IFSDZ PAPER
DEMOCRACY AND SOCIAL COMPROMISE: A LEGACY FOR FUTURE GENERATIONS OF AFRICA
The curse of African democracy is the salient but sometimes open totalitarianism that is evidenced by a culture of violence, the lashes of baton sticks, the choking tear gas smoke and sometimes unlawful arrests, torture, deaths and or disappearances of government critics. Opposition political parties are permitted to exist only as a façade, albeit being a thin and transparent veil, needed to conceal absolutism and intolerance of critical voices and opposition political parties. The key objective is never to allow any opposition political party to win elections or take part in national governance. The exercise of political rights is considerably undermined and the exercise of free speech is rarely permitted. Regrettably, criticism of the ruling elite is in many cases regarded as treasonous and yet ‘democracy does not possess any qualities of absoluteness’ (Han Zhen, 2006). Elections are reluctantly held on time not as an acknowledgement of their democratic value but as a painful constitutional requirement. Opposition political parties find it very hard to pursue their right to free assembly as rallies are usually banned on the ground that they are a threat to national security and access to public broadcast media is almost rare and as such reaching out to the electorate is made hardly possible. If the elections yield unfavourable outcomes for those in power, the most fashionable thing to do is to reject such outcomes and hold on to power. This is a negation of democracy itself. The strangest thing is that those that reject election outcomes purport to represent the will of the people and yet those very same people they purport to represent would have rejected them through the ballot. This short exposé is not intended to re-tell the story of what democracy is all about but to pose the following question, “What legacy are we going to leave for the future generations in Africa?”
The real problem in Africa is mis-governance associated with irresponsible decisions that negate democratic values. Is this the legacy that the future generations should inherit from us? Rejection of democratic values would normally lead to autocracy, corruption and poor economic policies which invariably lead to economic meltdown. This is probably the modern source of African poverty Some naïve politicians still want to blame colonialism for Africa’s economic problems and yet we are still mining the gold, the diamonds, platinum and all forms of precious minerals portions of which the white colonialists took to Europe. Africa has never run out of its precious metals. We have taken over the land which the white colonialists forcibly took over from our fore-fathers and yet we are failing to farm. Some of the key industries that were being run by the former colonial masters were taken over by black brothers and they have mismanaged them to the extent that they are either staggering in viability or some have been liquidated. This is happening, decades and scores of years after the last imperialist left the African soil. Can we continue to point our fingers at the colonialist who left decades ago for Africa’s economic short-comings? Certainly, the white colonial masters have nothing to do with our poor governance skills, corruption, violation of human rights and appetite for war and violence. No white imperialist sits in our cabinets these days and most of our African countries are experiencing economic meltdown because of poor governance and lack of accountability and yet economic prosperity has a positive correlation with adherence to genuine democratic principles.
Democracy does not exclude criticisms or opposition, in fact these are necessary in order to hold those who are in charge of State affairs to account for their actions and decisions as well as to encourage them to be transparent and open in the manner they administer the affairs of the State on behalf of the people. Democracy thus, recognizes that in every society there are competing political interests, which must find some form of social compromise and balance of power. Regrettably, violence, intimidation and intolerance create a state of disequilibrium in the scales of political power and therefore hurt the social compromise that is necessary for democracy to succeed. In circumstances like this, those that may win elections may not be winners because of the charm of their political ideologies and manifestos but on the basis of illegitimate force that cows the nation to submit to the power of illicit internal administrations. This outcome negates the fundamental values of democracy and in fact it props up illegitimate governments and acts as a catalyst for mis-rule, autocracy, corruption and poor governance. Military and police power are used to exert unlawful duress on unarmed civilians to adhere to and comply with an illegitimate government’s policies. The absence of social compromise will lead to political tension, unrest and in many cases civil unrest, disobedience or war.
Many African leaders have the proclivity to personalize national power even where it has been legitimately granted. Sadly, countries are in many instances treated like personal assets and yet the political mandate is of a fiduciary nature and as such it must be exercised in the best interest of the people including those who may not have voted for the government in power. This negation of democracy naturally leads to absolutism and incidentally initiates an evolution of self-destruction of the sitting government with collateral effects on the nation. What is often forgotten is that power belongs to the people and no one is born with the right to rule but that right must be earned through a legitimate, credible, free and fair election. The position of the President or a Prime Minister as the case may be is not different from the position of a chairman of a Board of Trustees. They both must administer the affairs of other persons whether natural or legal persons and what simply differentiates them is the depth and level of the mandate and power given unto them by the people they represent. Otherwise, they carry fiduciary responsibilities and must act in the best interest of the people they represent and within the scope of the mandate and power given to them. History has rejected totalitarianism and that explains why the Metternich system, Hitlerism, Mussolini’s totalitarianism, Mobutu Sese Seko’s autocracy in Congo (Kinshasa) and Idi Amini of Uganda’s vicious cruelty embodied in absolutism all met embarrassing demises.
The nature of modern governance is such that at some point, the nations will hold political leaders to account for their performance and decisions. That process may not necessarily be rapid but evolutionary. History shows that no matter how long it may take for that moment to come, it will never be missed. The path of safe judgment is one that adheres to democratic principles and values which leads to the social compromise of competing political forces and that is the inheritance and legacy that we must leave for the future generations.
Lyndon T. Nkomo
The Institute of Free Speech and Democracy in Zimbabwe, 17TH June 2011
No comments:
Post a Comment