Tanzania is gearing up
for the next phase of general elections; which are scheduled to be held later
this year, and next year. Are these elections genuine democratic exercises, or
mere window-dressing events?
Soon after the conclusion of the last
Ugandan Presidential elections in 2016; a writer in the
Ugandan media made the following
scathing comments: “Presidential
elections in Uganda had been stolen by the declared winner President Yoweri Museveni, and therefore, in terms of
sustaining democracy, they were actually useless and meaningless” He also made other serious allegations
regarding how, in the past, votes had been stolen by Presidential election
winners in Mozambique, Namibia and Zimbabwe. He then concluded by claiming that: Elections in Africa are a joke. Africans are
given to stealing elections.”
Similarly, soon after the
conclusion of Kenya’s general elections in 2017; THE CITIZEN of 11th September, published one Justice
Novati Rutenge’s comments titled “Decades on, why just can’t we get
our elections right?”, in which the writer went on to elaborate as follows: “Kenya’s 2017
elections were a cautionary tale of how
election malpractices (call it outright rigging) can divide a country and lead
to deep-seated turmoil . After taking what seemed to be all the steps
in the right direction in terms of setting up a fool-proof electoral process,
just how did Kenya manage to have botched the elections? However, this issue is not unique to Kenya,
for most African countries still have a long way to go before they start
holding proper and meaningful elections. Why can’t African ‘democracies’ get
their act together when it comes to the most important routine in their
practice of democracy, even after doing it for several decades?”.
In view of such scathing
criticisms of elections in Africa , I
was moved to ask this pertinent
question: “If indeed, as claimed by these writers,
Africans are given to stealing elections, what then is the value or
usefulness of holding elections in African countries, when they actually mere
jokes and NOT
true reflections of the genuine choices which had been made by the electors concerned?”
I am, of course, also keenly aware of similar accusations which have been regularly and consistently made against the winners of the Zanzibar Presidential elections, for the similar crime of “stolen elections”; which therefore adds on to the list of “Africans who are given to stealing elections.”
I am, of course, also keenly aware of similar accusations which have been regularly and consistently made against the winners of the Zanzibar Presidential elections, for the similar crime of “stolen elections”; which therefore adds on to the list of “Africans who are given to stealing elections.”
However, our discussion herein
has been designed to focus not on the actual
conduct of elections, nor on matters directly associated with such
exercise. We have instead opted to isolate
the subject of “electoral democracy” for a more detailed examination; or, as
the popular adage goes, to “separate the sheep from the goats”. This is solely for the reason that the word “democracy”
is an omnibus word, which, according to the Oxford English Dictionary, carries
three separate meanings as follows: - 1. “a system of government in which all
the people of a country can vote to elect their representatives”, 2. “a country
which has this system of government,” 3.
“fair and equal treatment of everyone in an organization, etc, and their right
to take part in the making of decisions”.
It, therefore, becomes necessary to clarify which meaning is being used in which
particular context. Thus, in the context
of this discussion, we will focus only on the first-listed definition of
‘democracy’, because that is what enables us to discuss the matter of elections,
which is a necessary component of that system.
Even though the words “system of government” themselves carry a
variety of meanings, since there are more than one ‘systems of
government’ in operation in the
world; the two most familiar being the ‘Presidential system’ and the
‘Parliamentary system”, which are commonly associated, respectively, with the American-based system
and the British- based
(Westminster) system. But because both these systems are founded on
the same basic principle that “their people must vote to elect their representatives” (which means the
holding of regular elections), this enables us to focus solely on that one
aspect of ‘democracy’, namely, “electoral democracy”.
In this discussion, we are
advancing the following propositions:
(a) that the modern concept of electoral democracy “has a distinctive cultural element embedded in it that
is based on the civilization of Western countries; and which is
attributable to unique factors such as their long experience in working with
elected representative bodies; plus their established systems of social pluralism; (b) that this cultural element necessarily creates operational problems for
participants who belong to
different cultures; and (c)
that this cultural impediment is the root cause for the “failure by African countries to just get our elections
right”.
I should disclose that this is a (perhaps vain) attempt to explain why “decades on, Africans still can’t get their elections right”; but is done purely as an academic exercise, with no desire whatsoever, or covert intention, of justifying any such criminal activities.
I should disclose that this is a (perhaps vain) attempt to explain why “decades on, Africans still can’t get their elections right”; but is done purely as an academic exercise, with no desire whatsoever, or covert intention, of justifying any such criminal activities.
The identification of
democracy with elections.
It is quite clear that the current dominant trend is to define
‘democracy’ almost entirely in terms of holding
regular elections; in order to
achieve the goal of ensuring that the “rulers” are selected
periodically by the votes of the
“ruled” through free and fair elections, in which virtually the entire adult
population is eligible to vote. Thus, a modern nation-state is deemed to be a
‘democracy’ only if its government is
established as a result of free, honest, and periodic elections in which he
candidates freely compete for votes. Hence, according to this view, elections are
the essence of democracy. And, more
importantly, it is presumed that these characteristics can only be guaranteed
in a multi-party-political system, where people are free to choose between
competing political parties, representing different shades of opinion.
The negative impact of
cultural differences.
Experience has manifestly
shown that because of the obvious cultural differences that exist around the world,
taking elections and its associated characteristics, described above, as the
essence of democracy has not always given us the perfect model we are looking
for. There have been two principal reasons for this. One is that although
electoral democracy will, indeed,
produce the desired elected government, but it is still possible, and has in fact
happened in some cases, for such elected government to subsequently ignore the other essential safeguards for individual
rights and liberties; such as those of expression, association, religious belief,
and political participation. Or it may even introduce legal mechanisms to
enable the people who are in power to manipulate the electoral process in their
favour; including introducing controversial Constitutional amendments to enable
them to stay indefinitely in power. There
are live examples of this having happened in a number of African countries. The second reason is that there have indeed
been situations whereby free and fair
elections have led to the victory of political
leaders, or groups, that have
subsequently threatened the maintenance of democracy itself, by, for
example, acting in arbitrary ways to suppress, or even eliminate, their
political opponents.
An additional facet, but rather strange
outcome in African elections, has been the rogue refusal by the
losing candidate in Presidential elections, to accept the results of an election which has been certified
by all groups of observers to have been free and fair; and who started fighting a totally
unwarranted, brutal, guerrilla war against the winning candidate.
Furthermore, over the years,
we have also witnessed a number of events
when the relevant elections were actually boycotted by political
parties, presumably because they were considered to be “useless and meaningless”
exercises. It
is in the light of all these negative experiences, that I am persuaded to believe that the cultural differences
that exist, are the root cause of ‘Africa’s failure to get things right’ in
relation to multi-party elections.
Indeed, as a result of
these experiences, some stakeholders have questioned the rationale of this blanket identification
of ‘democracy’ with multi-party elections.
At a “Global Coalition for Africa” conference that was held in November 1995, on the theme titled “Africa’s Future and the World”, many
participants were reported to have underscored
the importance of ‘going beyond political parties” in the
democratization process, by cautioning
that ’multi-party system does not automatically lead to democracy”, and emphasized the need to
involve the larger society in the
democratization process; by recommending the building of a
strong civil society, “which
alone will be capable of building and
sustaining democracy, and acting as a
check on Government”.
The issue of political
parties “representing different shades of opinion”.
Multi-party elections are
said to provide the opportunity for people to choose between “political parties
with shades of different opinions”. But again, this is only true in
jurisdictions where ‘social pluralism’ is part of their political culture. In many of our African ‘democracies’, even
after decades of operating the multi-party system, it is still difficult to
identify substantially significant differences between the political “shades “of
opinion, or ideologies, of the different political parties. Judging from their
election manifestos, and the statements made at open election campaign meetings;
the only ‘ideology’ which all of them appear to be promoting, is the need to
enhance the social and economic welfare of the people, through eliminating
poverty, ignorance and disease. In other
words, there are no fundamental divisions between political parties, since they
all seem to be pursuing this single objective.
This reminds me of Mwalimu Julius Nyerere’s
thesis titled “One Party
Democracy” which he wrote in 1961; in which he argued as follows:- “A two-party
system (like the British system) can be justified only when the parties are
divided over fundamental issues; otherwise it merely encourages the growth of
factionalism . . . Let us take the case of two major parties, both of which
have the interest of the people at heart (or so they claim). For example, both believe that education is a
good thing, and should be made available to everybody; and both believe that a
fair living wage should be paid to all workers; and both believe that medical
care should be within reach of all the people.
All these things are
fundamental. Thus, it would be a reasonable assumption that, whichever party
wins the election, will provide the people with as many of these benefits as
possible. Given that fundamental
agreement, it would be far more sensible if both sides were
to disband their competition teams, and let the electorate choose the best
individuals from among them all, so that the chosen representatives will meet
in Parliament to discuss only the details of how the agreed
tasks should best be carried out, and, thereafter, to cooperate fully in getting them accomplished”.
That, of course, is exactly what happened
during the 30-year period of the Constitutional ‘one-party’ governance system
in Tanzania, from 1965 to 1995.
Are elections in Africa a
big joke? My answer is “No”. Yours may be different. But elections have a great and crucial role
to play in a democracy. And since the
world has not yet been able to invent an alternative to elections for selecting
the peoples’ leaders, Africa will
continue to operate, unabated, the system of multi-party ‘electoral democracy’.
piomsekwa@gmail,com/0754767576.
Source: Daily News and Cde Msekwa himself today.
No comments:
Post a Comment