Dar es Salaam. Since 2000, a dozen of African leaders, who have
successfully attempted to bypass term limits, include Paul Biya of Cameroon,
Idris Deby of Chad, and Ismail Guelleh of Djibouti.
The last successful circumvention of term limits was in Djibouti in 2010.
Other 10 countries, including Burundi, have term limit provisions written into
their constitutions, though they have yet to be implemented.
Norms around term limits have been gaining momentum lately with
Afrobarometer polls showing 75 per cent of African respondents favour two-term
limits for their heads of state.
But even when African leaders lose elections, it is uncertain if they will
hand over power. After being defeated in Côte d’Ivoire’s presidential election
in December 2010, for instance, the then incumbent strong man, Mr Laurent
Gbagbo, rejected the outcome.
Instead, he launched attacks against supporters of his political opponent
Alassane Ouattara, plunging the country into a six-month civil war that claimed
over 3,000 lives and saw Gbagbo himself arrested and extradited to the
International Criminal Court.
After losing the first round of presidential elections in Zimbabwe in 2008,
President Robert Mugabe mounted a nationwide campaign of violence against his
political opponents, causing the leading candidate, Mr Morgan Tsvangirai, to
withdraw from the second round. Mugabe is now in his 35th year as Zimbabwe’s
Head of State. In addition to the detrimental impact these extended tenures
have on building democratic institutions, experience has it that countries with
leaders who have been in power for over a decade tend to have high levels of
corruption and poor economic performance.
A key building block in the push for democracy in Africa has been the
adoption of term limits. Establishing this precedent is crucial, given the
continent’s legacy of ‘strong man’s’ politics - - the cult of personality
surrounding many African leaders that supersedes the rule of law and efforts to
establish checks balances on power.
Once entrenched in office, many African leaders control the levers of power
that they are very hard to dislodge. Thanks to reformists’ efforts, now 20 out
of Africa’s 54 countries limit presidents to serve for only two terms. Tanzania
is worth emulating.
The struggle to limit Nkurunziza to two terms in Burundi, consequently, has
broader significance to Africa’s efforts to create legal parameters for their
heads of state. African leaders contemplating extending their terms are
watching Burundi closely.
Even the recent Ban Ki-Moon’s visit to Burundi and the Democratic Republic
of Congo do not portend anything good, as Nkurunzinza is rather seen as
jostling to show the way rather than bend for his remorse.
Indeed, the list of African presidents bending constitutions to their own
purposes is boundless. Having been in power for 31 years, Dennis Sassou
N’Guesso’s referendum to allow him to serve a third term as president of Congo
was widely expected.
Sam Nujoma amended Namibia’s Constitution in 1999 to give him a third term
as president before he finally ceded power in 2004. Zambia’s Frederick Chiluba
and Malawi’s Bakili Muluzi, however, failed to achieve the same amid domestic
criticism.
There was also speculation that former South African President Thabo Mbeki
aspired to a third term when he unsuccessfully extended his presidency in the
ruling African National Congress.
In January, tentative attempts to overturn the term limit in DRC were met
with riots with international non-governmental organisations urging President
Joseph Kabila to assure the public he would step down next year.
His vast mineral-rich country has endured the worst conflict since the
Second World War which saw 5.4 million people killed since 1998. Mr Kabila’s
peaceful relinquishing of power is deemed essential in preventing another
upsurge of violence and ensuring economic development.
The IMF forecasts that the DRC will have one of the fastest-growing
economies in the world this year, rising at 10.5 per cent rate -- mainly driven
by mining, which makes up 15 per cent of the Gross Domestic Product.
And in November 2014, Blaise Compaore was forced to resign after an uproar
greeted his plans to extend his 27-year rule in Burkina Faso.
Paul Kagame has effectively ruled Rwanda since the 1994 Genocide which saw
800,000 people massacred in 100 days. He was initially Vice President before he
became a de facto ruler only to be elected President in 2000.
The 57-year-old man has served two seven-year terms stipulated in the
Constitution, but remained worryingly ambiguous about his intentions ahead of
the 2017 General Election until Parliament changed the supreme law to allow him
to run again.
Opposition leaders are currently attempting to appeal against the vote in
Supreme Court, but are still struggling to find a lawyer to represent them. “I
belong to the group that doesn’t support change of the Constitution,” Mr Kagame
said in April, 2015, adding: “But in a democratic society, debates are allowed
and they are healthy. I’m open to going or not going depending on the interest
and future of this country.”
Yoweri Museveni of Uganda set the precedent for the current crop of rulers.
Shortly after taking power in 1986 he wrote: “the problem of Africa in general,
and Uganda in particular, is not the people, but leaders who want to overstay
in power.”
In an infamous U-turn in 2005, he secured a change to the Constitution,
allowing him a third term. He is now, at the age of 71, serving his fifth
presidential term.
In 2016, after a tense campaign and a jumbled election, President Museveni
rolled to a disputed re-election, winning a fifth chance to repair the nation’s
economy and fulfill the promises of hope and a fundamental change he made 30
years ago.
Although Mr Museveni won a clear victory, his popular vote margin in
several battleground districts was very thin and results from 1,787 polling
stations were left out because of the 48-hour- deadline.
But Kizza Besigye’s party -- the Forum for Democratic Change (FDC) --
rejected the results and demanded an independent audit of the elections. Mr
Besigye has been under house arrest, with no one allowed in or out to see him.
EU observers have also criticised the polls, saying the governing party had
created an “intimidating atmosphere” and that the Opposition had alleged vote
rigging.
While praising the “remarkable determination” of Ugandans to vote, EU Chief
Observer Eduard Kukan said the governing National Resistance Movement
“domination of the political landscape distorted the fairness of the campaign.”
The election has been marred by sporadic violence and opposition allegations of
electoral fraud with social media sites and messaging apps blocked on the
Election Day. But the question is why does the international community end up
blaming election irregularities without taking action?
Is Museveni above the international laws or should we wait for the sham to
get out of hand? Why “repressive” leaders like Gadhafi were punished without
well-defined schedules?
On a lighter note, the African Union (AU) adopted the Africa Charter on
Democracy, Elections and Governance in 2004, setting out Africa’s commitment to
strengthening democracy on the continent.
Some 38 countries, including Burundi, have ratified the charter.
To uphold these principles, the AU needs to take an assertive stand,
publicly and privately, when democratic processes are violated.
Failure to do so opens the door to a series of other extra-constitutional
challenges to democratic norms across the continent.
Western actors can reinforce the efforts by African reformers by
instituting visa bans and freezing asset on African politicians who are deemed
to be subverting the democratic process. Aid should be suspended especially
when the funds bolster the wayward government.
International actors also have a role to play in protecting independent
media and civil society which are frequently a prime target of regimes wishing
to extend their grip of power.
Any semblance of political dialogue and accountability requires independent
voices. There cannot be genuine debates or legitimate elections, not to mention
oversight or accountability, without a free press.
Ultimately, democracy is something that must be earned Africa. Burundi’s
civil society has been resilient in trying to sustain the gains toward a
multi-ethnic democratic system made over the past decade.
Tolerating unconstitutional extensions of power, on the other hand, rewards
Africa’s bullies who are unwilling to play by the rules. This, in turn, only
invites further political violence.
If Africa can institutionalise respect for term limits, politics on the
continent will enter a new era of predictability, with far-reaching
implications for the rule of law and stability. God bless Africa!!
