Introduction.
Since the late 1980s, most African countries have transitioned from one-party regimes or military dictatorships to multi-party democratic regimes. This change was initiated by domestic democratic pressures and transformations in the international system following the end of the Cold War. With few exceptions, democracy has taken root and gained legitimacy as the most appropriate form of political organisation and governance in Africa, based on the rule of law rather than brute force. An important aspect of this democratic opening has been the widening of the political space to include new political actors and the use of elections to choose leaders. However, in many cases, these elections were far from perfect and the results were strongly contested by the losers. This was particularly true where some governments used their power and public resources to manipulate the electoral process in their favour. As a result, Africa found itself with democracy but without elections, as the famous Ugandan economist Thandika Mkandawire said.
Elections in Africa: A Legal Framework but No Real Options
In the late 1990s, public disillusionment with the new democracies was beginning to be felt, despite the existence of an overwhelming majority of democratically elected regimes on the continent. The high expectations of the people, who hoped that democracy would reverse the decades of poverty, corruption and underdevelopment, were hardly fulfilled by the new democrats.
The question posed above questions is whether the current multi-party democracy offers any real choice to the African people. While some critics argue that it offers no real choice, others argue that it is the only option available to Africans in the post-Cold War unipolar world. It is therefore appropriate to ask the question: Did Africans choose the current democracy or was it imposed on them? The question apparently lies in the ideological framework within which a certain kind of democracy is promoted in Africa. There are several difficulties arising from this situation. The most important is the place of citizens in the current democracy in Africa. Is this multiparty democracy inclusive? Do elections offer citizens a real choice or no choice at all?
At some levels, there seems to be an electoral tyranny faced by people who do not fully understand or embrace a certain type of democracy. They are also caught in the turmoil of economic reform programmes that increase poverty and crush the middle class. In such a context, they can neither participate in nor influence the political process, but can only vote in periodic elections. Moreover, the state, its institutions and the ruling party have a great influence on the electoral process, so in most cases elections do not offer a real choice or opportunity to participate in the political process.
In another aspect, citizens can vote for a political party but have no choice over the economic policies that party will implement once in power. Experience in Africa shows that citizens have no say over the economic policies implemented by the parties they vote for. Increasingly, the economic policies adopted by African states tend to devolve responsibility and power to outside groups, such as the ‘dream team’ of local technocrats, who pursue a ‘fair price’ while ignoring social impacts.
Thus, increasingly, economic logic overrides the will of the people, rendering elections between different candidates irrelevant because they all implement the same economic reforms that punish and disempower the poor. On the continent, since the euphoria of the early 1990s, there is evidence that formal democracy has increasingly reduced citizen participation in politics. More and more, essentially, the same political elites and reorganised former dictators, supported by an international community eager to promote economic reforms on the continent, are accumulating power over the political process. The attitude towards democracy of this political class is ambivalent and opportunistic, seeking to bend democratic institutions for personal gain. Some have tried to change the constitution to extend their terms in office or to exclude strong rivals from electoral competition. Through their ties to the state and belonging to power networks, these wealthy elites have the structures and resources to contest and win elections.
“Democracy Without Elections" What Challenges and What Strategy?
There is no doubt that Claude Ake's critical reflections have profound implications for understanding the political reforms and democratic transitions that have taken place in Africa since the late 1980s. How can we make sense of it all and what are the options that are both viable and sustainable? What is the distance between the ideal concept and the ongoing political processes in Africa? Can African ‘new democrats’ really bring about the necessary changes? Has the continent fully recovered from its authoritarian past? Given the diversity of historical and social experiences through which democratic struggles have passed in various African countries, there are no simple answers. What is clear is that Africa's future will depend on the democratic outcomes of the ongoing political and economic reform projects across the continent.
The political reform process that brought multi-party democracy in Africa has been the subject of intense debate. While some academics have praised the transitions from authoritarian to democratic rule as a positive development, others have criticised them for their elitist character, arguing that they ignore the interests of local populations or, worse, are ‘intransitive’. The former emphasise the link between struggles for democracy led by civil society and the establishment of a democracy that guarantees the rights of citizens. They have also argued that the expansion of political space enables previously excluded groups to participate in the political process and that elections require leaders to be accountable to their people, who cannot rule arbitrarily. There is no doubt that this position has a certain relevance for some African states where the return to multi-party democracy has created conditions that allow the opposition to organise and defeat the ruling parties. This has happened in Zambia, Senegal, Ghana, Malawi and more recently in Kenya.
In addition to the opening up of the political space, certain rights, in particular freedom of expression and the rule of law, have also allowed previously silenced voices to express themselves and criticise the extremism of leaders and to act as voices of opposition. In this context, since the 1990s Africa has witnessed the development of private media, especially radio stations and newspapers. These media serve as platforms for people to express themselves and provide the public with alternative sources of news and information. These media have played an important role in struggles for democratisation, as in the cases of Senegal, Ghana and Nigeria. In other cases, for example in Zimbabwe, alternative media continue to operate under difficult conditions, but continue to disseminate alternative information to what the ruling party or government would like the public to believe.
Conclusion
Expectations that democracy would reverse decades of poverty, corruption and backwardness have not been fulfilled by the new democrats. In some cases, the collapse of the ‘old regime’ led to military coups, chaos, civil wars and regional conflicts; in others, cunning dictators legitimised their stay in power by transforming themselves from military leaders into ‘new democrats’, suppressing or dividing the opposition, or allowing only a symbolic implementation of the multiparty system. In short, popular disillusionment and a growing cynicism towards electoral processes became evident. To remedy this situation, the role of civil society and international organisations in promoting free and fair elections is crucial. Furthermore, political education and citizen awareness-raising are essential for strengthening democracy. Finally, institutional reforms are necessary to ensure a genuine democratic transition and accountability of leaders.
Comments