The ‘gods’ of Democracy

Democracy has become a cliché in the mouth of many African leaders today. I have always been unclear in mind as to what democracy really is, especially in Africa. It was when I read about President Olusegun Obasanjo (not the street) defending his country’s recent ‘democratic’ elections that I was compelled to dust my General Certificate Examination (GCE) Ordinary level Government textbook to look up the word Democracy. Democracy according to the ancient Greeks, came from the words “demos,” the people; and “kratein,” to rule. It is therefore implied that democracy is a political system in which the people of a community or country rule through any form of government they choose to establish. It therefore presupposes that, any form of governance that has organically evolved from the people would be considered as democracy.

The democracies of ancient Greece and Rome were unlike the democracies of today. Direct democracies in which citizens could speak (express opinions) and vote (take decisions) on issues that directly affect them was undertaken. However, democracy could not be delineated from the feudal culture of the Greeks and the Romans. Ancient democracy therefore did not presuppose equality of all individuals. The majority of the populace, notably slaves and women, had no political rights. Athens, the greatest of the city democracies, limited the franchise to native-born citizens.

The changing face of democracy began at the period of Stoic philosophy. The Stoic philosophy, which defined the human race as part of a divine principle, and held that external differences such as rank and wealth are of no importance in social relationships, and the Christian religions, which emphasized the rights of the underprivileged and the equality of all before God, contributed to the development of modern democratic theory. It would therefore be safe to argue that, culture, morality, and religion play very crucial roles in democracy; as democracy (governance) is born out of the beliefs and traditions of the people at a time.

In modern democracies (the form of democracy differ from country to country, but the underlying principle remain the same), supreme authority is exercised by representatives elected by popular suffrage. The electorate may supplant the representatives according to the legal procedures of recall. This system is currently being foisted and hoisted in most part of Africa including Ghana, without due regard to the so many irreconcilable cultural differences that exist in Africa. Africa has not seized the opportunity to develop and nurture its systems and forms of democracy. The present western democracy sweeping across Africa was rather providential. However, the emerging bloody conflicts in Africa which is as a result of electoral irregularities and non-adherence to basis democratic processes and principles by our leaders with its concomitant debilitating socio-political and economic effects should cause Africans to reconsider whether providence rather than prudence should dictate our democratic future. In principle and in practice, representatives should be responsible to the electorate. The officials in a true democracy more generally and directly must reflect the known or ascertained views of their constituents, and most often subordinate their own judgment. It is therefore imperative for elected officials to adhere to the principles of information disclosure on issues that affects the livelihood of the electorate. The foundation of information disclosure in democracy is the belief that the government is accountable for its actions and that the public possesses a right to obtain information about those actions. Nevertheless, some recent developments in Ghana under the NPP administration and some other African countries call for questioning the seriousness of governments to adhering to these fundamental principles of democracy.

For example, the refusal of the Governor of Bank of Ghana, Mr. Paul Acquah, to disclose to Parliament the cost or the anticipated expenditure of the redenomination of the currency which is supposed to take effect in July 2007; the refusal of the Chief of Staff and Minister of Presidential Affairs, Mr. Kwadwo Mpianim to disclose the estimated contract sum of the Presidential Mansion, which was currently under construction; the contract sum of the National Identification Card Project; the Golden Jubilee expenditure; and the mismanagement of information on the energy crisis, call for critical analysis of our democracy.

These are very worrying signs under the current democratic dispensation. Indeed this attitude of non-answerability and unaccountability to the tax payer has intoxicating element of corruption and threatens the health and quality of our democracy; and it is very prejudicial to the national interest. It is the fundamental rights of shareholders of corporate Ghana to demand full disclosure of all the necessary financial information about any project which will significantly alter the financial coffers of the State.

The manner in which governments organise elections and determine winners also affects the quality of participatory democracy. Since the controversial Florida vote rigging in the 2000 elections in the USA (ie. Between Bush and Al Gore), elections in Africa and some developing European countries have carefully repeated similar style in their countries. Incumbent governments in Africa have carefully planned elections in such a manner as to entrench themselves or their parties in power. In Togo for example, it was alleged that Faure Eyadema who inherited the ‘throne’ of his farther, Gnassigbe Eyadema only agreed to hold an election on condition that he was going to win. This assurance was alleged to have been given by the executives of the ECOWAS. It was therefore of little surprise that when European Union (EU) observers questioned the conduct of the Presidential election, the ECOWAS despite the fact that, government armed forces were caught on still camera and video camera brutalising the electorate in perceived strongholds of the opposition parties and carted ballot boxes into oblivion, the ECOWAS election observers declared the election as free and fair.

In Ghana for instance, a prominent NPP member was recorded on tape alleged to have stated that, the party has Action Troopers (the equivalent of the Ku Klux Klan (KKK) of 1861–1865), which uses violence and intimidation to prevent suspected opposition party members and sympathizers from voting. They are further used to steal ballot boxes and stuff them with already thumb printed ballot papers to influence the final result. The case of Pru Constituency in 2004 Presidential and parliamentary elections is seen as one of the examples to have given credence to the work of such Action Troopers. Furthermore, since 2004 elections, as required by law the Assembly Press, the official publishing authority of election results maintains that the Presidential results have still not been sent to them for publication and gazetting as appropriate.

It is very worrying that should any Political Science student undertaking research into Ghana’s electoral results, will not be in position to find legally certified presidential election results for 2004 for reference. As at present, the Electoral Commission (EC) has not informed the Ghanaian public through the gazetting of the Presidential poll results of the following, in respect of the true and accurate presidential polls results; how many votes in the presidential ballot boxes were counted in the presidential elections in the 21,005 polling stations?; how many people voted for PNC, NPP, NDC, and CPP; how many were rejected ballot papers?; and what was the declared percentage (%) of each candidate? Would it therefore be out of place to ask, by whose mandate is President Kuffour governing Ghana? This is a very legitimate question and needs to be critically examined and debated so as to avoid its future occurrence. The author has seen the electoral results of some of the polling stations, and it is interesting to note that the turnout at some polling stations is over 100%. In other words, the people who voted were more than the people who registered. Our law courts have also not been swift in responding to these electoral challenges hence legitimizing electoral fraud.

The recent 2007 Presidential and Parliamentary elections in Nigeria cannot go without mention. The elections in Nigeria were somewhat interesting as it was catastrophic. Some States were deprived of voting as ballot boxes and papers were missing or not sent to the States; results have been declared in some constituencies where voting had not taken place; and senators have been elected into offices in States where they have not contested. In fact the events preceding the elections were tantamount to a coup. The tenets of the constitution have been completely dislocated and hanged. The EU pronounced the elections “not credible” and the White House calling it “deeply flawed”. The irregularities are so incongruous that, no observer was able to attempt to give the elections any credibility except President Obasanjo who declared that “the elections have gone on well”.

A worrying trend is gradually developing in Africa. The continent is gradually becoming a cradle where politics and elected governments have no respect for democratic processes. In 2002, Zimbabwe’s elections was flawed with deep irregularities; in 2005, Togo’s elections provoked bloody street battles which has polarized the country; since 2004, Ghana’s Presidential result is still being contested at court, and the country is polarized on ethnic line and political patronage; in 2006 Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC) experienced one of the bloodiest ethnic conflict over the Presidential results; Cote de Ivoire is yet to recover from tampering with the electoral process by former President Konan Bedie; and Nigeria continues to grapple with ethnic violence due to manipulation of the constitutional arrangements.

Some western countries or donors subtly condone such acts so long as it benefits their political and economic agenda. Some Heads of States on the continent have turned themselves into ‘gods of democracy’ who condone and connive with their counterparts to manipulate the electoral systems and forcefully impose leaders on the electorate. It is therefore, quite appalling for President Thabo Mbeki of South Africa, and President John Agyekum Kuffour of Ghana and current African Union (AU) chairman to ignore these dangerous signs, and without thoughtful consideration of the socio-political ramifications not only to Nigeria but Africa as a whole, went ahead to congratulate Alhaji Umaru Yar Adua, the disputed President elect of Nigeria, whilst almost the whole has rejected the results.

These developments in the sub-Sahara Africa must be of concern to any well-meaning African. We are being confronted with a situation where Presidents are made and foisted on the people through very bizarre electoral process rather than being duly elected. African leaders have gradually assumed and arrogated to themselves, the position of democratic gods whereby at the end of their terms, they either circumvent the very constitution they vow to uphold to extend their terms or appoint demigods to succeed them. These demigods also mature to godfathers and give birth to the next godchildren of perpetuation. In this case, the democratic institutions are personalized to serve their myopic political agenda.

This would not only profoundly undermine Africa’s self-determination as a sovereign nation, continent, and people, but also would escort us to our failure in the search for practical and peaceful solutions to problems that confronts us. At the bottom of all these democratic ills, is the ordinary man who suffers. As one Richard Dowden says, “the ordinary people don’t matter and are all but completely ignored during the election – there is no reason why that voice should be heard so they don’t have much leverage”. Ghana keenly awaits 2008 elections.