Pages

Monday, 30 September 2013

Civilian rule and Elections do not necessarily mean democracy.

A recent interaction on BBC Radio got me to think really hard. The topic on the show known as #BBCAfrica Debate was whether democracy can deliver for Africa. The debate involved citizens from Zambia and Nigeria. These are two African countries that consider themselves to be under democratic governance. Nigeria has been a democracy for just 14 years after years of military rule. After that transition, it has been dogged by civil wars, religious chaos, terrorism and most recently, protests of hundreds in major cities demanding greater transparency from their leaders.

Zambia is currently battling civil strife from opposition groups that claim misrule and poor governance, unfulfilled promises by the government and lack of sensitivity to the plight of common citizens. They advance issues like a broken health system, poor education and infrastructure, suppression of any kind of dissent and lack of political space for the opposition and civil society. An opposition figure was dragged through court proceeding for three years for alleged defamation of the president.
First things first, it’s important to define democracy? It is a system of government based on the principle of majority decision making and equal representation of people where every citizen has a free and equal right to participate in decision making process.

Generally this definition tries to emphasize the fact that ultimate power belongs to the people, In this case, the citizens of a nation. 
The basic tenets of a democracy include a government of three arms; The Executive, Judiciary and Legislature (Parliament).  More so, the existence of rights and basic freedoms of speech, expression, worship, movement and choice of leaders through periodic elections also hinge democracy. The power belongs to the people and all other authority is subject to their will.

I felt it important to spell out these aspects clearly so that we get a clear hindsight before we discuss what works for Africa and what doesn’t. I won’t visit every country but, events in South Africa, Sudan, Egypt and other nations facing suppression of freedoms, lawlessness, impunity have quite a story to tell. Considering Uganda which I’m more familiar with, perhaps we can draw parallels about democracy. It is important to point out that Uganda has never had a peaceful regime change since Independence. Change of government has only come to us through military coups, assassinations and exiling leaders. However, when she made the choice to go democratic and promulgated what is celebrated as one of the best constitutions in Africa, we went to the polls in 1996. The two landmark achievements of a new constitution and elections were the baby steps of a young democracy. Over the years, we have had routine elections every five years and however much we have wanted change; we seem unable to cause it especially at the top.

Looking at Uganda’s situation logically, the idea that we are a democratic country is just that, an idea. In my country, the president (a semi-retired army General) appoints all Judges of the Supreme Court of the land including the Chief Justice, Court of Appeal/ Constitutional Court, the Attorney general, Solicitor general, Inspectorate of Government,  the Head of Electoral Commission, the Inspector General of police (who is a military General), the Chief of Defence Forces and his party elects Speaker of Parliament. In a situation where the citizens fall out with the regime, it would be wishful to think that with all these powers in appointments borne by the president and the institutional breakdown that he has presided over for the past close to three decades, the people can still wield the power given to them as would be in a true democracy. 
Elections are rigged in broad daylight with the full knowledge of the EC boss who works on instructions, the army is used to whip and intimidate people to vote against their will. Evidence adduced in Court finds cadre Judges waiting to quash it after a phone call from State House. Military men are appointed in civil ministerial positions and the Appointments committee of parliament is intimidated to uphold such in clear contravention of the very constitution they swore to protect. High Court justices are cadres of the ruling party and yet we still expect to go to these courts and get fair judgements when we are towing a different line from that of the ruling party. Parliament has become a voting machine for draconian laws that are proposed with the sole aim of suppressing dissent and further entrenching the president in power. Case in point is the recent Public Order Management Bill.

Orders from above have replaced constitutionalism and rule of law. Everything that can possibly go wrong has gone wrong. Institutions have been intentionally run down and the little breath left in their lives turned into appendages of the regime. Regime sympathisers are put in influential positions without a shred of merit and they end up running down the institutions and carrying away sacks of money, totally oblivious of the plight of the citizens. Theirs is no accountability to the citizens whatsoever. All we see is thieves being offered bigger positions in government as reward for sticking to the party positions.
Ghana who are supposed to be our heroes of democracy in Africa vote on tribal lines and the president can boldly say, ”northerners” should vote for him. Dirty politics and ethnocentrism lie under that shiny veil of Ghana's democracy.

True democracy can only hold with strong institutions, literacy and empowered people. True democracy comes from below, where leaders are accountable to the people below them and the people have the space to enjoy their rights and freedom to change leadership in periodic free and fair elections.
Unfortunately for most African Nations, what we have here is not democracy. It’s an illusion of democracy. It’s a periodic trek to the polling station while confronted with the thought that probably your choice will not matter but also hoping for serendipity. It’s the politics of pre-determined election results and imposition of leaders on people.  This painful helplessness and lack of power to cause change has pushed the numbers of those who choose to abscond from voting to grow exponentially
.
A friend of mine, out of frustration once suggested that we should outsource governance to Rwanda or China for decade so as to set things back on track. Unfortunately, none of those countries has an impeccable record of democratic governance. 

Back to the question; Can democracy deliver for Africa? My answer is, Yes it can. The issue is we do not have it yet. It would be a grave mistake to confuse Elections (a periodic ritual with no real substance) and civil rule with democracy. Those are not one and the same. Just like absence of war doesn’t necessarily mean peace.

@PathyKlinn



Thursday, 26 September 2013

UNITED AND STRONGER IN GRIEF…KENYA #WeAreOne



The events of last weekend in Kenya at the West gate Mall have left all of us gripped with grief and anxiety at the heinous and senseless killing of innocent civilians and holding others hostage for close to 96 hours in what is arguably the worst and most prolonged act of terror in the world. Reports of sporadic gun shots, explosions, sirens and victim rescue operations have dominated both local and international media since that fateful Saturday that almost all of us East Africans wish we could forget. A spate of horrific tales from survivors began to trickle in early Sunday morning shortly before Al-Shabab, the notorious terrorist group based in Somalia and linked to Al-Quaeda, claimed responsibility of the attack on social media.

In the midst of shock and terror that gripped us all on the news of the attack, Kenyans took to social media to express their disbelief, and others, their anger. The dreaded promise that the terrorists had made to attack Kenya had come true. As stories of lost loved ones began to emerge, the shock became more real by the minute. Terror became a reality that Kenyans, amidst their anguish had to accept and deal with. Joined by Ugandans on Twitter (#UOT) and other people from all over the world, Kenyans expressed solidarity in the most outstanding way that any civil society has ever known. They were determined to defeat this monster that had invaded their land. 

In the most unified voice on social media, using the hashtag #WeAreOne, Kenyan put their differences aside and commenced on an effort that would see more than half a million US dollars collected on mobile money to condole the victims of the Westgate attack, in a space of 48 hours, matatu drivers cut their fares by half to facilitate the easy movement of people to blood donation centres, droves of potential blood donors that overwhelmed the Kenyan Red Cross that some had to be turned away. Earlier on in what is arguably the biggest gesture of unity for Kenyans, President Uhuru Kenyatta addressed the nation on the tragedy that had befallen them, alongside his election rivals Raila Odinga and Musalia Mudavadi who did not fall short of mentioning that this tragedy had befallen Kenya as a nation and must be confronted in unison. This gesture went a long way in refreshing the Ubuntu spirit in Kenyans, reminding them that we are all Kenyans before we are anything else. That our differences must be put aside if we are to successfully mount a challenge to these terrorists. I am because you are. You are because I am.

Amidst the continuous gun shots and rampage as terrorists exchanged fire with the Kenya defence forces and police, Kenyans were scared but they never got divided. Scenes of volunteers preparing breakfast for the men in uniform and journalists covering the story are hard to forget. Ordinary Kenyans bringing water and food items to the security service men as they worked hard to secure as many hostages as possible was a one of the many heroic acts displayed by Kenyans. The chain of information flow was well controlled as Interior Ministry, The Kenyan police, the Inspector general of police, the president and several journalists close to the scene were constantly tweeting about the situation and encouraging Kenyans to stand firm, donate blood, condolences and remain unified in Christ as the situation gets resolved.

“If the terrorists did this to break us, they only made us stronger. #WeAreOne”, stated one tweet. A host of other tweets from #KOT (Kenyans On Twitter) preaching the same message poured on our Timelines throughout the ordeal. 

Today, in the aftermath of the #Westgate, we remind ourselves of the unity that saw us through this trying time. We seek the face of God who delivered us from this weekend-from-hell. We thank him for our lives and we pray that He gives a peaceful rest to those beloved ones that departed from us in this untimely and tragic attack. We declare that these cowardly acts of terror will not change our lives or deter us from our resolve to fight the war against terror. Lest, we let them win. We continue to pursue them with a renewed commitment. We accept to pay the small price of check points at public places and extra vigilance to identify and isolate the would-be perpetrators. 

We are shaken but we are not broken. Instead, we stand in solidarity. We brave the pain, the loss, the struggle to defeat these forces of darkness that threaten our sovereignty. To the Kenyan defence forces, we salute you. To the bereaved families here and abroad, we mourn with you. To the senseless terrorists, in the words of President Kenyatta, we shall make you to give “full accountability for all the mindless destruction, death, loss, pain and suffering we have undergone as a national family.” We shall defeat you. 


We have defeated hatred with pure love and overcome cruelty with kindness. There’s no way terrorists can have that above us. To Ugandans and the rest of East Africa, there are many lessons to learn from this unfortunate event. Let’s do so with keen interest and a renewed unity against all odds.

@PathyKlinn



















Wednesday, 18 September 2013

Stand with the Teachers

They could have been Politicians….
They could have been Engineers….
They could have chosen a “better” path…
They had all it took…
But they chose the path of love, of compassion…

We hated some….
We loved some….
They didn’t mind, they loved us anyway…
They did their job religiously….
To make us who we are today…

They sacrificed better careers to empower us…
They dedicated their time to seek knowledge and give it out…
They were determined to brighten the future of others…
Even when those others didn’t value their sacrifice…

They were neglected and forgotten…
They were forced to live in deplorable circumstances…
They were fooled around with empty promises….
But still expected to deliver,…and they did.

They empowered other people’s kids, as their’s fought a gloomy future…
They looked on for years, as the light in the tunnel gradually turned dimmer…
Their pleas for better remuneration and consideration fell on deaf ears for years on end…
Then they decided enough was enough…
They laid down their tools for industrial action…
They were lambasted for abandoning their duties and national obligation…
They stood their ground, and they had all the support from citizens, apart from the usual insensitive lot…
They made a clear case, and today, they seek your support…from wherever you are…
To remember their service and sacrifice,…and stand with them, for better pay and an equal chance for their kids like those they taught…and continue to mentor.
I say they fully deserve it and more…
  ……………………………………………………..@PathyKlinn©……………………………………………….

Monday, 2 September 2013

The US Has NO audacity to Judge SYRIA

August 21st, 2013 brought un-amusing pictures of what is now known to be the bodies of hundreds of men, women and children lined up after a chemical attack by the Syrian government on its own people. This is the “red line” that president Barrack Obama had set for Syria last year that would automatically warrant military action; the use of chemical weapons. The Syrian rebels blew the whistle on this attack in Damascus that they claim was carried out by government forces. 1430 people are claimed to have been killed in that particular attack alone, in a war that has claimed at least 100,000 lives and displaced millions of people.
As expected, the world’s policeman; the United States was quick to make a statement about how the Syrian government had crossed the line and military action requirements to solve the humanitarian nightmare. The accusations of the Syrian government seemed to come faster than the evidence of who actually carried out the attack as the blame game ensued between the Syrian government and the rebels. Meanwhile, The US’ strongest ally, UK was rushing to call out MPs from their break to the House of Commons to make a rushed decision whether the British forces should be involved in a military action against Syria. This motion was defeated in a dramatic vote. 
An August 26, Foreign Policy article revealed that, "CIA Files Prove America Helped Saddam as He Gassed Iran." One would hope that this revelation would change the propensity with which the US is moving to bomb Syrian targets. Probably it did, with President Obama now seeking the permission of Congress before attacking Syria. The revelation reinforces what has been a public secret; that the hands of the US war machine are not as clean as they portray them to be.
This reality leads to the question: Can a government that supported the use of chemical weapons in one conflict claim any moral, political or legal authority militarily to attack another country for using the same weapons, particularly when the attack is not authorised by the UN Security Council? The files further reveal that not only did the US aid the use of chemical weapons by the former Iraqi government on Iran; it also used chemical weapons on a large scale during its 1991 and 2003 invasions of Iraq, in the form of depleted-uranium (DU) ammunition.
One wonders why chemical weapons are singled out for international condemnation compared out to other weapons considering that conventional weapons are also capable of producing more death and destruction on an industrial scale. Paul Waldman, in his December 6,2012 article, argues that chemical weapons are not as uniquely dangerous as biological or nuclear weapons because they lack the ability to kill tens or hundreds of thousands or people at once.
Dominic Tierney seems to believe that if we "strip away the moralistic opposition to chemical weapons" we'll find "strategic self-interest as powerful countries like the United States cultivate a taboo against using WMD partly because they have a vast advantage in conventional arms. We want to draw stark lines around acceptable and unacceptable kinds of warfare because the terrain that we carve out is strategically favourable."
Al Jazeera’s Dahr Jamail reported the use of Depleted Uranium by the US and UK has been the cause of many cases of Gulf War Syndrome suffered by Iraq war veterans, thousands of birth defects, cancer and other diseases - causing a "large-scale public health disaster" and the "highest rate of genetic damage in any population ever studied" - suffered by Iraqis in areas subjected to frequent and intense attacks by US and allied occupation forces.
So, for a country that has both supported and committed large-scale and systematic war crimes in one country (Iraq) to be leading the International effort to stop Syria from continuing to use chemical weapons against its own people, one wonders where it gets it audacity and legitimacy.
The moral mission over Iraq, and the invasion impetus to "liberate" women in Afghanistan have only left tens of thousands of people killed. 1,000 Iraqis were killed in July alone. That should make interventionists think twice about moral justifications - but it seems this hook is just too seductive, too perfectly attuned to a western enlightened sense of self.
Besides, for a war that has been ongoing since March, 2011, and claimed more than 100,000 lives as the west watched on from a distance, why should military action be necessitated by outrage over chemical attacks? Where was the “red line” when the US used depleted-uranium ammunition in Fallujah, Iraq? Or when Israel deployed white phosphorous in Gaza in 2008? Or when Saddam Hussein, then a western ally, gassed the Iranians and then his own people during the 1980s? This arbitrary and self-serving declaration of what's acceptable is precisely what makes the US so lacking in credibility when it comes to preaching codes of warfare to the Middle East.
This is not to say however, that nothing should be done to stop the bloodshed in Syria. But western leaders should not always seek to justify military interventions by using democratic values and lovely human rights slogans when it clear that war suits their particular agendas of the time.

Twitter: @PathyKlinn