The recent disclosure by the Mo Ibrahim Foundation that no African ex-leader is deemed worthy of the 2009 version of the $5 million good governance prize money is a disgraceful and damning verdict which should provide food for thought on the crisis of leadership and democratisation which continues to bedevil Africa. Mr. Ketumile Masire, former president of Botswana, while announcing the decision of the prize awards committee said despite some measure of progress made by some of the eligible past African leaders in their respective countries, it was extremely difficult to award the prize to any one of them.
The Ibrahim Prize for Achievement in African Leadership is awarded only to democratically elected heads of state that have left office in the past three years. That requirement limits the pool of contenders, eliminating the continent’s strongmen leaders, some of whom have held onto power for decades. Created in 2007 by Mo Ibrahim, a Sudanese-born telecoms billionaire, the prize awards $5 million over 10 years and $200,000 annually for life to encourage leadership that improves the prospects of people on the continent.
Masire noted that “the committee had considered some credible candidates but that after in-depth review could not select a winner,” adding that it was “no issue of disrespect.” can only be won by a democratically elected leader who has served his term and left office in sub-Saharan Africa. And Ibrahim was reportedly advised commentators to draw their own conclusions regarding why no single former African leader was deemed fit for the prize this year. The prize was first won by Joachim Chissano, former president of Mozambique, for his outstanding efforts in conflict resolution. The following year, in 2008, the prize went to Festus Mogae of Botswana who was widely acclaimed for creating wealth and jobs for his countrymen. He was reputed to have added value to their natural resource export of diamond. Ex-African leaders that were eligible for the 2009 edition of the prize award include Chief Olusegun Obasanjo, Nigeria’s immediate past president, Mr. John Kuffor, Ghana’s immediate past president and Mr. Thabo Mbeki South Africa’s immediate past president.
It is also worrisome to note that among the 53 African nations surveyed by the Mo Ibrahim Foundation on good governance, only small Island nations such as Mauritius and Cape Verde achieved seemingly pass marks on good governance. Sadly, Nigeria which is largely regarded as the giant of Africa was ranked 35 followed by Somalia, Chad, Sudan, Guinea and Zimbabwe, among others. The ranking coincided with the presidency of Obasanjo under whose tenure opposition voices were frequently being muffled. Yet Obasanjo considered his tenure worthy of an African award for good governance. Besides, the ruling Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) was at the time notorious for squelching the political ambition of emerging progressives within its ranks, especially those who express opposing views with the president.
The electricity problem in Nigeria worsened and became intractable under Obasanjo’s watch in spite the huge amount of funds voted for the sector in the country’s annual budgets. The roads were in deplorable condition and even resemled death traps in several parts of the country. Labour unions staged regular protests to draw attention to their pitiable working conditions while teachers’ enhanced salary was not paid even when there was a signed agreement to that effect. Obasanjo’s greatest undoing was the failed attempt to alter the country’s constitution in a bid to extend his tenure. The 2007 general election which he supervised to usher in his successor was largely flawed and deemed the worst in Nigeria’s recent history.
Although Ghana’s Kufour and South Africa’s Mbeki performed very well in office by African standards, both former presidents failed to impress the awards committee. It is noteworthy that Mbeki was forced to step down last year and hand over power to an interim leader after losing the race for his party’s leadership. He was also heavily criticised for questioning the link between HIV and Aids and blamed for the epidemic that killed about 300,000 South Africans during his tenure as president. After serving two terms, Kufuor stepped aside without a fuss, marking Ghana’s second successful hand-over, a milestone not just for the country but also for Africa as whole. Nonetheless, the opposition at the time accused his administration of corruption.
The future of the awards looks bleak going by the crop of leaders currently holding sway across the continent. For instance, the unfolding story in Niger is a sore one. The Economic Community of West African States (Ecowas) recently suspended the country from the bloc when it went ahead with a legislative election that tightened President Mamadou Tandja’s grip on power. With the outcome of the legislative election, Tandja has effectively extended his tenure which would have run out in December.
In Zimbabwe, the story is not different as President Robert Mugabe appears ready to die in office despite the poverty his administration has brought to the people. Sudanese and Guineans are not left out as they have sorry tales about their leaders. Indeed, these examples reflect the growing trend of retrogression in Africa. The foundation’s verdict has revealed that there has been monumental bad leadership in the last few years. More worrisome is that African leaders are still so self-centered that they care little about the development of their respective countries. The verdict is a clear indictment on African leaders.
It is more tragic that those who got into power through democratic processes, later resort to unconstitutional acts, just to perpetuate themselves in office at the detriment of the citizens and the development of their respective countries.
It behooves sitting presidents in the continent to start thinking of posterity in all that they do. They should shun selfishness, greed, corruption, embezzlement of public funds and focus on the development of their countries. Good governance can be achieved through transparency, people-oriented policies and sacrifice.