ivory coast election Archives

January 4, 2011January 20, 2011

Chinua Achebe and Why Things are in Free Fall in Africa

(Only Part of Prof. Mariam Article is published here due to space restriction)

: Prof Alemayehu Mariam

Ivory Coast, December 2010 — Laurent Gbagbo says he won the presidential election. The Independent Ivorian Election Commission (CEI) said former prime minister Alassane Ouattara is the winner by a nine-point margin. The African Union, the Economic Community of West African States (ECOWAS), the United Nations, the United States, the European Union all say Ouattara is the winner. Gbagbo is only the latest African dictator to steal an election in broad daylight, flip his middle finger at his people, thumb his nose at the international community and cling to power like a barnacle to a sunken ship.

Ethiopia, May 2010. Meles Zenawi said he won the parliamentary election by 99.6 percent. The European Union Election Observer Team said the election “lacked a level playing field” and “failed to meet international standards”. Translation from diplomatic language: The election was stolen. Ditto for the May 2005 elections.

The Sudan, April 2010. Omar al-Bashir claimed victory by winning nearly 70 percent of the vote. The EU EOM declared the “deficiencies in the legal and electoral framework in the campaign environment led the overall process to fall short of a number of international standards for genuine democratic elections.” Translation: al-Bashir stole the election.

Niger, February 2010. Calling itself the Supreme Council for the Restoration of Democracy (CSRD), a group of army officers stormed Niger’s presidential palace and snatched president Mamadou Tandja and his ministers. In 2009, Tandja had dissolved the National Assembly and set up a “Constitutional Court” to pave the way for him to become president-for-life. Presidential elections are scheduled for early January, 2011.

Zimbabwe, March 2008. In the first round of votes, Morgan Tsvangirai won 48 percent of the vote to Mugabe’s 43 percent. Tsvangirai withdrew from the runoff in June after Mugabe cracked down on Tsvangirai’s supporters. Mugabe declared victory. The African Union called for a “government of national unity”. Former South African President Thabo Mbeki mediated and Tsvangirai agreed to serve as prime minister. A stolen election made to look like a not-stolen-election.

Kenya, December 2007. Mwai Kibaki declared himself winner of the presidential election. After 1500 Kenyans were killed in post-election violence and some six hundred thousand displaced, intense international pressure was applied on Kibaki, who agreed to have Raila Odinga serve as prime minster in a coalition government. Another stolen election in Africa.

Massive election fraud, voting irregularities, vote buying, voter and opposition party intimidation, bogus voter registration, rigged polling stations, corrupt election commissioners and so on were common elsewhere in Africa including Rwanda, Uganda, Nigeria and Egypt. In 2011, “elections” will be held in Chad, the Central African Republic, Malagasy, Uganda, Zambia, Nigeria and other countries. Will there be more stolen elections? One thing is for sure: In January, the Southern Sudanese independence referendum will be held with little doubt about its outcome.

Chinua Achebe and Why Things are in Free Fall in Africa

In Things Fall Apart (1959), the great African novelist Chinua Achebe tells the story of the initial encounters in the 1890s between Ibo villagers in Nigeria and white European missionaries and colonial officials. That was the time when things really began to “fall apart” in Africa. The white man “put a knife on the things that held us together and we have fallen apart.” But his depiction could apply to the “falling apart” of many other African societies as a result of contact with colonialism and Christianity. But over the last one-half century, colonialism has become extinct and the white man has “left” Africa. The African leaders who replaced the colonial masters have not hearkened back to pre-colonial Africa and used traditional values and methods to hold the center and keep things from falling apart. Rather, they have followed in the colonial footsteps and lorded over vampiric states which have attenuated and frayed the fabric of the post-independent African societies to ensure their hold on power.

Robert Guest, Africa editor for The Economist, in his book The Shackled Continent (2004), argues that “Africa is the only continent to have grown poorer over the last three decades” while other developing countries and regions have grown. Africa was better off at the end of colonialism than it is today. According to the U.N., life expectancy in Zimbabwe, Lesotho, Sierra Leone, Zambia, Mozambique and Swaziland for the period 2005-2010 is less than 44 years, the worst in the world. The average annual income in Zimbabwe at independence in 1980 was USD $950. In 2009, 100 trillion Zimbabwean dollars (with a “T”) was worth about USD $300. In the same year, a loaf of bread in Zimbabwe cost 300 billion Zimbabwean dollars (with a “B”). The tens of billions in foreign aid money has done very little to improve the lives of Africans. The reason for things falling apart in Africa is statism (the state as the principal change agent) and central planning, according to Guest. The bottom line is that the masses of Africans today are denied basic political and economic freedoms while the privileged few live the sweet life of luxury, not entirely unlike the “good old” colonial times.

Guest concludes that “Africans are poor because they are poorly governed.” The answer to Africa’s problems lies in upholding the rule of law, enforcing contracts, safeguarding property rights and putting more stock in freedom than in force. Much of Africa today is under the control of “Vampire states”. As the noted African economist George Ayittey explains, the “vampire African states” are “governments which have been hijacked by a phalanx of bandits and crooks who would use the instruments of the state machinery to enrich themselves and their cronies and their tribesmen and exclude everybody else.” (“Hyena States” would be a fitting alternative in the African landscape.) Africa is ruled by thugs in designer suits who buy votes and loyalties with cash handouts.

Things have fallen apart in Africa for a long time because of colonialism, capitalism, socialism, Marxism, communism, tribalism, ethnic chauvinism… neoliberalism, globalism and what have you. Things are in total free fall in Africa today because Africa has become a collection of vampiric states ruled by kleptocrats who have sucked it dry of its natural and human resources. It is easy to blame the white man and his colonialism, capitalism and all the other “isms” for Africa’s ailments, but as Cassius said to Brutus in Shakespeare’s Julius Caesar: “The fault, dear Brutus, is not in our stars, but in ourselves.” The fault is not in the African people, the African landscape or skyscape. Africa is rich and blessed with natural and human resources. The fault is in the African brutes and their vampiric regimes.

Achebe took the title for his book Things Fall Apart from William Butler Yeats’s classic poem, which in partial rendition reads:

Things fall apart; the center cannot hold;
Mere anarchy is loosed upon the world, (substitute Africa)
The blood-dimmed tide is loosed, and everywhere
The ceremony of innocence is drowned;
The best lack all conviction, while the worst
Are full of passionate intensity.

For what it is worth, my humble view is that the African center cannot hold and things always fall apart because the best and the brightest of Africans lack all conviction to do what is right, while the worst are full of passionate intensity to divide the people ethnically, tribally, racially, ideologically, religiously, regionally, geographically, linguistically, culturally, economically, socially, constitutionally, systematically… and rule them with an iron fist. “Ces’t la vie en Afrique!” as the French might say; but to gainsay Jacques Chirac, “Africa is ready for democracy!” (L’Afrique est prêt pour la démocratie!).

December 22, 2010January 19, 2011

The role of tradition in African democracy

“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.

December 20, 2010March 10, 2011

There Is Hope For Democracy In Africa

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)

December 15, 2010January 6, 2011

Cote d’Ivoire: Several die in clashes between protesters and security forces

Solomon Aben

Several people died on Thursday when demonstrators calling for President Laurent Gbagbo to step down clashed with security forces in Cote d’Ivoire’s commercial capital, Abidjan, reports said. Reports put the number of dead between four and 20. Journalists reported seeing four bodies in Abidjan, while a spokeswoman for Gbagbo said 10 protesters and 10 members of the security forces had died.

It was unclear if those casualties were in Abidjan or other parts of the country as well. The BBC said clashes had erupted between Rebel New Forces fighters and troops backing Gbagbo near the town of Tiebissou, just south of the ceasefire line agreed in 2003 to end the country’s brief civil war.

Alassane Ouattara, the man that the international community says won last month’s run-off vote in Cote d’Ivoire’s long-delayed presidential election, had called on protesters to take to the streets on Thursday to protest Gbagbo. Gunfire was heard from many parts of the city as demonstrators attempted to make their way to the state-run television downtown. Gbagbo has been using state-run media to spread his claim of legitimacy.

He says the elections were fraudulent, and both he and Ouattara have established rival governments.

Ouattara is holed up at the luxury Golf Hotel in Abidjan’s east and is protected by United Nations peacekeepers. Troops loyal to Gbagbo have positioned themselves outside the hotel.

allAfrica.com

December 15, 2010December 15, 2010

Cote d’Ivoire: The real tragedy is that we’ve seen this so many times before

Jenerali Ulimwengu

Zimbabwean dictator Robert Mugabe and his power-sharing rival

The tragedy that has become Cote d’Ivoire is unfortunately one of those déjà vu situations that continue to haunt the African continent. We have been here before, in Zimbabwe, in Kenya, in Zanzibar, and in many other places where stoic societies suffer without exploding.

Cheating at polls is nothing new; almost all our countries engage in electoral fraud, some more subtly, others more crudely.

The more egregious samples have come from Harare and Nairobi, and now Abidjan, where cheating has become more transparent and in-your-face.

It’s this brazen nature of electoral rape that especially worries one.

It’s as if we have grown a species of humans who, in spite of all the talk about ending impunity and the threat of international sanctions, still believe that they can do what they pretty much wish.

The vote thieves have employed different styles. There are those that have simply removed ballots in favour of one candidate and turned them in favour of another, quite simply.

There are those whose manner is more wholesale, who strategically remove whole populations from the electoral process, annul results from entire polling stations, impound hundreds of ballot boxes and run into the night, et cetera.

Then there are those who tally the ballots, gaze upon the results, hate what they see and take out a fresh piece of paper, scribble more convenient numbers and proceed to announce their “results” and their “winner.”

In the Zimbabwean case, the style was simply not to announce the results.

For a continent that is not renowned for creativity, in this area we are great inventors.

There is certainly nothing African about this type of cheating — remember the pregnant “chads” in Florida? — but the Africans have embraced it with gusto.

It may soon be written into our constitutions, that whoever happens to be in power can steal votes the same way he has been raiding the national Treasury.

We even have a tested script ready for what happens, blow for blow: An election is held; the incumbent loses; he is declared the winner; the people riot; the international community cries foul; babysitters are trotted out to go and clean up after the naughty brats of the moment; the babies are brought together and talked into forming a government of “national unity.”

Thus the thief and the rightful proprietor shake hands and become partners, now free to quarrel at close quarters.
Half a century after putative Independence we are still toddlers, dependent on a clutch of babysitters who now seem to be on some AU, EU or UN roster: Kofi Annan, Thabo Mbeki, Joachim Chissano, Graca Machel.

In Haiti — another miserably African country — naughty children would be quieted at night by being told that tonton (uncle) Macoute would come from the hills and snatch them.

Macoute, a mythical ogre, found shape in Papa Doc’s terrifying secret police.

In our time and place, that Uncle Macoute has taken the form of Louis Moreno Ocampo, of ICC fame.

But this our Macoute is not just yet interested in vote stealers, who may, come to think of it, be at the very heart of all the demons that Ocampo seeks to exorcise.

It may be high time that the committee of baby sitters and Macoute Ocampo got together and compared notes with a view to tackling their problem at source.

In the case of Kenya, for instance, it may be futile to prosecute those who whipped up sectarian violence without at the same time dealing with the authors of the botched elections that were, honestly, the casus belli of the fracas.

In the meantime, at least we can congratulate the African Union and the West African economic bloc on their declared position on the Cote d’Ivoire fiasco.

Time was when the continental body and its regional partners would helplessly look on such events as the internal concern of squabbling toddlers, an attitude that helped feed the culture of impunity.

* Jenerali Ulimwengu, chairman of the board of Raia Mwema newspaper, is a political commentator and civil society activist based in Dar es Salaam. E-mail: jenerali@gmail.

December 14, 2010December 15, 2010

A critical look at the Ivorian post-election crisis

Ivory coast election crisis

Kwadwo Appiagyei-Atua

(Due to space only part of the original article is being published here)

All too soon, an unpleasant but familiar scenario is brewing in African politics: An incumbent has lost power through constitutionally-organised elections supervised by the international community and declared to be free and fair, but has decided not to give up power.

This time it’s not Zimbabwe or Kenya, but Cote d’Ivoire. But certainly, the orchestrator of the plot is following the bad example set by the African Union (AU) and exploiting a loophole which still exists in spite of the negative experiences in Zimbabwe and Kenya. The situation in Cote d’Ivoire, therefore, again exposes the weaknesses in the AU and Economic Community Of West African States (ECOWAS) position on collective recognition and the urgent need for review.

INTERPRETATION OF GBAGBO’S ACTIONS

According to the Lomé Declaration for an Organisation of African Unity Response to Unconstitutional Changes of Government, Gbagbo’s actions amounts to an unconstitutional change in government. The Declaration provides that an unconstitutional change in government is deemed to have occurred when one of the following events takes place:

a military coup d’etat against a democratically elected Government;
intervention by mercenaries to replace a democratically elected government;
replacement of democratically elected governments by armed dissident groups and rebel movements;
the refusal by an incumbent government to relinquish power to the winning party after free, fair and regular elections.

The African Charter on Democracy, Elections and Governance, a treaty adopted by the 8th session of the African Union Heads of State and Government Assembly in 2007, but yet to come to force, adds a fifth criterion under its article 23(5). That is where ‘[a]ny amendment or revision of the constitution or legal instruments, which is an infringement on the principles of democratic change of government.’

This is interpreted to refer to acts of incumbents changing the terms of elections to cover a third or indefinite term in office. A good example is what happened in Niger when Mamadou Tandja doctored the constitution to enable him to run for a third term and which resulted in his overthrow.

In the event of unconstitutional change of government, the AU is expected to issue a condemnation of the act, which amounts to non-recognition of governments in international law. Recognition in general refers to a unilateral act acknowledging the existence of a government or state by another state or government or international organisation. Recognition by a state or government is a political act, which does not necessarily take into account the legal context in which a state or government comes into being. However, when it comes to international organisations, recognition follows certain laid down principles and norms agreed to by the organisation, either in its constitutive treaty or another document, be it a declaration, decision or resolution. Thus non-recognition means that the government that purports to be in existence is not in existence, legally speaking.

The next step is for the AU and ECOWAS to recognise the government de facto. De facto recognition means that the new regime is still deemed illegitimate, but because it is the one that is in control of the country at that moment, it needs some form of recognition while the situation is being monitored to see how the change in government would affect the peace and stability of the country.

The AU and ECOWAS would then ask the government to return the country to constitutional rule within a particular time-frame, that is, six months. An added rule is that the de facto regime should not take part in the elections it would organise to return the country to constitutional rule. This rule was applied to Moussa ‘Dadis’ Kamara in Guinea, who took over the reins of power in Guinea in December 2008 following the death of Lansana Conte.

When talking about recognition by states, usually two types of recognition may run concurrently. De facto recognition may be given to the government that usurped power while de jure recognition, or recognition according to law, is given to the ousted regime which may decide to form a government in exile. With time, de jure recognition may be withdrawn from the ousted regime and given to the de facto regime. This usually occurs where the de facto regime is able to attain effective control of the state, and the people generally succumb to, or approve of its authority; and, thirdly, where the new regime generally abides by international law and treaty and other obligations of the state. At this point, the ousted regime withers away.

The AU and ECOWAS, however, generally do not accord de jure recognition to ousted regimes. An exception was the case of Ahmed Tejan Kabbah of Sierra Leone who, though ousted in a military putsch by the Armed Forces Revolutionary Council, continued to be recognised as the legitimate government by the AU and ECOWAS while in exile in Guinea.

In most cases, however, the AU and ECOWAS will simply condemn the act and ask the new regime to return the country to constitutional rule. This approach, however, is considered a major weakness in using the tool of recognition to end unconstitutional changes in government in Africa.

What has happened in Cote d’Ivoire is not a case of a coup d’etat. It involves the refusal of an incumbent to give up power after losing an election. If the AU and ECOWAS reaction to coups d’etat has not proven effective, it has been worse with this scenario.

There are two examples to guide us: the situation in Kenya and Zimbabwe.

In both situations, the call for a return to constitutional rule is rendered practically impossible as it is not able to resolve the following questions, among others: Should the illegitimate government also be given six months to re-organise elections? Would organising two elections within six months not pose too much of a burden for a developing country? Can there be guarantees that the de facto government will not be allowed to take part in the elections again? Can there be guarantees that a puppet would not be groomed to take over?

Perhaps without expecting such questions to arise, or without anticipating such a scenario and without any clear-cut guidelines to follow, power-sharing was adopted as an ad hoc or stop-gap measure. One may call it ubuntu, but it is certainly unAfrican to share power in that manner. We need to place the discussion in its proper legal context and simply describe it as an unconstitutional act and a slap in the face of the right of a people to self-determination.

According to articles 31 and 32 of the Constitution of Cote d’Ivoire, sovereignty resides in the people and they determine, in the exercise of that sovereignty, the sole right to elect their own leaders through free and fair elections: suffrage is universal, free, equal and secret.

What Kibaki did in Kenya, Mugabe in Zimbabwe and now Gbagbo in the Cote d’Ivoire was and is illegal and unconstitutional. In the case of Kenya, the constitution had to be amended to create the position of Prime Minister for Raila Odinga, who should have been the legitimate leader of Kenya. A similar situation occurred in Zimbabwe. Clearly, Gbagbo is exploiting this loophole. And the scenario is likely to repeat itself in other countries if the loophole is not plugged now by the AU and ECOWAS.

Ivory coast election crisis Kwadwo Appiagyei-Atua

Ivory coast election crisis

Kwadwo Appiagyei-Atua