Tag: dictactors in Africa

“Democracy works only when it has evolved within a specific socio-cultural environment and fused into the traditional political systems such that it is seen as an indigenous product, but unfortunately Africa has not been given the opportunity to develop this.”

Comments from the former President of the Republic of Ghana, His Excellency Jerry John Rawlings, seek to treat democracy as a political system that ought to function on the basis of cultural relativism. The idea of allowing local values, traditions and cultural habits to factor in our democracy has been touted by leading academics and scholars as well. The argument is that democracy as it is practised in Africa is a wholesale adoption of a Western political practice. As such it might prove to be incongruous to Africa’s traditional ways.

What are some of these traditional ways? One might ask. For one thing traditional African societies have generally been communal. The notion of placing emphasis on the group is in essence at variance with a political practice that empowers the individual (one man, one vote) to partake in the process of societal governance. Civil and Political Rights by definition puts the interest of the citizen above the society and endeavors to liberate the individual from social shackles that may impede individual freedom.

The traditional African society however, sometimes suppresses individual rights for the sake of the rights of a group. The minor is expected to shelve personal views in the presence of elders. This practice is carried into boardrooms and the political arena as well. So a full or proper implementation of the tenets of Western democracy in Africa is at times curtailed by some of these factors indigenous to the African way of doing things.

Even advanced democracies on the continent such as Ghana are still having difficulties fully adapting to western political practices. Freedom of expression is still somewhat elusive in Ghana due to the fear of victimization or societal alienation. The generational gap between the young and the old means that, the youth are still struggling to make an impact on the society and continue to fight for acknowledgment that will enable them to partake properly in the process of policy formulation. Even in corporate settings views espoused by relatively younger workers are dismissed for viewpoints that are deemed to be more elderly. What this invariably means is that African societies continue to be excessively conservative and tend to be parochial in terms of outlook and ideas.

Needless to say that, such a paradigm of Africa is strongly endorsed by ultra conservative reactionaries who are in the habit of referring to the superiority of ancient ways. Dr Kwame Nkrumah’s vision for Africa is often cited as a continental ideal seeking to form a United States of Africa. In Ghana it is a sacrilege to criticize or dismiss views that seek inspiration from this wise statesman. African societies are therefore slow to change and the proclivity to embrace cultural liberalism is condemned and seen as a perversion of local values.

Hence the tendency to believe that even democracies must have a local flavor, otherwise they are doomed to fail on the continent. The problem with traditionalists and the conservative mindset in general is that, human institutions tend to be organic and dynamic and what this basically means is that they evolve with time to reflect the changing nature of people and the societies they live in. Failure to incorporate these changes into social ordinances and political practice can prove to be a great disservice to the people that these ordinances are expected to serve.

An evolving Africa means that, traditional practices and beliefs are becoming increasingly archaic and anachronistic. Holding on to them is tantamount to being stagnant and refusing to adapt to global innovations that are advancing other societies unlike our own.

Democracies are already indigenous to human beings and need no local flavor to thrive successfully in any cultural setting. If democracies in Africa are so far failing to enrich states on the continent as expected, this may be due to repeated and consistent failures on the part of African politicians whose tendencies to be dictatorial remain strong even when they are expected to function in democratic political settings.

Rather than, infusing African democracies with traditional political practice, the continent must endeavor to introduce systemic innovations to democratic practice by limiting the power of politicians and increasing the power of citizens. A leading democracy on the continent like Ghana still needs to incorporate fresh ideas into its democratic methods by edifying the electoral process especially.

Entrepreneurs and businessmen continue to have a foothold in party politics. This unfortunate political norm must be curtailed with the introduction of caps and restrictions on political campaign contributions to ensure that political parties are not manipulated by financiers and sponsors. The power of the executive branch ought to be limited as well by adopting a style similar to the Westminster system in England where the Prime Minister is expected to account to legislators and explain his actions to the parliament.

When some of these Western democratic practices are introduced to African democracies, the political system will surely have the desired effect of enriching the continent by fully liberating its people. As long as traditional practice plays a role in governance, the tendency or rather the risk of going back to political dictatorship under the guise of cultural relativism remains. If democracies are so far failing in Africa it could be due to their poor implementation by politicians who still enjoy the cover offered by traditional practices that permit political autocracy as a method of governance.

John Dramani Mahama, the vice president of the Republic of Ghana, is writing a nonfiction book about Africa.

The current political development in Cote d’Ivoire, and the manner in which it will be resolved, will serve as either a clear indication of how tenuous the democratic process still is on the African continent, or a joyous testament to how far the continent has traveled in its promotion of peace and advancement.

I’m sure that because many people, especially in the Western world, may still not have faith that democracy can actually work on the African continent, it didn’t come as a surprise to some that the results of the Ivorian Electoral Commission were not recognized by Laurent Gbagbo’s incumbent government and not followed by the requisite concession and transfer of power.

However, the exact opposite was true for a great many of Africa’s leaders and heads of state. We had every faith that the elections in Cote d’Ivoire would be yet another success story in this new narrative of democracy that our nations are writing. We were all surprised at the turn of events after the results were broadcast.

Politics in Africa, for centuries it seems, have been a violent game of domination in which the residents of any given region are nothing more than pawns, warm bodies to be subjugated or slaughtered or, in earlier centuries, sold and enslaved. As, one after the other, African nations won their independence from colonization, a sense of hope and a feeling of confidence took hold of the continent. Finally the people of Africa would be free to determine their own destiny. They would be free to partake of all the pride and progress that being sovereign seemed to promise.

Yet before cartographers had even finished documenting the names of the newly independent nations, all the leaders who had been celebrated and held up as heroes — like Kwame Nkrumah, Sylvanus Olympio, Patrice Lumumba — were either overthrown or assassinated. The era that followed should have, and so easily could have, been one of steady development and economic stability. Instead, for decades, the continent turned into a garish kaleidoscope of dictators, coups d’etat, prisons overflowing with opposition leaders, and people fleeing under cover of darkness to live in foreign lands as refugees and political exiles.

But times are changing in Africa; putsches and autocracies are fast becoming a thing of the past. Our citizens are tired of despots and corrupt leaders dimming the prospects of a bright future for them and their children. Africans are becoming more politically vocal and savvy, refusing silence and staking their lives on their right to suffrage.

Voter turnout in the Ethiopian general elections this past May was over 90 percent; likewise, voter turnout in the Burundi presidential elections this past June was over 70 percent; and it was nearly 80 percent in Guinea, which, also in June, held its first free and fair elections since 1958.

These figures are significantly higher than those of more developed countries such as the United States, whose highest voter turnout ever was 81 percent — in 1876. (Even with all the confusion, long lines and mass international coverage, voter turnout for the 2008 U.S. presidential elections was only approximately 62 percent.) Understanding that their right to vote has not always been respected, Africans often turn out in record numbers, praying that this time, this election, their vote will ultimately be counted, and their voice will be heard.

In response to the tense standoff in Cote d’Ivoire, heads of state have issued pleas, condemnations and warnings. Organizations such as the African Union, the United Nations, the International Monetary Fund and ECOWAS have been decisive; democracy must prevail. And they have been firm, threatening sanctions and alienation.

There was a time in Africa when this would not have been the case. Cote d’Ivoire might very well have plunged into civil war before the world took notice, or action. I was wondering today, while reading about and listening to news reports about the increasing pressure that is being mounted on Mr. Gbagbo to step down, what has prompted this change in the way the international community now regards and responds to Africa.

Could it be that the genocides in Rwanda and Darfur made clear the message that we all pay a price for inaction? Or that the civil wars and battles for blood diamonds that gave birth to armies of child soldiers, whose opprobrious conduct left fields full of corpses and villages full of amputees, taught us that the world must speak quickly and loudly, and it must say, “No more. This cannot happen anymore”?

Or maybe it’s something much simpler than any of that. Maybe Africa itself has shown, by making such incidents the exceptions rather than the rule, that it is maturing politically, leaning eagerly toward the sort of liberation its citizens have craved for so long.

Peaceful transitions of power are no longer an aberration; they no longer stand out as much in the public imagination, because these days, more often than not, they are what is taking place on the African continent. Lately, peace has prevailed even in the most potentially explosive situations, such as Ghana’s 2008 presidential elections, in which I ran as the vice presidential pick on the opposition party’s ticket. Our victory, which came as the result of a runoff election, was, by official results, the slimmest margin ever recorded in the history of modern African elections — less than half a percentage point.

For days after the results were announced, our nation was gripped with fear. Despite a consensus among all the independent election monitors that there were no improprieties, accusations of voter fraud were nonetheless made. People even went so far as to predict that Ghana would follow in the footsteps of Kenya, which erupted into postelection violence in 2007, the residual effects of which are still being felt in that country today. We held our breaths and waited, hoping that our lives and the land we all so loved would not be needlessly torn apart.

Though the other presidential candidate never conceded, Ghana’s incumbent president made it clear that he would encourage and support the democratic process by respecting the will of the people and handing over power to whomever the electoral commission certified as the official winner. Because of that, Ghana was able to boast yet another peaceful transition of power in 16 continuous years of democratic governance. Over the past couple of weeks, we have been witness to the same respect for democracy and the rule of law in Guinea, with the ex-prime minister conceding defeat and calling for peace, particularly among his supporters.

The U.N. peacekeepers that were guarding the democratically elected president, Alassane Ouattara, have been ordered out of Cote d’Ivoire by Mr. Gbagbo. Danger seems to be looming, and the world’s attention is now fixed on the fate of that nation. We all remain hopeful, because Africa cannot afford another political setback.

Mr. Gbagbo has the unique opportunity to help cement one of two antithetical perceptions of Africa: as a continent of despots in the service of power instead of the service of their people, or as a continent making great gains toward democracy and sustainable development. Whatever decision Mr. Gbagbo makes will leave a lasting impression, not only on his country but also on the entire continent. Let us pray that he chooses wisely.

(NPR)