‘EUREKA’ IN AFRICA'

‘EUREKA’ IN AFRICA

‘Eureka’ an ancient Greek word meaning “I have found it” is perhaps apt in characterizing the latest development I found in Kenya.

If Kenyans succeed in having a “national dialogue” as it is currently being discussed across the political divide, they will be blazing the trail for other African countries on the practice of democratic governance.  Especially if the dialogue is not a one time event, is guided by a spirit of patriotism and its deliberations are underpinned by the principle that  ‘democracy’ transcends balloting and elections; that it is ¨governance by discussion and public reasoning.” (See my two recent Blogs on “An Alternative System of Governance Revisited” and “ Patriotism and National Development II”).

By making periodic ‘discussions and public reasoning’ part and parcel of the governance structure to collectively address key challenges in the society and devise durable solutions to them, the country would be fostering constructive and ‘healthy’ rather than ‘unhealthy’ competition, which is currently the prevailing norm.

The periodic ‘public reasoning’ on the country’s challenges would also help Kenya move beyond “western democracy” as currently practiced, primarily as balloting and elections  - (winners take all) and start to build a viable foundation for a homegrown and durable political and socioeconomic development. 

PATRIOTISM AND NATIONAL DEVELOPMENT II

PATRIOTISM AND NATIONAL DEVELOPMENT II

Last year I published a posting on this topic following the strike action by the teachers' labour Unions in the Republic of Benin. The French version of that post has been left on this Blog as I consider it still relevant.

Apart from the economic impact of strike actions in terms of loss in productivity, there are also adverse psychosocial effects on the stakeholders; in Benin's particular instance, the innocent students who were subjected to lost time in their curricula for the school year and the stress factor to which the parents were subjected.  The recognition of the gravity of these consequences for the nation elicited a groundswell of appeal from various quarters to the sense of patriotism of all stakeholders, in particular the Unions. The appeal was nationwide and uniform in its message.  

The strike action entailed prolonged negotiations, which were characterized by considerable passion on the part of the Unions and the Government. The resolution of the crisis, which may be a reprieve rather than a permanent one offered nonetheless a unique opportunity to examine the role played by an appeal to the sense of patriotism of the stakeholders.  It is yet to be seen if the country has been able to seize the opportunity and consolidate the goodwill engendered by the patriotic spirit that contributed to the resolution of the crisis. 

Some general lessons could be drawn from that experience, especially on how to deal with such crisis and more importantly, how to avoid them in the future.

GENERAL LESSONS:  “Patriotism is the love of and devotion to one’s country”. Every citizen as a stakeholder has the responsibility to be proactive in embracing and promoting patriotism as an 'indispensable fuel' with which to run the engine of national development and promote growth.  National development, the growing of the national output and its equitable distribution are the responsibilities of all stakeholders in the society.  It must be under-guarded by patriotism and sustained by the society's values and ethics.  Being proactive in promoting patriotism has to transcend exhortations and the willingness to sacrifice for one’s country not only for its defence against external aggression but also devotion to work for its socio-political and economic advancement.  

 The following is a set of proactive and programmatic actions for consideration:

1.  A National Campaign on Patriotism with a focus on its indispensability for national development and ensuring that all public enlightenment campaigns are in local languages. No country can achieve sustainable development without a patriotic population.  (Some time back, a popular saying in the Nigerian public service was: " no be my Papa work or business O!" meaning, the work I am doing is not my father's business so, why should I care about giving the best I am capable of?)  The good news is that there has been a change over time and that attitude is no longer as pervasive. Of course national development is everybody's business (public, private, civil society, etc) and the public service has a pivotal role to play. 

Leadership at all levels of society has the responsibility for ensuring that Patriotism is embraced and practiced in the way and manner each citizen conducts her or himself in daily life. The political leadership has a responsibility to ensure that the public sector is service delivery-oriented, efficient and effective in order to invigorate the spirit of patriotism in the society.  Most attempts at reforming the public sector have tended to pay lip service to the importance of patriotism in service delivery.  Corrective measures could be taken through policy decisions that ascribes major importance to patriotism, eschew ethnicity, discrimination, corruption, exploitation of workers, tax avoidance and evasion, etc.  The loyalty of all the constituent parts of a country is fundamental and the State has an obligation to articulate its responsibilities and commitments to safeguard and defend the interest of its constituent parts, for example, through enforcement of the rule of law; meeting the challenge of poverty reduction successfully; rewarding excellence and providing leadership by example; demonstrating that leadership and the requisite responsibilities are discharged at every level of the society, from the political leadership to the household; by ensuring for example, that women's rights are socially and politically entrenched and respected; property rights are immutable and irreversible; and finally, that the legal and security systems and their structures exude confidence by eschewing favoritism and corruption, promoting trust, and cooperative spirit.

2.  Establish a platform for regular discussions of diverse opinions on governance issues that hinders the promotion of patriotism.  The objective of such a platform should be two-fold: (i) create the space for constructive dialogues on the issues; (ii) Focus on how to promote a sense of national belongingness and galvanize patriotism for national development. 

3.  Contextualize Patriotism in national symbols and instruments of governance and development and disseminating these throughout the country, including all educational institutions and in local communities as part of National civic education programme.

4.  Establish basic requirements on the significance of the country's Universal Symbols of Patriotism and their observance at home, at work, in public places, etc., as sources of inspiration and pride in serving the country with devotion.

AN ALTERNATIVE SYSTEM OF GOVERNANCE REVISITED

AN ALTERNATIVE SYSTEM OF GOVERNANCE REVISITED

This posting was published last year and it attracted a lot of attention through personal e-mail messages expressing agreement with the viewpoint either in total or with some reservations and a few in total disagreement. But virtually all were unwilling to submit their comments to be published except for a couple.  I am republishing it in the hope that it will generate the type of bold public debate it was intended to provoke because the viewpoint is still relevant and topical.  In private reflections we continue to question the relevance of the system of democratic governance as practiced in many of our countries. Why not subject it to rigorous public reflections through this platform or any other in the hope of a successful search for a viable alternative?

Going by the “successful” elections in a number of countries in recent past and the keeping in check those trying to usurp political powers through unconstitutional means in a few countries, such as Mali and CAR, democracy must be well and alive in Africa!  So, why think or talk of a need for an alternative system of governance?  

Democracy has been adopted as a system of governance and practiced primarily in terms of balloting and elections by a group of privileged political groups or class called “political parties”.  Few African countries have ideologically derived and driven political parties and rarely are the so-called manifestos of the parties actualized after elections.

Democracy transcends balloting and elections. It is ¨governance by discussion and public reasoning.” (See The Idea of Justice by the Nobel Laureate Professor Amartya Sen, Harvard University Press, Cambridge, Massachusetts 2009.  African countries should not be lulled into believing that western ¨democracy¨ as currently practiced, primarily as balloting and elections, has a viable foundation upon which to build durable and unadulterated political and socioeconomic development. 

In practice, western democracy is an expensive system of governance for the privileged few with huge sums of money to buy the media and disseminate misinformation about political opponents for the sole purpose of winning elections. In the process, these “politicians” also buy the electorates who due to their poverty of the mind and means are left with selling their votes in the absence of any objective programme of civic education and the inability to make informed choices. Once in office, the “politicians” proceed to loot the treasury to pay back for what they have “invested” in getting elected. Some even boast publicly about how they rigged elections, how much ill-gotten wealth they have been able to acquire and flaunt these publicly without any scruples or sense of guilt.

A form of governance worthy of exploration by African countries is "benevolent autocracy" as a transition to a home grown "democratic governance" that has as its foundation "discussions and public reasoning".  The system has a visionary leader supported by an administrative machinery that shares his or her vision and in turn ensures that the vision is also shared by the masses.

 Such a system would necessarily require some concentration of political power, but the issue is not the power in itself but how it is used. When the military came to power in the 1970s and 80s in a number of African countries, citizens were jubilant, hopeful that the military would use the autocratic or dictatorial power to correct for the ills of society. Instead the power was misused and the outcomes were disastrous. The military failed woefully to use the power for the common good.  Rather, they used it for selfish ends with obscene scale of corruption never before witnessed as was the case with Sani Abacha et al.

What African countries need are visionary leaders with the capability to assemble around them, those that share their vision of development, those that have been schooled in stewardship and service, not those that see the shared vision in terms of the loot to be shared.  "Benevolent autocracy" is a viable transitory form of governance that is rooted in Africa's own traditional values and system of governance.  It involved the chiefs as counselors to the traditional ruler, with whom they shared a common vision.  Although they are counselors, there was room for dissent even though the ruler was a "benevolent autocrat".

President Nelson Mandela was impressed and influenced as a young boy by seeing the democratic nature of the proceedings of the local meetings that were held in the Regent's Grand Palace in Mqhekezweni. According to President Mandela in Long Walk to Freedom, Little Brown & Co . Boston, Massachusetts and London 1994 p19 – 20.  

"My later notions of leadership were profoundly influenced by observing the regent and his court. I watched and learnt from the tribal meetings that were regularly held at the Great Palace.  ... On these occasions the regent was surrounded by his 'amaphakathi' a group of councilors of high rank who function as the regent's parliament and judiciary....Everyone who wanted to speak did so. It was democracy in its purest form. There may have been a hierarchy of importance among the speakers, but everyone was heard, chief and subject, warrior and medicine man, shopkeeper and farmer, landowner and labourer. The foundation of self government was that all men were free to voice their opinions and were equal in their value as citizens. Women , I am afraid, were deemed 'second class citizens'.  Democracy meant all men were to be heard and a decision was taken together as a people". 

Other cultures in different parts of the World share a similar form of approach to governance and have applied this in modern times as seen in cases such as Indonesia and South Korea.  Three cases in Africa that have or have had some semblance of such an approach to governance at different times are Ghana (a la Rawlings), Ethiopia and Rwanda.

Modernization of Africa's own traditional values and system of governance and scaling it up to the national level deserve consideration as an alternative to western democracy, the foundations of which are not well understood and the practice of which is disadvantageous to the masses of the population.