Showing posts with label Democratic theory and practise. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Democratic theory and practise. Show all posts

Thursday, March 12, 2015

Democratic Experience in Africa

Since African countries began attaining independence in 1960s and 1970s, from European colonists, a few countries in this continent embarked on establishing their own independent systems of government. Most of these countries simply inherited the systems that were used by their former colonial masters. Up to 1990s, most African states had a one party system of government, or military governments which were autocratic. Yet according to Zolberg (1965) survey in West Africa, the rise of one party state was inevitable given the raw nature of African opposition.


However in the early 1990s, Africa began experiencing “second liberation” that opened new avenues for democratic development in the continent. After 1990, many African nations such as Ghana Nigeria, South Africa, Botswana, and Kenya among others legalized opposition parties and held competitive multi party elections. Nonetheless, these elections have not been able to meet the minimum criteria of democracy, free and fair. Consequently, Africa failed to transition to established democracy.


However, many African nations have made considerable efforts towards democratic transition and consolidation. For practical purposes this article grounds its case in Ghana in an attempt to explain how African countries have made significant efforts and established democratic and participatory systems of governance. Following a democratic transition in 1992, Ghana has made significant efforts to promote a liberal democratic culture and system of Government (Fobih, 2008).


It can be argued that the country has made significant strides towards its goal of consolidating a democratic process and culture. This is evident in the five successive elections that it has held since 1992, in improvements in human and political rights, in the independence of various institutions of government such as the Electoral Commission and in the significant role played by the media and civil society organizations. Nonetheless, there are a number of constraints and challenges that need to be addressed in order to sustain the gains that the country has chalked up in the democratic consolidation process. The last two to three decades has seen what Huntington (1991, 1996) has described as the ‘third wave’ of democracy. As part of this wave, a number of developing countries, including Ghana, have made concerted efforts to not only embark on the democratic process but also consolidate it. 


Despite these achievements, a major challenge that bedevils many countries has focused on how to put in place structures and institutions to consolidate these gains and not squander the benefits of the democratic transition process. Efforts to address this challenge are compromised by limitations of both capacity and political will. At the broadest level, in Ghana and elsewhere in Africa, challenges also persist in consolidating a democratic culture and institutional structures based on tolerance and accountability. Other challenges to the consolidation of democratic principles and good governance revolve around the role of the independent and often courageous media, which, while being crucial for the accountability and transparency, also tend to have a number of weaknesses.


As Gyimah- Boadi (2009) Points out, the independence and administrative capacity of Ghana’s Electoral Commission (EC) has improved with each election, while Levels of public interest in national elections remain high (evidenced by voter turnouts consistently above 70 percent). In addition, the country’s key democratic institutions – the judiciary, Commission on Human Rights and Administrative Justice (CHRAJ) and parliament – continue to develop and solidify, and media freedoms and respect for human rights have expanded from one election to the next. 


Moreover, Ghana’s growing international prestige has helped bring substantial external aid and assistance to the country. Besides enjoying debt relief from bilateral and multilateral sources, and from initiatives such as the Highly Indebted Poor Country (HIPC) program me, it has also benefited from the Millennium Challenge Account (MCA) that was introduced by the USA government in 2004 to assist countries in the developing world that were perceived as promoting  good political governance, investing in people, fostering enterprise and entrepreneurship,  building capacity for trade and investment, furthering economic reform and anti-corruption efforts. 


Of interest in this discussion is the relationship between the role of key democratic institutions and the factors that inhibit their capacity to be effective in expanding their activities and operations in the democratic process. Civic groups, as Putnam (1993, 2000) have pointed out, help individuals to socialize, interact and also mobilize to engage in mass demonstrations, protests and civil disobedience to exert pressure on authoritarian regimes to engage in democratic transition, as well as demand governmental transparency and accountability. They also help promote institutionalized social trust that helps deepen the democratic process. Civil Society organizations (CSOs) have been able to perform these roles within the context of Ghana’s democratic consolidation process. 

The performance of the media can be assessed in terms of their professionalism in their coverage of election campaigns and examines their role as gatekeepers in the democratic process. By looking at issues such as the nature of political reporting by the media and the role of civil society, as well as examining how key democratic institutions such as the EC and judiciary are performing, one can attempts to assess the extent to which democratic transition and consolidation is occurring in Ghana.

Friday, March 6, 2015

Critical Appraisal of Democracy



DEMOCRACY IS THE WORST FORM OF GOVERNMENT EXCEPT THOSE THAT HAVE BEEN TRIED FROM TIME TO TIME

Allan Soi,
Africa Political Society
March 6, 2015
            Simply defined, democracy is a form of government based on the consent of the governed, political competition and political equality, and political liberty. Winston Churchill in his popular quotes said, "Democracy is the worst form of government except those that have been tried from time to time." If democracy is a worse form of government then a better one is yet to be found. So, until a better alternative is accepted, we have no choice but to live with democracy. Indeed, democracies of all types come with its own problems both in theory and practice. One would imagine that the panacea is to recreate an alternative system to fit with contemporary age, but no. There exist endless disagreements over the review and research due to different approaches in the study of democracy.1
            The political arena is essentially comprised of competing and conflicting interests. Conflicts are inherent in human nature, where humans rarely agree one hundred percent over any issue. Emerging democracies in particular, feature deep seated divisions in populations emanating from nationalistic hatred and negative conflict. The winner take all system generates factional attempts to control power to suit their selfish interests, thereby turning the state into a battle field. Identity politics continue to define political societies to date. Group allegiance risks promoting intolerance of divergent views. As such ethnic, religious and gender nationalism is a challenge to state power often leading to irredentism and ethnic cleansing.2
            For example in Kenya, citizens belong to their ethnic nationalities first and Kenya second. The goodwill of all is sacrificed at the altar of ethnic loyalty. Fukuyama's study of Kenya reveals successive post colonial regimes failed to forge a national Kenyan identity. Consequently, Kenyan societies have been marred with zero- sum conflict between the big ethnic groups over authoritative allocation of resources to the extent of affecting its development. Political cleavages militates against an agreement over creation of unified national narrative to hold the polarized society together.3
            Democracy is practically the dictatorship of the majority who while having their way are expected to give minority a chance to have their say. Democracy hands down unchecked power to the majority to the detriment of the minority. This situation is especially worse in societies where political cleavages are advanced to reinforce dominance of the majority group. As a result, the minority groups are consequently, marginalized in exclusive, oppressive and unresponsive majority regimes. These segments of the minority are defenseless and pulverized such that they become powerless to safeguard their interests and choices in decision making.4 Power should seem to rotate between the different social groups, but in practice privileged groups dominate the political system. For some groups, democracy has failed, perhaps never will, deliver on its promise to this segment of the population. Imperfections has made rules of the game so skewed in favor of some groups that it is practically impossible for the underdog classes to gain representation in government.
            On paper democracy is the rule of the majority but in reality it is the few who rule. Yes, it is the elected few elite politicians who actually call the shots. The elected representatives personify elite capture in the guise of representing popular will. The masses rarely make critical decisions that affect their lives but their elected representatives do. A power vacuum is created and demagogues, populists and authoritarian politician superficially coat democracy with their faces and passing themselves as the people.5 Iron law of oligarchy succinctly summarizes this view pointing out it is the minority officials and bureaucrats who actually rule as the populace is incapable of ruling over selves.
            Despite, it's carefully crafted tools like referendum; democracy should not be taken at its surface value. More often than not, popular participation has been abused to turn the people into mere rubber stamps for decisions already made. For this reason referendum is just a tool of gentleman's shadow of participatory democracy rather than a vessel of substantial policy decisions. In any case, government can still refuse to implement the decisions made.6
            In Kenya's 2005 referendum, the government was able to sneak in proposals to the draft constitution using dubious means. It was apparent that forces were keen on manipulating a noble cause to the detriment of the populace. Although the draft was finally defeated the government of the day refused to listen to public voice and instead became increasingly intolerant to dissent. The government selfishly interpreted the "no" verdict to mean that people wanted the old constitution to prevail. If a powerful clique would not gain control of constitution amendments, then nobody would. This status quo favored domination by incumbent. A clique of hardliners emerged in government treating matters of the state as personal property by blocking reforms.7
            Democracy promotes corruption and dirty politics in a contest to win power. Wealthy politicians can easily buy their way into government. Once in government they enact laws that protect their ill gotten positions. They even use state resources to their advantage, making it difficult for citizens to question them or demand accountability for actions from their elected representatives.
Conclusion
In summary, democracy however good a system, is loaded with plenty of dysfunctions, at times leading to crisis.  Apparently, democracy fuels dirty tactics in competition resulting in undeserving people being elected. Above all, democracy fuels zero sum conflicts over spoils of power eventually leaving the political society more divided on delicate factional lines. Gaps between theory and practice have turned democracy into rule of a few yet at the same time dictatorship of the majority. Power doesn't seem to rotate freely between social groups leading to exclusions of the minority from representation. Even handmaiden direct initiatives can be abused to the detriment of the population. Therefore, it is prudent to begin searching for an alternative democracy.
Bibliography


Arblaster, Anthony. Democracy. Berkshire: Open University Press, 2002.
Cunningham, Frank. Theories of Democracy: A Critical Introduction. New York: Rutledge, 2002.
Held, David. Models of Democracy. Cambridge: Polity Press, 2006.
Fukuyama, Francis. "States and Democracy". Democratization, 21 no. 7 (2014): 1326-1340. doi             10.1080/13510347.2014.960208.
Soi, Allan. "Democratic Consolidation in Kenya: The Role of Opposition." (Undergraduate dissertation, Kenyatta University , (2014), 19-27.

End Notes
            1. Frank Cunningham, Theories of Democracy: A Critical Introduction (New York: Rutledge, 2002), 15.

            2. Ibid., 15.

            3. Francis Fukuyama, "States and Democracy", Democratization 21 no. 7, 2014: 1326-1340, http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/13510347.2014.960208#.VKaP-M9RWxU.

            4. Frank Cunningham, Theories of Democracy: A Critical Introduction (New York: Rutledge, 2002), 15-16.

            5. Ibid., 19-20.

            6. Anthony Arlabaster, Democracy (Berkshire: Open University Press, 2002), 84.

            7.Allan Soi, "Democratic Consolidation in Kenya: The Role of Opposition", (Undergraduate Dissertation, Kenyatta University, 2014), 19-27.
http://sociopoliticalworld.blogspot.com