My attention has been drawn to an article by Saikujohn Barrie, posted in The Oswald Hanciles Column WhatsApp forum on 4 November 2025. In it, he raises thought-provoking questions about which governance systems best serve modern Africa and, more specifically, which system can genuinely drive development on the continent. Unfortunately, in his commentary, he appears to assume that anyone questioning the efficacy of African democracies must be sympathetic to military juntas or civilian dictatorships.
Let me be clear: I am not a supporter of military regimes or dictatorships anywhere. Nor do I consider military governments to be the necessary alternative to the many struggling democratic administrations in Africa since independence. However, I believe it is important to interrogate the assertion that the democratic systems implanted across Africa roughly six decades ago have served us well. Many of these systems were imposed by our colonial rulers—whom I deliberately refer to here as _“bastards” in the Krio sense of the word, meaning despicable persons—and they have largely failed to meet the needs of our societies.
Many Western-educated Africans tend to discuss democracy in idealistic, almost mythical terms, as if the democracies they admire fully guarantee the rights and wellbeing of every citizen. We know that this is far from reality. Even in the most advanced democracies, governments find ways to secure their preferred outcomes, often at the expense of certain groups—If nar lie, ask Donald Trump! No democracy is perfect, and none satisfies every citizen within its jurisdiction.
Has Western-Style Democracy Worked for Sierra Leone?
It is time to ask ourselves whether the British model of democracy—reintroduced in the 1990s and still largely practised in Sierra Leone—has genuinely worked for us. Many argue that it has not. While politicians, elites, and other leaders are frequently blamed for its failures, these individuals might themselves be victims of the rigid system they must follow, often driven by the need to appease external powers.
A familiar pattern repeats itself: opposition politicians denounce the ruling party, but once in power, they quickly confront the harsh realities of a winner-takes-all system that fuels greed, ethnic entitlement, and political patronage. Even well-educated individuals—sometimes the worst culprits—pressure their leaders to fill public offices exclusively with their ethnic kin, regardless of merit or experience. Presidents often find themselves under intense pressure from their ethnic base, which can amount to political blackmail.
Unless our constitution includes firm provisions limiting the extent to which any president can appoint members of one ethnic group to public institutions, we will continue to endure dangerous, high-stakes electoral cycles. Everyone knows what is at risk when “their side” loses. My perspective comes from decades of experience observing presidents from both the APC and SLPP struggle to reconcile campaign ideals with the harsh realities of governance.
The Krio parable: ‘Elephant hade nor to pikin load because for tot am no to funny bizness,’ worths reflection.
Lessons from Africa’s Pan-Africanist Thinkers:
At the founding summit of the Organisation of African Unity (OAU) in 1963, Professor Henrik Clarke—representing early Black American Pan-Africanists—warned African leaders that they would fail their people if they attempted to govern using inherited Western systems without modifying them to reflect African realities. He encouraged them to adapt governance models to align with the communal traditions that had sustained prosperous African societies long before colonialism.
Those who attempted such reforms—Kwame Nkrumah, Modibo Keita, Patrice Lumumba, Ahmed Sékou Touré and others—faced fierce resistance from colonial powers and their proxies, who preferred Africa to remain divided, unstable, and susceptible to resource exploitation. Many of these leaders were undermined or eliminated.
A System Misaligned with Our Demographics:
Here in Sierra Leone, our democracy has not worked—not necessarily for lack of effort, but because the system is fundamentally misaligned with our demographic and sociopolitical realities. Western democracies tend to function best in ethnically homogeneous societies: Germany for Germans, France for French people, Italy for Italians. Where diversity exists, these nations employ consociational democracy—deliberate structures that ensure shared governance among major groups. They do not practise an unrestrained winner-takes-all model.
Yet, that is precisely the system we inherited. Sierra Leone’s two largest ethnic groups—the Mende and Temne—each constitute roughly 30–32% of the population, followed by several smaller groups. This demographic balance has entrenched our politics along ethnic lines. Electoral contests become existential battles between the southeastern Mende-speaking communities and the northwestern Temne-speaking communities. The rhetoric and actions that fuel this hostile divide continue to endanger national cohesion.
By contrast, countries like Botswana—with a dominant 80% Tswana population—have enjoyed relative stability under a similar democratic framework. Our demographic context is dramatically different, and therefore requires a different approach.
Toward a Modified Democratic System:
We must modify our democracy to account for Sierra Leone’s ethnic diversity. Winner-takes-all governance should not translate into the exclusion of entire ethnic groups from public service. A constitutional cap on ethnically skewed appointments is necessary to protect national unity and to ensure broad representation.
We may also learn from countries like China. While we cannot adopt their system wholesale, their post-1949 governance model—distinct from Western democracy—has delivered dramatic economic and social progress. Over 600 million people have been lifted out of poverty, and China has emerged as a technological, military, and economic powerhouse. They designed a system aligned with their realities and aspirations.
By contrast, Sierra Leone’s blind adherence to Western democratic norms has brought neither lasting development nor political stability. Instead, it has produced fragile institutions and recurrent cycles of division.
In response to Saikujohn Barrie’s question, the type of democracy we have been practising has failed to deliver sustainable development and has contributed to an increasingly precarious political environment. We must have the courage to rethink and reform it.
I pause.
*Brigadier-General (Retired) Kellie Conteh
4th November, 2025.
(Brigadier-General (Retired) Kellie Conteh served as National Security Coordinator and head of the Office of National Security under Presidents Ahmad Tejan Kabbah and Ernest Bai Koroma; Defence Minister and later National Security Adviser under President Julius Maada Bio. His military career spans the governments of Siaka Stevens, Joseph Saidu Momoh, and the early NPRC administration.)
