Ibrahim rings alarm bells on African democracy

With his recent survey of Africa's governments, Mo Ibrahim warned that some areas of governance have not improved in the last couple of years. The Ibrahim Index of Good Governance survey found that economic development and quality of life is improving in Africa. However, the survey has found that the areas of human rights, safety, and rule of law seem to be in decline or stagnant.

From the Guardian, writer Jonathan Glennie has this comment on the survey results.

With all this data and credibility at his fingertips, Ibrahim has chosen this moment to "ring alarm bells on democracy". The progress witnessed across the continent in recent years is slipping, according to his figures. Countries doing better economically, but where these alarm bells need to be sounded, include Gambia, Senegal, Cote d'Ivoire and Madagascar.

Worryingly, some African leaders can be heard muttering about a trade-off between development and rights, citing "the Chinese model".

There is certainly some truth in the idea that strong but not necessarily democratic government can be good for development, while participatory democracy can create problems. But it is worth remembering Matthew Lockwood's useful maxim (in his excellent book The State They're In): "Authoritarian rule seems to produce developmental outcomes that are either very good or very bad; democratic rule tends to languish in the middle". In Africa, it is hard to find an example of authoritarian rule that has achieved "very good" outcomes, though there are many examples of the opposite.

The key is accountability. Ibrahim makes the slightly exaggerated but nonetheless compelling claim that "poor governance is the only reason for slow progress" in Africa. The development of representative government in most countries in the world has been the most important means of allowing poor people more power over decisions that affect them – the power to vote for someone else, or the opportunity to meet and influence their representatives.

It would be a grave mistake to believe that because Africa has progressed economically and developmentally in the past decade, that is the only trajectory available to it in the future. On the contrary, shocks and struggles for power, often to do with resources, are more than likely to challenge this direction.

The latest Ibrahim Index on good African governance

Mauritius has the best performing government in Africa according to the latest Ibrahim Index of African Governance. The index is a service of the Ibrahim Foundation which was set up by African businessman Mo Ibrahim to  monitor government performance. Mo Ibrahim made a fortune in mobile phone technology in Africa and now he devotes some of his time and money to the foundation. 

The Ibrahim Index of African Governence weighs how effective a government is by several factors. Some of the factors include saftey, human rights, economic opportunity and development. The Ibrahim Foundation does not use poverty and health statistics in the index as they say the statistics are not comprehensive.  

The top five performing governments according to the Ibrahim Index are Mauritius, Seychelles, Botswana, Cape Verde and South Africa. The lowest ranking governments on the index are Somalia, Chad, Republic of Congo, Zimbabwe and Eritrea. You can go the foundation website to see the complete overview of the rankings.

From the Guardian, Mo Ibrahim has this commentary on the index.

The index is a comprehensive assessment of governance quality in Africa, across 88 criteria grouped into four main categories: safety and rule of law; participation and human rights; sustainable economic opportunity; and human development. These four together constitute the cornerstone of a government's obligations to its citizens.

As one would expect, results vary significantly across countries. However, there are important global trends that are cause for hope as well as concern. For a majority of countries, progress in economic and human development is significant. Improvements in these categories have been recorded in over 40 out of 53 African states. On economic management, on the provision of health, on welfare, improved governance is making a substantial impact on quality of life for hundreds of millions of people. Not only has there been overall progress in each of these important areas but, importantly, no country across the whole continent has seen its performance decline significantly. 

These are more than just numbers. I have seen first hand how critical these improvements are to Africans' daily lives and to their hopes for their families. Educational opportunities have supported the rise of the African middle class, the professional cadre of young people who are now willing and able to contribute to Africa's future prosperity. Provision of health services means that millions are now receiving the HIV treatment they need, and that millions of preventable deaths have been avoided. Improvements in economic management mean that trade, and regional trade, can increase, stimulating economic growth and providing millions with the opportunities to lift themselves out of poverty.

However, this progress is not reflected in the other two pillars of the index. Declines appear in what could be termed the political side of governance, namely rights, safety, and rule of law. These issues too are about people's lives. We are all too familiar with the drastic consequences of corruption, dysfunctional legal systems, and insecure and unsafe environments.

Again, no winner for the Good Governance award

Once again there will be no winner for the Mo Ibrahim African Good Governance Award. This is the second year in a row that no winner received the 5 million dollar award. When Sudan-born mobile phone businessman Mo Ibrahim initially set up the award he had intended for there to be some years when the award didn't have a winner.

From this Associated Press article that we found at Google News, we learn more about the award panel's decision.

But the Mo Ibrahim Foundation, based in London, said Sunday the prize committee, led by former U.N. chief Kofi Annan, had not selected a winner.

The foundation said "there had been no new candidates or new developments" since last year, when the panel declined to award the prize.

It is open only to democratically elected heads of state who have left office in the past three years.

The Pan-African Parliament; another level of poor governance

When we talk about poor governance in Africa it's usually concentrated on the individual countries. A story today exposes another ineffective level of government, the Pan-African Parliament. The Parliament is one of several regional governments that is seen as week and ineffective, so much so that many Africans are unaware of it's existence. These regional governments have multi-million dollar budgets but are unable to make positive change.

From the Globe and Mail, Geoffrey York first gives us some good news on governance before moving onto the Pan-African Parliament.

Several countries – including Ghana, Tanzania, Botswana, Liberia, Malawi and Mauritius – are winning praise for their democratic elections, their increasing stability, or their efforts to tackle corruption. Ghana has been one of the most successful, holding a series of free and fair elections whose results are accepted by all sides. Even the African Union, founded in 2002 to represent the 53 nations of the continent, is gaining some respect for its refusal to tolerate military coups and its efforts to persuade regimes to hold free elections – even though it has signally failed to deal with veteran autocrats such as Robert Mugabe of Zimbabwe.

The Pan-African Parliament is a reminder of the grand ambitions that have often faded into disappointment. Set up by the African Union in 2004 after years of planning, PAP has a budget of more than $14-million (U.S.) this year, including $1.5-million for salaries and $40,000 for hospitality. Another $100-million has been allocated for a new headquarters. Yet the body meets only twice a year, usually for just seven or eight days in Johannesburg, and it has no real powers. It’s merely an advisory body, which the African Union can easily ignore.

“We are, in my view, a toothless bulldog,” said Ambrose Dery, a lawyer from Ghana who has served as a member of the Pan-African Parliament for the past year.

“I think the PAP is not doing enough. We don’t have legislative powers. The AU decides when to consult you and when not to consult you. Between our meetings, we have a limited scope of action. We are part-timers. We come here twice a year. How effective can we be?”

When the Parliament was created in 2004, it was envisioned that within five years it would have legislative powers and its members would be directly elected. Instead its members are still appointed by the legislatures of the 47 member countries – including many that are authoritarian or military-dominated. Some of the member countries have been suspended for military coups, or placed under sanctions, so PAP currently has fewer than the 235 parliamentarians it should have.

Mr. Dery says he has seen little evidence that PAP is tackling key problems such as corruption. In fact, the Parliament itself was embroiled in allegations of nepotism and financial misappropriation after auditors could not account for nearly $1-million in spending. Its founding president was accused of misusing some of the money.

“You can only check corruption when you have oversight responsibility,” Mr. Dery said. “The budget of the AU is supposed to be submitted to us, but it is not submitted. We can’t compel them to submit it. We cannot call any head of state and say, ‘Look, you’ve done something wrong.’ We don’t have those powers.”