This paper relates to our book project, The African Backlash against International Courts, forthcoming with Zed Books. The paper is motivated by the following empirical puzzle: Why do many contemporary African governments work to undermine the international courts they proactively created and supported in the 1990s and early 2000s? It proposes a conceptualisation of backlash against international courts and then applies it to African states' relations with both regional, African courts and with international courts. The paper argues that continental backlash against the ICC reflects the re-emergence of demands for a more equal international order. African states have begun using international law to demand equal participation in international affairs. Thus, backlash is not a reassertion of national sovereignty in an 'authoritarian' manner, as contemporary literature suggests. In fact, African states have not objected to new international policy initiatives with high sovereignty costs, such as the Responsibility to Protect doctrine. The point is underscored by the contrast with regional courts in East, West and Southern Africa, where backlash has not been against international law per se, but against judicial interference in particular areas of importance to state legitimisation. These areas relate to democratisation in West Africa, stabilisation in East Africa, and land in Southern Africa.