simplemind
JF-Expert Member
- Apr 10, 2009
- 16,409
- 9,183
- The basis for this assertion is three-fold. First, the country has refused to be party to the African Charter on Democracy, Elections and Governance. This is the framework instrument for conducting democratic elections across Africa.
Some events and developments in East Africa have prompted me to seriously reflect on Tanzania’s commitment to constitutional and electoral democracy. I recently almost concluded that Tanzania was the least democratic nation in the East Africa sub-region.
The basis for this assertion is three-fold. First, the country has refused to be party to the African Charter on Democracy, Elections and Governance. This is the framework instrument for conducting democratic elections across Africa.
Additionally, the country continues to shun some time-tested guarantees in electoral democracy, including independent candidature, contesting of presidential election results in court and the 50+1 principle in declaring poll winners. These, together with the discretionary ban on political activity until 2020, put Tanzania on the list of the most undemocratic countries in Africa.
A relatively peaceful member of the Organisation of African Unity and later the AU, Tanzania is still mum on the charter. Drafted by the African Commission on Human and People’s Rights and adopted by the African Union in 2007, the charter came into force on February 15, 2012 after securing the compulsory 15 depositories of ratification in accordance with Article 48. Unfortunately, Tanzania has not signed, ratified or deposited the Treaty of this charter. In this regard, Tanzania is being kept company by Zimbabwe, Morocco, Libya, Eritrea, Botswana and Egypt. It is the only East Africa country with such a status.
Burundi, Kenya and Uganda have at least signed the charter, putting them a step ahead of Tanzania. Rwanda and South Sudan have made bigger commitments, each having signed, ratified and deposited the instrument. Outside East Africa, nations like DRC and Somalia have at least accomplished the signatory stage of the charter.
One wonders, therefore, why Tanzania, the poster boy in the region of the western world of liberal democracy, has not made any meaningful progress in ratification and domestication of the continental benchmark on democracy.
The inevitable conclusion is that Tanzania is not committed to democracy in general and electoral democracy in particular. See what happened in Zanzibar last year, for instance. In the language of the African Charter on Democracy, that should have amounted to unconstitutional change of government as provided for under Article 3(10). In my view, the repeat elections in Zanzibar ought to have been declared null and void in accordance with the charter.
According to Article 23(4), any refusal by an incumbent government to relinquish power to the winning party or candidate after free, fair and regular elections is one form of unconstitutional change of government and deserves to be sanctioned in accordance with the charter. A good number of people are of the view that the comical way results of the October 25 poll were cancelled, the flimsy reasons given and the implosion of the Zanzibar Electoral Commission (ZEC) were enough to invalidate the repeat elections.
The requirements of Article 90 (3) of the Constitution of Zanzibar, 1984 (2010) were supposed to have led to the convening of the House of Representatives to consider the matter of alleged electoral irregularities as claimed by ZEC chair Salum Jecha. Alternatively, the same Constitution of Zanzibar provides in Article 72(1) that “…the only authority with the jurisdiction to hear, determine and rule over election matters shall be the High Court of Zanzibar”. Hence, the unanswered question here is why was this avenue ignored by ZEC and the Zanzibar government.
Tanzania’s elections and democracy practice are in flagrant violation of the African Charter. The fact that candidates other than those sponsored by parties are barred from running makes Tanzania one of only a handful countries in Africa that are in violation of the right to independent or private candidature. Every other member of the EAC has a system of independents in operation. In the forthcoming election in Kenya, the number of independent candidates exceeds 1,000, with the presidency alone attracting 11 independents.
Three independent candidates vied for the presidency in the last elections in Uganda, while 66 independents were elected to parliament. Elsewhere, Rwanda, whose elections are slated for August 4, has at least two independent candidates seeking to be elected president. They include 35-year-old Diane Rwigara, whose candidacy has understandably set tongues wagging in and beyond East Africa. Even in war-torn Burundi, the electoral system permits independent representation in parliament as long as candidates receive a minimum of two per cent of the vote nationally. Why is Tanzania such an isolated case in the region?
Going forward, Tanzania needs to make a democratic comeback by taking measures to arrest all practices that are at variance with constitutional and electoral democracy.
First, we must quickly move to sign, ratify and domesticate the African Charter. Also, Parliament must declare the presidential ban on political activity unconstitutional, null and void. Finally, the country should complete the constitutional process to promulgate, among other freedoms, the right of independent candidacy and end party over-dominance. A new constitution should make it possible to challenge all election results. As things stand, Tanzania is the least democratic nation in East Africa, and rightly so.
Source: TALKING POINT : Is Tanzania the least democratic nation in East
