By Alusine Fullah
After the mid-20thcentury, African intellectuals who first gained the Western Civilization and Education were the first to become conscious and enlightened about imperialism and colonialism that has long subjected them into slavery. These African intellectuals, notably (Kwame Nkruma of Ghana, NamsiAskwei of Nigeria, Milton Margai of Sierra Leone, etc.) were identified as freedom fighters for the emancipation and independence of Africa. Their push and patriotic movement towards nationalism and independence created huge impact in freeing Africa from the shackles and web of colonialism. Their emancipatory and independent achievement earned them the trust of the people to run the administration of their respective states. As political Messiers for the people of Africa, upon gaining independence, the mantle of leadership was transferred to them (political saviours). And hence, they have the support of the people.
However, these political Messiers, gradually, began losing legitimacy of the people due to their corrupt practices like embezzlement of state resources for their personal interests and their insatiable thirst for power, tribalization of the army and reluctance to hand over power when their tenures are due. In fact, many of these so-called political freedom fighters turned out to dictators to their own people. They suppressed and stifled the press that granted them independence and brought to power. Multi-party system was discouraged, crippled and no political participation was encouraged. This continued suppression of the voices of the people and the worsened corruption activities motivated the military boys or men to stage coups and counter coups in Africa. Apparently, the main reasons for the coups or military takeovers in the 1960s were the incessant corruption by politicians and the tendency for politicians to stay too long in power.
REASONS FOR MILITARY TAKEOVERS IN THE RECENT COUPS IN AFRICA
In recent times, I will argue that the reasons for coup d’états in Africa are not sharply dissimilar to those interventions in the second half of 20thcentury. However, there are some new reasons for the military takeover in 21stcentury which have to do with electioneering processes, legitimacy crisis, incompetent management of the state economy (which leads to an uncontrollable inflation and subjects the masses to extreme hardship), ideological differences between the military and the politicians, politicians breaching the national constitutions in order to favour or suit their personal interests (perhaps intending to contest for third term), capturing of the state resources by few people (politicians and foreign investors).
Generally, government is the process by which a political entity manages its affairs and exercises authority over a territory of its citizens. Democratic government is a form of government in which the political power to make decisions is vested in the people. Citizens have the right to participate in the decision-making process via voting in an election, exercising their views and holding their leaders accountable, but this can only be ensured and enforced in a society where there is true democratic exercise. The government often includes the rules of law, protection of individual rights and checks and balances to prevent the concentration of power.
On the other hand, junta administration clearly parted its ways from democratic regimes having regard to the ideals of democracy. It is a form of government where a government of military officers and/or other individuals often with a strong military background cease power from, most commonly, democratically elected leaders. Their interventions in politics eventually lead to an immediate dissolution of the existing political power and suspension of the constitution.
Junta governments are typically characterized by authoritarianism and centralization of political power which limits decision making process within the group of individuals that make up the junta government. Commonly enough, junta regime is not a legitimate political system, in other words, it does not derive it power by the will of the people.
LEGITIMACY IN THE CONTEXT OF DEMOCRACY
In a democratic sense, legitimacy implies the acceptance of a leader by his people followed by their voluntary compliance with his wishes or commands. A legitimate government is one that is legal and has the support and consent of the people, a political system that derives its power through the mandate of the people is equally recognized by other states and international organizations. The concept, legitimacy, is therefore a necessary tenet of democratic practice. It ensures and guarantees the functioning of a democratic process.
Legitimacy maintains its aliveness when it is not disconnected to public trust, transparency and fairness in decision making process by the state actors, free and fair election, and accountability, rule of law and consent of the governed.
LEGITIMACY IN THE CONTEXT OF RECENT COUPS D’ETAT IN AFRICA (FRANCOPHONE)
Theoretically, legitimacy is only practiced in a democratic system of government. However, and with reference to recent coup d’états in Africa, the jubilation and celebration of military interventions by the people especially in Niger, Guinea, Burkina Faso and Gabon manifests legitimacy but in its technical context. Citizens under the junta government hail and venerate their junta leaders over the overthrown democratically elected leaders. This snobbery attitude by the people showcases a seeming loss of confidence in democratic regimes. Junta regime leaders are not obviously elected to power; however, the people’s choice and consent is what legitimacy is implying. From these recent coups, it seems that the people care less about the means of coming to power.
This ironic attitude of the people raises questions and suspicions of the present-day democratic practice especially in connection to electioneering (unfairly declaring winners of presidential election which out rightly deprive the people of their rights of would-have-been- chosen leader), constitutional breach or amendment to suit their selfish comfort – either to contest for third term or to unendingly govern the people. The politicians wear the masks of democracy and rule with the actual face despotism and Hitlerism.
Amazingly also, the attitude of citizens of Niger republic under the junta administration – Commander General Abdourahamane Tchiani who ousted a coupon the 26thJuly 2023 – detaining President Mohamed Bazoum and proclaiming himself the leader of the military junta.
Even though military governments are characterized by dictatorial and autocratic ideals, almost all of the citizens of Niger Republic legitimately welcomed the takeover – they hailed and revered junta leader as against the overthrown president who intended to continue ruling the people of Niger. Under the new junta regime, almost all of the people are seemingly comfortable with the new regime instead of the so-called erstwhile democratic regime. Guinea, Burkina Faso and Garbon are not an exception.
Burkina Faso happens to be country that has the youngest leader in Africa and possibly in the entire world. Captain Ibrahim Traorè assumed power on the 30thSeptember 2022 via a coup d’état which ousted the interim president Paul Henri Sandaogo Damiba. As of now, Ibrahim Traorè is the most highly respected, admired and youngest junta leader. He is liked and accepted by the people of Burkina Faso and even beyond borders. The endearing likeness and admiration of him by his people and his fervent stand to free his people imperialism has earned the massive support and legitimacy of the people.
The interim President of Guinea, Mamady Doumbouya assumed power since October first 2021 – led a coup d’état on 5thSeptember 2021. Despite the fact that it is military government, he was overly preferred over Alpha Condè who was democratically elected. Doubouya is another junta leader that was or is not just admired and welcomed by his subject, but also preferred to the claimed-dictatorial democratic leader (Alpha Condè) who amended the constitution via referendum to contest for the third term. This constitutional amendment of the so-called democratically elected leader was uncalled for and hence, lost the trust of the people; this paved a way for legitimacy of the junta regime of Mamady Doumbouya.
Some critical questions which are quite uncomfortable for those armchair democratic preachers are that: why are coups d’état so legitimately welcomed and preferred by the people instead of the all-embracing democratic systems? Have the democratic regimes become faulty or incapacitated to govern the governed? Or are they so-called arm-chair democratic preachers not practically working according to the dictate of democracy? Probably, the masses have lost hope in the politicians due to their unending incompetence to stabilize and strengthen the economy and to discourage incessant inflation which have succeeded in subjecting the people into extreme economic hardship and penury. Is it because of legitimacy crisis i.e., either from the day a presidential candidate is declared winner or the manner in which a ruler rules his people (gradually losing support of the people)? Crying foul over election result by the main opposition parties is a common phenomenon in Africa especially in Sierra Leone. One may wonder why this is happening taking into consideration the various constitutional provisions that provide for free, fair and transparent elections in African countries, the presence of International Observers and the independent institutions like the SCO’s that are geared towards upholding the principle of free, fair and transparent elections. Yet, there is always a cry of foul by rigging of elections. Has this been a syndicate over the past decade or score to deprive the electors of their actual legitimate choice?
THREATS AND IMPACTS OF COUPS IN AFRICA
Generally, military regimes are not comfortable and conducive systems of administrations when it comes to peaceful and national cohesion and freedom of expression and of the press. Military governments are commonly characterised by dictatorial and autocratic ideals. Although their interventions into politics are to correct certain lapses of democratic regimes, but they usually turnout to be the worst. Personnel in the junta administration are mostly bunch of are amateurs who lack the administrative experience and expertise to run the affairs the state. Such system of inexperience people will undoubtedly result into maladministration and mismanagement of state resources.
The watchdog role of the press on behalf of the people will be instantly put into permanent slumber and the masses will be drown into darkness and as a result of such, the people will become ignorant, unconscious, unaware and unenlightened about the daily affairs of the junta administration. And when the people are not heard, you cannot understand their plights.
Financial aids from some foreign organisations or countries will come to standstill. Most Africa countries, particularly West Africa, largely depend on foreign aids to boost their economies. This foreign assistance or loan agreements are granted to countries that are peaceful and unarmed system of governance (democracy system). In a military regime, this is not usually the case. Even foreign investors are not attracted; they will be flown away due to constant unrest under the junta government.
COUP D’ETATS’ IMPLICATIONS TO DEMOCRATIC REGIMES
Despite the evil fruits of junta regimes, there are some blessings and benefits these systems have. First, junta regimes put the civilian governments on toes to effectively run the affairs of the state. Coup paranoia worries politicians and for fear of not being overthrown by the junta men, they would maintain good governance.
Secondly, military intervention in politics exposes corrupt democratic administrations. Many a time, people are blinded and unaware of the dealings of politicians. Most of their financial activities are classified and done behind the scene until the military come to power and expose all previous corrupt practices these politicians have doing. A practical example is seen in the recent coup that was ousted in Guinea by Mamady Doumbouya- corrupt practices of some government ministers were exposed to the people. This eye-opener role of the junta administration has been one of the reasons why the military men are liked and legitimately supported by almost all of the people.
Comparatively, the hardship in today’s democratic regimes seems to supersede the one under junta administration. Most of the recent coups in Africa are motivated by the cry and disgruntled calls of the people under civilian administration. And most time the military men themselves are not exempted from this hardship. As dictatorial as they are, junta men, led by their leader, dictate to businessmen and women to automatically scale down the prices of commodities especially when they notice that these businessmen and women are exploiting the consumer population.
Military takeover impedes the tendency to contest for third term or stay too long in power by politicians. Commonly enough, in Africa, peaceful transfer of power has always been a challenge to democracy. When leaders are elected into public offices, they apply all manipulative tactics and breach the constitution to maintain their stay in office. This is what former president Alpha Condè did in Guinea. He amended the constitution through referendum so that he can contest for third term. That constitutional amended reluctantly led to his overthrow. Another brighter example is the recent coup in Garbon – president Ali Bongo Ondimbawhose according to CNN, family has ruled Gabon for more than half a century. The unseated president, Alie Bongo, when he was declared winner of the contested election was placed under house arrest. That was a clearly manifestation of unwillingness to leave power for others.
In conclusion, military intervention in today’s democratic systems and the open support of these coups by the people technically demonstrated that there is some form of legitimacy in junta systems (for argument purposes). It happened or it is still happening in Guinea, Burkina Faso, Gabon and Niger. The people are snubbing the overthrown politicians in favour of the junta. What is this telling us? It is a clear indication that there is some form of a legitimacy crisis in today democratic administrations. This might be stemming from either the way elections were conducted (characterised by fraud) or politicians becoming dictatorial (transforming their administrations into worst system of governments). And the only fruits that come out of such systems are those of hate, loss of trust and confidence, legitimacy lost and the demand and hugging of junta administrations.
