actually changed.
But African Parks did commission an independent investigation. Doesn't that show they took it seriously?
Taking it seriously and fixing it are different things. An investigation that confirms abuse happened is a start, but the Baka community leader had to hide their identity to speak to journalists. That tells you the fear hasn't gone away.
What would actually convince Survival International that things have improved?
Probably evidence that the Baka people themselves feel safe reporting problems without retribution. Right now they're saying the treatment is still violent. That's not a procedural problem—it's a safety problem.
Is there a chance African Parks' reforms will eventually work, given time?
Maybe. But the organization is trying to raise another billion dollars while this is still unresolved. That's the pressure point. You can't ask for that kind of expansion while your own communities are saying you haven't fixed the basics.
What happens if Harry steps down?
It doesn't solve the problem for the Baka. But it signals that the board itself recognizes the gap between what they promised and what's actually happening on the ground.