Paper-thin democracy failing Africa’s people

ALARMINGLY the question being increasingly asked is whether democracy has failed in Africa. Or similarly, whether democracy is unworkable or perhaps not suitable for Africa.

This, given the fact that many African countries which are supposedly democratic are characterised by dreadful human rights abuses, ethnic conflicts, life presidents and economic chaos.

Some wrongly argue that democracy is “un-African”, “Western” or somehow anti-African “culture”. China’s economic rise without democracy appears to have emboldened this argument.

But such views are entirely misguided. It is not that democracy has failed Africa, it is that Africa’s version of democracy has failed the continent.

Since independence from colonial powers Africa has developed its own peculiar brand of “democracy”.

This is best defined as an adaptation of the worst kind of colonial methods and systems combined with the worst kind of African traditions, behaviours, laws, and practices. The result is a system of toothless democratic institutions staffed by docile incumbents and unending empty rhetoric about democracy.

African-style democracy is often the most minimalist, most limited and most elementary kind of “democracy”.

It rests on several deeply flawed assumptions, the first being that democracy is only about elections: if an election takes place, the country is supposedly democratic.

This cannot be more wrong.

Sadly, foreign donors, Western nations and electoral observer missions often endorse this view by declaring countries where elections take place “democratic”.

What this creates is a cycle prior to the elections in which dictators intimidate and bribe voters to vote in their favour, and/ or threaten to withhold basic public services and goods which citizens should be entitled to anyway, should they dare to vote for the opposition.

When undemocratic African leaders “win” such so-called elections, their country’s are then endorsed as being “democratic”.

Zimbabwe’s President Robert Mugabe is a case in point. Because of his “victory” in his country’s last national “election” he has been awarded the chair of the Southern African Development Community (SADC) and is a possible candidate for the African Union in the future.

Because of the way African countries were constructed by colonial powers, diverse ethnic, regional and religious communities were arbitrarily lumped together.

This has given rise to seemingly insurmountable rivalries within African-style democracies, where all citizens are not viewed as equal, not even before the law. Instead the fullness of one’s citizenship depends on one’s ethnic group, regional or religious community, or on one’s political or economic status.

Many African political parties, whether ruling or opposition ones, are not diverse in their membership and leadership. They are often dominated by one ethnic group, are primarily from one region or from one religious community.

When these political parties come to power they tend to look after their “own”, rather than governing in the interests of all – which is what genuine democracy is all about.

Furthermore, in an African-style democracy, the election winners take all: they appoint their “own” to government positions, and maximise tenders and services for this group.

And when, and if, an opposition party finally manages to unseat a ruling government, they then also govern in the interests of their “own”, purging the former incumbents and excluding them.

This means that electoral competitions are not competitions over policies, but competitions over control of a government system in order to secure control and dish out patronage to one’s own.

It also means that political leaders are not scrutinised for their ability to lead, but get there merely because they are likely to “provide” for their “own”.

This is one of the reasons why Africa keeps on churning out terrifyingly incompetent, self-serving and useless political leaders.

Ordinary citizens in African-style democracies have few rights beyond voting every five years, which in any case is often circumscribed through intimidation, violence and electoral rigging.

Another marker of African style democracy is that the leader is all-powerful and cannot be questioned or challenged.

In an African democracy, if you win an election and become president, the government and its property becomes yours.

These leaders have the right to appoint whom they wish to democratic institutions, the judiciary and public services.

Of course, this undermines and contradicts the very fundamental principals of democracy.

Further, in African-style democracies, such leaders do not willingly step down. Presidents tend to be there for life and elections are manipulated to ensure they are re-elected, again and again and again...

With the state and its resources as his personal property, the African style democratic leader becomes like a traditional chief.

Winning means the state resources are the spoils, part of which you may use for yourself.

In African-style democracy the state is the major tool for accumulating wealth. That is also why there is a proliferation of political parties in African “democracies” – everyone wants to have access to the state so they can become wealthy. You do not need to work, to become educated or to build factories, the bricks and mortars of a successful economy.

All you need is to get control of the state so you can use its might to extract taxes from businesses, obtain donor money from abroad, and be in a position to control the disbursing of state tenders.

If a citizen wants to independently create their own business, but is not connected to the leader or ruler party, he or she has to pay massive kickbacks at every step.

This is one reason why Africa has struggled to create an entrepreneurial class. Talent is wasted in African societies. Appointments to government are not made on merit, but based on closeness to leadership. This is why the most talented people often leave African countries for the greener pastures abroad.

In African-style democracy the rule of law is only applicable to ordinary people. The leaders, their families and allies are exempt. There is one constitution, and one set of laws and rules for ordinary people, and quite another for the ruling family and the politically connected elite.

In African democracies there is also no leadership accountability – at a personal level or to the nation. The only form of “accountability” is the level to which those who helped get the leader and his faction “re-elected” are able to benefit.

This includes those in his “constituency”, region and ethnic group.

Leaders can brazenly steal from the public purse, avoid paying taxes, their children can commit criminal violations – nothing will happen to them. Yet if “subjects” commit such transgressions the “law” will take its course.

In African-style democracy leaders do not explain their actions or submit to questions, or take responsibility for their decisions or for the consequences thereof. Rather, in African-style democracies leaders always have strawmen – the “whites”, the former colonial power, the “legacy of colonialism”, the “World Bank”, or even fall-men, the ones who are always responsible for things when they go wrong.

African “culture”, or at least selected bits of it, is also pressed into service in African-style democracy. The worst elements of “culture” are used, for example, to justify oppressing women, or to silence critics with accusations that they are not “African enough”, or are “Western educated” or are proxies of “Western powers” or “want to be white” or are “clever blacks”.

Ironically, the best of African traditions, such as the “lekgotla” where leaders consult with their constituencies, are not practiced by those African leaders who supposedly are so much in thrall of “African” culture.

Nor do these leaders threaten fellow Africans with “dignity” – one of the most honoured African characteristics. Most of these leaders fail to live in the same humbleness and simplicity as their constituencies who live in RDP houses, travel in mini-bus taxis and walk.

“Citizens” do not exist in African-style democracy. People are “subjects” who have no say in decision-making beyond the five-yearly empty ritual of elections.

Those in power do not govern, which means they would be accountable to citizens – rather they rule.

And the ruler is immune from all accountability, be it in his broader public life, his personal life, sexual relations, financial obligations or social life. Rulers can for example “take” a subject’s wife, girlfriend or daughter because there are no consequences.

Rulers can also take the life of someone who opposes them or strip them of their property, use state institutions such as revenue agencies, intelligence services and the police to make their life a misery.

African-style democracy since independence has been responsible for much of the ethnic conflict, poverty and misery that characterises this continent. This is exacerbated by the fact that rulers cannot be dislodged. As a result we have seen a procession of coups on the continent: leaders can only be forced out of government by violent means.

African-style democracy has also, to a large extent, created the conditions in which extremist fundamentalist organisations like Boko Harem and al Shabaab are able, not only to gain a foothold, but to thrive and virtually overrun governments.

It is also responsible for the new rise of African populism as “subjects” have no hope of ever benefiting from “democracy”, yet they witness the ruling elite and their allies being perpetually advantaged.

Really, whoever still argues that African-style democracy is genuine or the real deal needs to have their head examined. What Africa has by and large, is a thin veneer – all form and no substance.

There are some exceptions, those countries that have genuinely attempted to build genuine democracy, such as Cape Verde, Mauritius and Botswana until the early 1990s. These are far more stable, far richer and far more peaceful than any of the other African countries where governments argue that democracy is not for Africa.

William Gumede is chairman of the Democracy Works Foundation in

Johannesburg, and author of

Restless Nation: Making Sense of Troubled Times