By Anthony Akinola
Most people in the relatively stable
democratic nations of the world would find it rather difficult to understand
why democracy should be causing so much pain in the so-called third world
nations. The assassination of Benazir Bhutto in December 2007 and the
consequent turmoil of Pakistan followed by the killings of hundreds of citizens
in Kenya and Nigeria in the aftermath of allegedly rigged presidential
elections, further reminded peoples of the peaceful democratic nations that
what they now take for granted in their own nations never comes on a platter of
gold.
The United States of America gained its
independence from Britain in 1776. However, the Americans had to fight a
system, which made them pay tax without being represented in parliament. “No
taxation without representation” was the memorable slogan of their war and
their declaration, which must guide democracy anywhere in the world, is the
assertion that “all men and women are created equal”. The determination to give
effect to that important declaration would later lead to constitutionalists to
prohibit the American citizen from bearing a title of nobility. The now
problematic gun culture - the right of the American citizen to have a gun - was
also intended to achieve that end.
However, America is still democratising
because the assertion of equality of all men and women excluded Blacks for the
great part of the nation’s history. The history of de jure acceptance of Blacks
as equal to Whites is only a few decades old, coming into effect with the Civil
Rights legislation of the 1960s, while de facto acceptance of equality is still
evolving. The vestiges of the racial-supremacist Ku Klux Klan, their own
earlier version of our Boko Haram, are yet to fully disappear. However, things
are looking good because substantial progress has been made. The election and
re-election of Barack Obama as first African-American President is a huge step
in the right direction.
Neither can Great Britain claim to have
perfected its democracy. The nature and extent of privileges enjoyed by the
monarchy is an on-going debate. The history of democracy in Britain has been a
history of the ordinary citizen challenging the Crown and the so-called royal
prerogative. It is also a history of organised challenge to the assumptions of
the aristocracy. The British monarch is now a mere constitutional one -
courtesy of the revolt led by Oliver Cromwell in the 17th century - while many
other European countries including France, Germany and Russia, got rid of
theirs in violent revolutions. The emergence of a controversial King or Queen
could spell the end of the monarchy in Britain.
Be that as it may, democracy and its
institutions crept in gradually. The right to vote did not come to many on a
platter of gold. Requirements of property and education meant many were
excluded from the democratic process. Voting rights did not come to women until
quite recently. We may now refer to some societies as civilised not least
because their citizens readily comply with rules and regulations but such
civility did not come about easily. In Britain, for instance, there was once a
time when a relatively minor offence attracted severe punishment. Convicts were
ex-communicated and distant Australia became more or less Britain’s prison for
such convicts .
The universal definition of democracy
is that provided by the great Abraham Lincoln as “the government of the people,
for the people, and by the people”. Democracy is not just an approach to
political governance but a culture, which touches on every facet of human life.
The major problem of democracy in some societies is that it is a new value
system in competition with already established structure, which are at best
contradictory. The authoritarian feudal structures of some societies derive
their authenticity from tradition and religion. Until the contradictions of
state and society have been resolved, our democracy will be a mere imitation of
what obtains somewhere else.
In Nigeria, for instance, the
traditional system co-exists with the modern democratic system. There is
nothing like the King or Queen of Nigeria but traditional rulers exist as heads
of cities, towns and villages. The British approached political governance in
Nigeria through a system of indirect rule, making use of the chiefs. The
politician seeking political power wants to be in the good books of the
traditional ruler and some might want to parade a chieftaincy title of some
sort. Traditional rulers are among the most affluent in Nigerian society; those
in big cities receive multiple salaries from local government councils in their
areas of jurisdiction. It is hard to envisage a revolution that would end
Nigeria’s traditional institutions.
The electoral democracy into which we
were introduced has been characterised by failure. The rigging culture has
become our electoral culture. The recent events in Cote d’Ivoire are also an
indication that election rigging is an African disease. The typical African
leader does not believe in leaving office voluntarily or in being defeated in
the process of re-election. If the Constitution stipulates two terms, the
typical African leader interprets it to mean a minimum of two terms in office.
Robert Mugabe of Zimbabwe has been one long-term mis-leader in that respect.
The United States of America has been governed by one constitution since 1787,
while Britain is not even guided by a written one; the typical African leader
believes the Constitution could be changed at every conceivable opportunity, to
suit his whims and caprices.
Is there a future for democracy in
Africa? One likes to be optimistic and, therefore, say there is. One’s optimism
derives from the belief that education can play a big part in the future of
democracy in our continent. Most of the current crop of African leaders (or
rulers) belongs to the first generation of educated men and women in their
respective families, while the percentage of the educated in society itself is
generally low. True democracy belongs to the future when a more assertive,
refined and rational citizenry dominates the political space. With successive
generations of educated men and women, the outlook on life will be a lot
different from what it currently is. A country like Britain can boast of more
than a thousand years of education; its oldest university is more than 900
years old while Nigeria’s oldest university, the University of Ibadan, is 64
this year. The point one is trying to make here is that ours is still a very
young nation and it takes time for rough edges to be chiselled out.
Future economic outlook will also
bolster democracy. The current generation knows no other route to wealth and
fame than politics but that should change when economic opportunities widen.
There are still quite a number of thieves and clowns dictating policies here
and there. When corrupt politicians retire to nowhere other than prison, those
who seek wealth and not service will know where to go. The Press and Judiciary
in Nigeria may be doing relatively well but the people themselves must feel
democratic for democracy to be the culture they so much crave. They are the
ones who must insist, by their votes and actions, on how they want to be
governed.
• Dr Akinola lives in Oxford, England.
No comments:
Post a Comment