NAMIBIA: Regional Councils - Government Launches Decentralization Campaign

Govt Launches Decentralisation Campaign

by Irene Hoaës
01 December 2008
Source: http://www.newera.com.na/article.php?articleid=1120

WINDHOEK – The Ministry of Regional and Local Government, Housing and Rural Development has launched a public participation campaign on decentralisation.

The campaign will be known as “Participate-Influence! Use your Regional Council”.

The decentralisation policy, which was adopted in 1997, seeks to promote participatory democracy and sustainable development for the benefit of all Namibians.

The process is to give regional councils, local authorities and village councils the power, responsibility and funds to plan and administer basic services that affect the day-to-day lives of people in their areas.

What would make the process of service delivery effective is the fact that local authorities are more familiar with local needs and priorities and people at the grassroots, and have easier access to them than is the case with central government.

The ministry’s custodian, Jerry Ekandjo said one of the critical requirements for decentralisation is the participation of citizens in affairs that affect them.

“Citizenry participation has proven to enhance local voices. Hence policymakers are tuned to true aspirations of communities and effectively address needs and priorities,” Ekandjo, who launched the campaign, said.

The minister said while the process itself may be “smooth sailing”, the major challenge lies ahead, which is to bring the broader public into decision-making to facilitate a process whereby citizens have a direct say on decisions affecting them.

“A citizen’s role does not end after the casting of votes. This is only the beginning,” he noted.

Ekandjo said voters are at liberty to exercise their rights to speak and air their views and demand services, as long as demands are reasonable.

In order to implement the decentralisation policy, the ministry has identified the importance of good communication and information strategy.

The ministry, with financial assistance from the French government, conducted and finalised public participation surveys in seven regions and assisted them with developing of strategies to improve public participation between regional councils and their constituents.

Participation surveys are currently being conducted in the remaining six regions.

In order to enhance smooth transmission of the process, the ministry has decided to embark on a national campaign that would support the efforts of the individual regional councils.

For now, regional councils will be the focal point as most of the functions will be delegated to that structure of government.

A similar campaign is earmarked for local authorities in the near future.

The current campaign, which will run from now until March 2009, will cover three themes, namely the changing roles of regional councils, ways to participate in regional council activities and feedback received from the public.

Ekandjo also revealed that the decentralisation process will start in April next year.

The Finish Chargé d’Affaires, Asko Luukkainen, commended government on the initiative, whose main objective is to enhance participatory democracy.

Luukkainen said civil servants have the tendency to assume that people are naturally interested in government decisions and policies.

“From time to time, we should therefore remind ourselves that there is a countless body of research-based counter-evidence to this,” the diplomat reminded the gathering.

Luukkainen said Finnish financial support to the decentralisation process will stop in March next year and focus will shift towards other areas.

“In future Namibia and Finland will focus on promotion of trade, investment and private sector partnerships, institutional cooperation, non-governmental organisation support, various exchange programmes, cooperation with universities as well as between local authorities,” Luukkainen noted.

During the launch, it was revealed that significant progress has been made in policy implementation during the last few years.

Functions such as rural water supply were already gazetted to regional councils in 2007, while other functions such as maintenance, lands management and primary and secondary education are expected to be handed over next year.

Progress has also been made towards the development of an inter-governmental fiscal transfer system, which will provide for a transparent, predictable and poverty-sensitive way of allocating funds from central government to regional councils.

NIGERIA: How about People’s Parliament at the Local Government Level?

How about people’s parliament at the local government level?

Thursday, 06 November 2008 00:14 Ebere Onwudiwe
Source: http://www.businessdayonline.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=1074:how-about-peoples-parliament-at-the-local-government-level&catid=96:columnists&Itemid=285

In some emerging democracies such as ours, leaders tend to represent themselves and their cronies. Democracy becomes government of the leaders, by the leaders, for the leaders. In representative democracy, which in theory is what we practice in Nigeria today, the people elect their leaders, who are supposed to represent the people’s interests. This system of government is noted for accountability, constituency service and other forms of responsiveness when practiced by the book. But accountability and government responsiveness are hardly the trademarks of Nigeria’s representative democracy.

In our three tier federalism, the local government is possibly the least responsive and accountable even though it is the level that is closest to the people.

This column has argued recently that one way to ensure accountability at the state and local governments is to institute a policy of taxable revenue distributions (“The Alaska Option,” Business Day, 08 October, 2008.) Direct democracy at the local government level is another way of reaching the same goal. Direct democracy is not feasible at the federal or the state tiers, not even the modified version proposed here. But it is entirely feasible at the local government level.

In direct democracy, the people are the parliament. When the Greeks, especially the Athenians, instituted what is considered the origin of modern democracy, it was of this kind. The Athenians gathered at the Pnyx, a structure of concrete slabs, where they debated issues and made decisions. It was the ultimate manifestation of democracy as a “government of the people, by the people, for the people.”

The same practice is to be found in many African villages even today. At the sound of the gong, drum, or some other percussive instrument, the people would gather at the communal meeting place. The village head would state the issues and the people would debate them vigorously, often rancorously. In the end, a consensus usually would emerge.

Sometimes, the consensus is reached through a series of compromises. Other times, someone would have a brainwave and come up with the ultimate solution.

Why can’t we use this democratic tradition of our forefathers to reform our local governments where direct democracy is feasible in a modified form? We will still keep the local councils and chairmen. But in addition, there will be a periodic assembly of the people (representatives of villages and communities under the local government plus any other resident who wants to attend) where today’s council chairman and his councilors will render an account of what they have done, what they are doing, and what they plan to do, plus deliver an account of local government’s funds.
It would be people’s equivalent of what transpires in the British parliament. Periodically, the prime minister appears before the parliament to render an account on a variety of policies and actions. The members of parliament then pepper him with questions.

The sessions, which are televised live, are often raucous and feisty. Sometimes they are jocular or even whimsical. In all renditions, they are an age-long method of keeping the prime minister in check. The mere fact of having a leader account for his actions publicly and in a verifiable manner makes him think twice about straying from the proper and just.

For local governments in Nigeria, the people would constitute the periodic parliament and they would ask the questions. The parliament could be convened four times a year (on a Sunday to maximize attendance) and as necessitated by events.

The sessions would work roughly this way: The council chairman and councilors would render reports that specify the total allocation and revenues received by the council. They would then specify what the funds have been budgeted for or spent on. The expenditure would reflect priorities the people’s parliament had established during the last meeting. A concise and understandable summary of the revenues and expenditures will also be distributed.

The people would then ask pointed questions about any discrepancies between the government’s revenues and expenditures or between the people’s priorities and the projects pursued. They would also ask questions about budget lines or expenditures that seem bloated or unrealistic. Minutes of the meeting will be taken, circulated among the people, and sent to government auditors and the EFCC.

The strongest point about the people’s parliament is that there is strength in numbers. A major reason for the wanton pilfering of government funds is that individuals are afraid to speak out. Brave souls who speak out often suffer major consequences; from occupational reprisals to threats of physical harm. In contrast, the people’s parliament has the advantage of strength in numbers. More people speak out boldly when they are with a crowd, and reprisal against the whole is less practical.

Also, requiring local governments to publicly declare their revenues and expenditures makes possible the informed scrutiny by many people. As the saying goes, if only one person saw a worm, it could turn into a snake; if several people saw it, it couldn’t. Government officials can bribe accountants and auditors, but they cannot bribe all of the people, certainly not all of the time.
Even the EFCC can do its job much better if the people are given the chance to scrutinize their leaders.

NIGERIA: Demanding Direct Democracy

The business of democracy in Nigeria

By Joshua Ocheja

Source: http://www.tribune.com.ng/06102008/opinion.html

Democracy is the government of the people, by the people and for the people. It is basically of two types: Representative Democracy and Direct Democracy. Representative democracy is one founded on the principle of the people’s representatives, the representatives form more than one independent ruling body, vested with the responsibility of acting in the people’s interest but not as their proxy representatives, but with enough authority to take initiatives in the face of challenging circumstances.

Direct democracy, classically termed pure democracy, comprises a form of democracy and theory of civics wherein sovereignty is lodged in the assembly of all citizens who choose to participate. Depending on the particular system, this assembly might pass executive motions, make laws, elect and dismiss officials and conduct trials. Where the assembly elects officials, these are executive agents or direct representatives, bound to the will of the people.

Direct democracy stands in contrast to representative democracy, where sovereignty is exercised by a subset of people, usually on the basis of election. However, it is possible to combine the two into representative direct democracy.

In Nigeria today, we have striven for democracy for the greater part of our political history. Democracy is not a political buzzword but something definite, something we have relentlessly striven to attain, especially during the 29 years of military rule.

Those years were marred by the brazen ambitions of the military junta who were determined in retaining their leadership of the nation with detrimental repercussions. The contemporary Nigerian society consists of over 250 ethno-linguistic groups and is among the most ethnically-diverse countries in the world. The challenge our nascent democracy faces, is not the health status of the president or the number of ethnic groups, but the sheer politicisation and incorporation of ethnic diversity into national life.

Each ethnic group under the cover of relevance organises itself in the contest for national booties and view public policies largely from the prism of their sectional interest. Ethnic sentiments is at the heart of the perennial allegations of marginalisation by the different ethnic groups that make up the Nigerian nation

Democracy in Nigeria is a limited liability company where certain people have ownership and these people are conformist in that they feel Nigeria is not ripe to be listed on the stock exchange so the citizens can have shares via public offer.

The big question is how democratic is Nigeria? Nigeria is 48 years old. This is a company that has been in business for that long and remains a limited liability company whereas other nations that have not clocked 48 have become full fledged public liability companies, posting impressive financial result and giving its share holders(citizens) a reason to smile. But the Nigerian scenario is a different one. When an organisation stands as a limited liability company, their profit goes to the pocket of the few that are the owners. This is what our beloved country has become! You might want to agree with me that there exists a powerful cabal that dictates our yesterday, today and tomorrow.

These people have hypnotised us and they too have been hypnotised by their imagination. Their greatest worry is, when the spell eventually fades away what befalls them? Nigeria can not remain a limited liability company anymore; it has outgrown that status. Its citizens have a right to know who gets what, when and how.

The year 1999 marked a defining moment for Nigeria, I remember vividly when Obasanjo was being sworn in as president. He wore a facial expression, which I could not interprete. If only I could read his thought pattern. It was not easy but it was worth it, I believe Obasanjo will be telling his close aides in Ota farm. The task of ruling Nigeria is the most tedious in human endeavour. Aside the paraphernalia of office that are enticing, the rest is in the hands of God. You are for God or for the devil.

When Moses went to Pharaoh to deliver the heavenly message, Pharaoh in his earthly wisdom, dismissed it with a wave of the hand. The rest is history. This same scenario is playing out in Nigeria: Let us go, we keep saying! The ruling cabal is turning the deaf ear to our pleas. Nigeria is 48 and sincerely, we cannot tell our right from the left.

But I have a dream: that one day, we shall be free and free indeed! Nigeria will become a public liability company, churning out impressive result for its shareholders (citizens).

SOUTH AFRICA: Izimbizo Helps to Fight Corruption

Izimbizo helps to fight corruption in government

Source: http://www.buanews.gov.za/news/08/08101314151004
Compiled by the Government Communication and Information System
Date: 13 Oct 2008

By Siboniso Ntuli

eThewkini - Government programmes such as national, provincial and local Izimbizo have assisted in the fight against corruption.

Addressing the delegates at the KwaZulu-Natal Anti-Corruption Summit at the Inkosi Albert Luthuli International Convention Centre (ICC) on Monday, Premier Sbu Ndebele said Izimibizo gave people the opportunity to raise issues of corruption through participatory democracy.

"The fact that the corruption can also be raised through participatory democracy is a sign that our democracy is mature. People can talk openly and freely and this is a major guarantee when compared to dictatorship and tyranny."

The two-day summit, themed: Towards an integrated system promoting good governance with emphasis on anti-corruption and ethics, aims to assess the prevalence and impact of fraud and corruption to service delivery in the province.

Mr Ndebele urged his peers and colleagues to talk to their counterparts who may be involved in corruption practices and find reasoning, if any, behind such behaviour.

"People who do not report corruption are equally guilty," said Premier Ndebele.

Other objectives of the summit include exploring effective preventive mechanisms aimed at combating the occurrence of fraud and corruption.

It also hopes to examine challenges for both combating and preventing corruption as well as exploring avenues for promoting professional ethics, among other things.

KwaZulu-Natal Director General, Dr Kwazi Mbanjwa said government departments should put aside a budget that can be used to fight corruption.

"We need to have an effective system, where members of the public can use to report corruption, without putting their lives at risk," said Dr Mbanjwa.

Delegates attending the summit include MECs, Heads of Departments, Chief Financial Officers, Municipal Managers, Risk Managers, Special Investigation Managers, Security Managers, Internal Control Managers, and other entities active and involved in Anti-Corruption in KwaZulu-Natal. - BuaNews

NIGERIA: A Lecture on Participatory Democracy

Odinga and Participatory Democracy

10.13.2008

Source: http://www.thisdayonline.com/nview.php?id=125006

The Prime Minister of the Republic of Kenya, Hon. Raila A Odinga, in a lecture he delivered to commemorate the 25th anniverssary of The Guardian Newspaper in Lagos last week canvassed the practise of participatory democracy in the African continent. Ademola Adeyemo who attended the lecture reports

The gathering at the silver jubilee lecture of The Guardian Newspapers was a meeting of people of rich intellectual mind drawn from the media, the academia and the business circle who were at the Nigerian Institute for International Affairs,venue of the lecture to honour the invitation extended to them by the newspapers’ publisher , Mr Alex Ibru

The Guest lecturer, Hon Raila Odinga who became the Prime Minister of Kenya after a disputed and widely condemned ekection that claimed many lives talked about the problem of democracy in Africa and why the continent is under developed , According to him , whether African leaders like it or not, 90% of African people want democracy as a form of government

Said he " . The intrinsic values of democracy and good governance, and aspirations towards that condition, are universal. Ninety per cent of Africans say they want to live in a democracy, and this year, we have shown in Kenya, and Zimbabweans have also demonstrated that Africans are now more determined than ever before to have their say in governance. Since the fall of the Berlin Wall in 1989, most of the remaining single-party dictatorships and one-man military regimes in Africa have crumbled and given way to emergent multi-party systems. There is an intense focus on replacing bad governance with good, and on the reform of political, economic, social and legal structures. There has been significant progress, but the way ahead is potholed with challenges.

According to him, Africa is the richest in terms of resources, and yet the poorest in terms of living standards. But he identified the major problem of Africa as that of being a victim of the self-interest of its exploiters. "The richest nations throughout history have used and abused our continent to fuel their own economies, extracting and benefiting from our raw materials and in the process hindering our development and entrenching poverty. This history led former UK Prime Minister Tony Blair to remark that conditions in Africa were "a scar on the conscience of the world".

"Each year, nearly 15 million people die in Africa from causes that have their roots in poverty. To heal that scar requires sound, selfless and moral political leadership. At independence, we knew we could not rewrite the past, but we knew we could make a bold commitment to changing the future. We needed inspirational and visionary leadership that would perform effectively and deliver for the people.

Odinga also said African leaders who emerged after the independence had good vision, but unfortunately, they were swept aside and a group of exploiters of people and their wealth took over. ". Instead of ensuring state and individual security, a functioning rule of law, education, health, and an economic framework conducive to trade, growth and prosperity, they in many cases have entrenched despotic power to pursue personal enrichment. It is a sad fact that most of our people are too young to have known anything else".

Giving the example of Zimbabwe, he said" A recent and current example of someone who has dragged our continent's name through the mud yet again is Robert Mugabe of Zimbabwe. We were thrilled when Mugabe took power as Zimbabwe gained its independence, but he has turned out to be a grotesque parody of a leader. He became a brutal dictator, whose contempt for democracy he openly expressed when he said: "We are not going to give up our country for a mere X on a ballot. How can a ballpoint pen fight the gun?" These are chilling words uttered by a national leader in a continent struggling to entrench democratic ideals".

Odinga who criticized the African Union(AU) for not doing enough to solve the problem of Africa also accused leaders of maintaining criminal silence when they failed to condemn brutal regimes and sham elections, including the second round poll in Zimbabwe earlier this year.

"But we should not be surprised at the AU's failure to stand up for democracy. Many of our national leaders have skeletons rattling loudly in their cupboards. Their personal misdeeds bond these leaders in a diabolical conspiracy of silence and complicity, in refusal to condemn their neighbours for fear of the spotlight falling upon themselves."

But he however said the dictatorship of the leaders will not stand any longer as the people of Africa have undergone an attitudinal change towards any leadership that fails to meet their expectations." They are calling leaders to account. In the past four years alone, there have been more than 50 democratic elections in Africa, and more than two-thirds of sub-Saharan African nations live in freedom. This is the first exciting step on the way to achieving the kind of leadership that can sustain democracy and bring prosperity to our continent." he further said.

True democaracy, according to Odinga is about freedom of choice, a universal concept that is meaningless without free and fair elections where the people can choose those who will govern them, and also dismiss those who have failed them. "Genuine democracy is also about freedom of expression and association, under which people can form themselves into likeminded groups and seek political power. It is about the rule of law and the independence of the judiciary, without which none of the other freedoms can be secured. Most importantly, genuine democracy is about transparency and accountability in government"

He also expressed regret that corruption has been and remains the major scourge preventing economic growth and stability in African nations which, he said, has constituted a barrier to national development, t infrastructural growth, t trade and investment and moral authority .

Said he "Corruption is a close relative of ethnicity, the enemy of national unity. While each of us is rightly proud of our origins, our traditions, the stories of the ancients told by our griots, and the security and warmth of a shared cultural identity, the time has come when we must turn our backs on negative ethnicity, the kind that has been used to destroy our fellow countrymen and women.

We need the developed world and they need us. We need significant private investment, and they need a strong and that groundwork can only lie in a bold determination to commit long-term to good governance and leadership on our continent, building development-oriented solutions for our myriad problems, and embracing true humanitarianism in our democratic revolution. It is a vital step for all of us, whether we are Kenyan, Nigerian, Zimbabwean, South African or a citizen of any other country on this great continent"

Odinga however concluded his lecture by challenging African leaders to rise up and take their destinies. in their own hands saying " we have the power, we have the opportunity. We can change our world. Our only enemy is inaction - otherwise, everything is possible. We must confront our demons, raise our heads proudly, shoulder the burden and go the extra mile. We must make democratic change - and all that this entails - not just possible, but a reality

Former Head of State, General Yakubu Gowon in his remarks said the stand of Odinga represented a new phase of African politics. "They really have vision and determination to put in their best and to put things right in their countries and Africa as a whole. The man gave a very good lecture and as you can see a lot of it came from the heart."

On Odinga's insistence that the right to vote should be accompanied with the right to be voted for, the former head of state described the view as a very bright one. "We should always allow the people to determine who they want to entrust their rights to; who they want to put in office. We should refrain from tinkering with the system to give advantage to pre-determined people. I have no problems with that at all and I can understand the premise he's coming from," Gowon said.

According to him, there is need for Nigeria to strengthen its democracy. His words: "One of the problems is that we practice democracy in a very selfish way; in a wrong way. There should be no question on African democracy or a European democracy. Democracy is democracy and it needs to be practised in the correct way everywhere in the world. If it is done correctly and everybody plays by the rule of the game, all will be well. If your vote and my vote count, and it is respected and done correctly, then all will be well. I really hope that will happen one day in this country. He lamented that it is a pity that no African country can beat its chest to say it is practising true democracy today "Elections were being rigged accross Africa and this call for serious concern . Gowon also appealed to the leaders of Zimbabwe and Kenya to desist from "politics of winners take all "

Other guests also commented on Odinga’s lecture and agreed with the Kenyan Prime Minister on the theme of his lecture . They however picked holes with his recommended solutions to the problems of democracy in Africa.

Former governor of Ogun state, Chief Olusegun Osoba disagreed with the suggestion of using the political model of Kenya and Zimbabwe for resolving political problems in Africa. His words: "I'm still not sure whether the Kenyan or Zimbabwean option is a solution to African problems. When dictators rigged election and then go round to negotiate and give crumbs to the winner of the election, this gives one reasons for concern. I don't believe it is a solution to democracy in Africa. Democracy is democracy anywhere in the world.

"However, the right to elect, according to Odinga, must also be accompanied by the right to be elected, otherwise a man like Barack Obama will not be talking of even emerging presidential candidate of one of the major political parties in the United States, not to talk of ruling America. The right to elect must also come with the right to be elected. It's a long way for us, but I am confident we will get there one day."

Former governor of Kaduna state ,,Alhaji Balarabe Musa while rejecting the Kenyan model for Nigeria also,said "Everybody knows that in 2003, the PDP did not win the presidential election. In 2007, they did not win the presidential election. If you say, let it go for the sake of peace, then we would never have a legitimate election in Nigeria. We will continue to have illegitimate government. The Kenyan solution is not good for Nigeria, and I cannot recommend it to any country. The peoples' votes must count. The people must decide who should lead them."

Musa insisted that the right to elect and be elected, which Odinga advocated, does not exist in Nigeria. He said: "In the last election, no voting took place at all in some places and yet results were announced in those places. You also look at inflated votes, consensus candidates, buying candidates and voters with money. In Nigeria, you have the worst situation where there is no right to vote and there is no right to contest. Even when you force your way to contest, it is meaningless. Even if you vote, it is meaningless."

The Second Republic governor said the quality of the Nigerian politics is very low. "In fact, the Nigerian politics has now become a commercial proposition. That's why we are talking of the illegitimate thing, by the ANPP in particular and all the other political parties that have come to join the rigger of elections -- the PDP - in what they call Government of National Unity," said the radical politician.

Revolution, according Musa, still remains the option for solving the Nigerian political debacle.
"When we say revolution, we don't mean violence or armed struggle; we mean fundamental changes. This fundamental change can come in the form of election, which is no longer possible; it can come through the National Assembly; again this is not possible with what we have on the ground. This fundamental change can also come through government realising the dangers of corrupt political arrangement to themselves and for the country; again this is not possible.

"But the people can exercise their rights either through sustainable street demonstrations on specific national issues or social revolution. What other countries have done, Nigeria can also do. The time may not have come yet, but it will come. We have reached the end of the road."Musa further submitted.

ZAMBIA: Struggles Toward a New Era

We received the following press release from the Zambia Direct Democracy Movement. - Editor


Zambia Direct Democracy
Movement-ZDDM
P.O BOX 34553
Contact 0977-621364
Lusaka

8th October, 2008

Its Not Too Late to Save Zambia

Zambians are ill prepared for the forth-coming Presidential election and going ahead with it may have serious long term consequences for our nation hence our appealing to the listed institutions and key stakeholders to support our call that the Zambia Centre for Inter-party Dialogue-ZCID may initiate dialogue which can lead to the formation of a Government of National Unity which can simply bring all the contenders and other party leaders into government.

* Zambian Government
* MMD Secretariat
* PF Secretariat
* UPND Secretariat
* American Embassy
* British Embassy
* Swedish Embassy
* The Roman Catholic Secretariat

We believe that the forth-coming election to be held as stipulated by the current sick constitution can be set aside to allow reason to dictate because this will not only be an unnecessary waste of resources but an exercise which will not help to bring about the kind of change which Zambians desperately need.

Contrary to what some people may believe an agreement by all political parties at the ZCID followed up by a letter to Electoral Commission of Zambia, ECZ and the High Court is all that it needs to start a Healing process for our country. This can be the much needed Fresh Start towards Zambia becoming a Great Nation with the unfortunately lost vision already stated in our National Anthem.

Already for our young people and those who have suffered serious mental injury under the current government, the election is viewed as a chance to express their anger while for some it has been reduced to a situation where they will want to express their tribal solidarity.

The Mwanawasa era used excessive force by the police and courts to silence citizens for a long time and it is in national interest that a Government of National unity is put in place to defuse deeply rooted anger being harbored by many citizens such as the youth whose Themba's and survival efforts were destroyed, many retirees who have not been paid their due since 1991 when the MMD came in power, the suffering unemployed, those whose homes have been destroyed, and indeed many who feel that they have been victims of injustice etc. Holding elections at this point in time and using a constitution which the nation has already agreed needs a complete overhaul will defeat the whole purpose and reason of the exercise and reduce the election into a mere protest.

Already some citizens are threatening to withhold their votes if their immediate concern such as water and electricity load shedding is not minimized. ZDDM believes that the formation of a Government of National unity can help reduce the current tension in the country and pave way for the establishment of a Truth and Reconciliation Commission to visit all cases of alleged injustices stretching back to the UNIP era can be addressed as part of the healing process.

It would also pave way for establishing a genuine fight against corruption as compared to the current selective and politically motivated anti-corruption fight where some citizens are imprisoned for the theft of cars which nobody and not even the convicted, the police or the institution were the alleged theft was done are aware of.

Zambians have not enjoyed their freedom of expression because the public media is still controlled by government and the security forces have reacted with excessive force to discourage this mode of expression which has left many citizens looking forward to vent out their anger and frustration through the vote.

As already explained Zambia will be gambling with its future by going ahead with this election before serious concerns from citizens are addressed, a new constitution is put in place and those aspiring for Presidency explain their manifestos because all that the nation is getting from politicians right now are insults and demonisation of each other. The nation requires a massive education on why citizens should vote and promote a realization of the power of the vote and it is only when this is done and really appreciated that Zambians will be able to hold meaningful elections which can facilitate a common vision for Zambians to engage in a battle to save the nation from deepening poverty and address its serious social, moral, political and economic crisis which has been created by the now accepted culture of wasting valuable time and energy on pointing accusation fingers at each other.

In spite of our country being among the richest countries on the continent it is now listed among the poorest countries with among the highest poverty related death rate because of our failure to engage in serious and constructive dialogue. Our Movement believes that it is in national interest that the remaining 30 month of the term of office of this government can be utilized to making a deliberate effort to pave way for a Better Zambia.

It is against this background that ZDDM even at this late hour is mobilizing support that the ZCID can bring together its members contesting the election that they may save the nation unnecessary expenditure and acrimony by changing the future of Zambia through the creation of a Government of National Unity which can focus on a collective national effort to addressing the crisis facing the nation.

Our Politicians should acknowledge the fact that no single person or party can single handedly save Zambia from its current situation .This task needs the coordinated effort of every Zambian from politician to the simple villager in the remote.

We pray that the opposition parties will take heed of our advice this time because they are most likely going to regret if they ignore this advice as it is becoming very clear that the Acting-Vice President Mr. Rupiah Banda will win with a landslide due to the obvious mistakes being made by the opposition.

ZDDM just like many other Zambians is extremely disappointed that the country has been turned into a political battle field of insults and demonizing each other because this does not inspire hope or indeed save any constructive purpose. Zambians do not like what is going on and contrary to what those engaged in this crusade think-they are helping to draw a lot of sympathy and support for Vice-President Banda who is already being viewed as a victim of Satanic attacks. His reaction to the insults being hailed at him is already proving that he is mature and a very democratic leader who does not even need to rig the election results because Zambians are now apprehensive of what sort of government they may have if some candidates won.

While the opposition conduct is campaigning for the Acting President, Zambians should also ask themselves if those demonizing him will accept the landslide victory which they are building for him ?.

ZDDM believes that a time has come for Zambians to put their personal and partisan interest aside to serve a bigger cause which is Zambia as a nation. A government with Mr. Rupiah Banda, Mr. Michael Sata, Mr. Hichilema Hakainde, Mr. Nevers Mumba, Brigadier Miyanda, Mr. Enock Kavindele, Mr. Mundia Sikatana, Princes Nakatindi and all the opposition parties for the remaining 30 months can be very powerful and capable of healing this nation that the year 2011 can give Zambia a Fresh beginning full of hope.

Instead of having a winner and losers ZDDM and indeed the whole nation stands to win if all the political parties for once in Zambian history can put aside their interest and agree to work as one to heal our country and stop the current unnecessary widespread abject poverty .

United we Stand as a Nation
Divided we shall continue to fight and witness
unnecessary premature deaths

Edwin Sakala
National Coordinator for Zambia Direct Democracy
Movement-ZDDM

And at the same time
Chairman of Movement for African Unity-MAU
AND
Southern African Regional Representative for the
General Forum for Arab-African NGOs

GHANA: Non-Partisan Committee to Promote Participatory Democracy

Two articles about a newly formed local non-partisan oversight council in Ghana which has as a stated aim the promotion of participatory democracy. - Editor

APRM oversight committee inaugurated in Nkoranza

Source: http://www.ghanaweb.com/GhanaHomePage/regional/artikel.php?ID=151048

Donkro Nkwanta (B/A) Oct. 3 GNA - Mr Paul Baffoe-Ansah, Chairman of the Oversight Committee of the African Peer Review Mechanism (APRM) Governing Council in Nkoranza South District in Brong Ahafo has noted that the under-development of many African countries was due to the slave trade that took away energetic and reproductive youth to work in foreign lands. He called on African leaders to unite to enable them to come out with better ideas, policies and measures that would enhance the development of their countries. Mr Baffoe-Ansah, who is the Secretary of Nkoranza South branch of Ghana National Association of Teachers (GNAT), was addressing chiefs and people of Donkro Nkwanta at the inauguration of the oversight committee in the district. Other executives of the committee are the Reverend Emmanuel Osei, Vice Chairman, Miss Agartha Osei, Secretary and Mr Kwame Osei, Financial Secretary.

The rest are Miss Margaret Ankomah Mansah, Nana Amah Pokuaa, Mr Kwadwo Ansah, Miss Grace Baffoe and Mr Daniel Ohene Djan. Mr Baffoe-Ansah expressed regret about how coups d'etats and poor leadership had rendered some African countries unstable and advised Ghanaians not to allow partisan politics to divide the nation and stall its development. He explained that the APRM was a non-partisan body formed in the various communities to assist in promoting participatory democracy among the people so they could participate in the decision-making process. The District Chairman urged the Ghanaian leadership to let the welfare of the people and the country's development be a priority and to initiate policies that would help improve the living standards of the people.

Mr Baffoe-Ansah called for effective collaboration among political parties, traditional and religious authorities in organizing the people to contribute their quota towards national development. Mr Yaw Effah-Manu, District Director of National Commission for Civic Education, appealed to the nation's leadership to ensure that poverty, diseases and hunger were eradicated so the people could live comfortably. He urged the people to support the committee to achieve its target of promoting democracy in the country. Farmers at the forum appealed to the government to construct feeder roads to help them to convey their produce to marketing centres.

________________________________________________________________________________

KINTAMPO SOUTH:
MMDA’s cautioned

Source: http://www.ghanadistricts.com/news/?read=14961&PHPSESSID=7802d91b2e127ac7ccf221177d8418eb

The Chairman of the Governing Council of the African Peer Review Mechanism (APRM), Reverend Professor S.K. Adjepong, has cautioned Municipal and District assemblies against interfering in the activities of oversight committees of the council since they do not belong to any political party.

He was speaking at the inauguration of oversight committees for Kintampo North, Kintampo South and Nkoranza North districts at Kintampo.

“The committees are independent bodies challenged with the responsibility to find from the people their views about the governance of the nation, as stakeholders in national development”, he said.

The Rev Professor Adjepong explained that the APRM was aimed at monitoring and tracking the programmes of some African governments who are expected to give account of their stewardship to their people at a given period to enhance participatory democracy.

He urged members of the oversight committees to be good role models but to guard against partisan politicking, be loyal and submissive to win the support of the people.

A member of the governing council, Professor S.K.B. Asante, commended the committee members for offering to take up the voluntary but Herculean task to serve the state, saying they were establishing legacies as responsible citizens.

GNA

[2008-05-12 02:24:38]

SOUTH AFRICA: Editorial Demands More Participatory Democracy

The people shall govern

Source: http://www.thoughtleader.co.za/ahmedmotala/2008/08/15/the-people-shall-govern/

A few words from the famous Gettysburg speech of Abraham Lincoln in November 1863 are oft quoted as a simple, short definition of democracy: “government of the people, by the people, for the people”. Our own Freedom Charter adopted in June 1955 in Kliptown exalts that “no government can justly claim authority unless it is based on the will of all the people” and that “the people shall govern”. In the dictionary definition, democracy is “a system of government in which power is vested in the people and exercised directly by them or through their chosen representatives elected through regular free and fair elections”.

Our Constitution defines South Africa as a democratic state based on human dignity, non-racism and non-sexism, supremacy of the Constitution and rule of law and regular elections and a multi-party system of government. The Constitution also states that “This Bill of Rights is a cornerstone of democracy in South Africa. It enshrines the rights of all people in our country and affirms the democratic values of human dignity, equality and freedom.”

In South Africa therefore, democracy is more than the exercising of power by the people through freely elected representatives. It encompasses the rights enshrined in the Constitution and intrinsic values of human dignity, equality and freedom. The history of our country and the context in which our Constitution was born strongly influenced our definition of democracy.

What do these words that define democracy actually mean in practice? Should representatives of the people, once elected, make decisions based solely on their judgment? Are they required to revert regularly to the people who elected them on key questions of policy and legislation and obtain their approval? How often during their tenure are these elected representatives required to consult with those who elected them?

In South Africa direct public participation is through written submissions and public hearings arranged by Parliament on draft legislation. The Constitutional Court has stated that the commitment in our Constitution “to principles of accountability, responsiveness and openness shows that our constitutional democracy is not only representative but also contains participatory elements”. The Constitutional Court went on to extol the importance of public participation as follows:

“The participation by the public on a continuous basis provides vitality to the functioning of representative democracy. It encourages citizens of the country to be actively involved in public affairs, identify themselves with the institutions of government and become familiar with the laws as they are made. It enhances the civic dignity of those who participate by enabling their voices to be heard and taken account of. It promotes a spirit of democratic and pluralistic accommodation calculated to produce laws that are likely to be widely accepted and effective in practice. It strengthens the legitimacy of legislation in the eyes of the people. Finally, because of its open and public character it acts as a counterweight to secret lobbying and influence peddling. Participatory democracy is of special importance to those who are relatively disempowered in a country like ours where great disparities of wealth and influence exist.”

The Constitution therefore imposes a duty on Parliament to facilitate public involvement to provide citizens with a meaningful opportunity to be heard in the making of laws that will govern them.

Recent public remarks by Maggie Sotyu, the ANC chairperson of Parliament’s portfolio committee on safety and security prior to the commencement of public hearings on the proposed legislation to disband the Scorpions undermine the genuineness of public participation. She stated that the dissolution of the Scorpions would go ahead regardless of the volume of written submissions and petitions sent to Parliament opposing the move. The will of the people does not seem to matter to Ms Sotyu. What matters is the will of the ruling party and she stated as much. Later comments by Yunus Carrim, justice committee chairperson, to reassure the public of the genuineness of public participation did not reduce doubts about the process. I can see a constitutional challenge brewing.

In Switzerland, public participation on constitutional amendments is through obligatory referendums. Political parties and interest groups can also subject federal laws to a referendum upon the collection of 50 000 signatures. Constitutional amendments can also be initiated through citizen initiatives upon the collection of 100 000 signatures within a period of 18 months, provided that the amendment does not contradict any international law or treaty.

The Swiss system of referendums, while allowing for direct participation of citizens in decision-making, is extremely expensive and can slow down political decision-making. However could it be appropriate in some exceptional cases such as the disbanding of the Scorpions? Or should the South African government be required to subject all Constitutional amendments to public approval through a referendum before adoption? For meaningful public participation through referendum there has to be a good understanding of issues being decided, which often can be complex. Has the electorate in South Africa reached a level of sophistication, including literacy and education, to be able to participate through referendums?

Should contentious public issues such as abortion and the death penalty be decided through referendums? Referendums should not be permitted on issues that affect the rights of others as public opinion alone cannot determine the rights of individuals. Rights should not be left to the prevarications of public opinion, which are regularly subject to change. Furthermore, the Constitutional Court is final adjudicator on constitutional matters, not the public. It is essential that we maintain rule by law in our country, not rule by public opinion. In June 1995 in its very first decision, the Constitutional Court said the following regarding public opinion:

“The issue of the constitutionality of capital punishment cannot be referred to a referendum in which a majority view would prevail over the wishes of any minority. The very reason for establishing the new legal order and for vesting the power of judicial review of all legislation in the courts, was to protect the rights of minorities and others who cannot protect their rights adequately through the democratic process. Those who are entitled to claim this protection include the social outcasts and marginalised people of our society. It is only if there is a willingness to protect the worst and the weakest among us, that all of us can be secure that our own rights will be protected.”

NIGERIA: Government Employees Protest Cutbacks to Participatory Democracy

A couple of articles about recent protests and strikes by the Nigeria Union of Local Government Employees against the central government's appointing civil servants from government ministries to replace local governing councils and the resulting setback to the opportunities for participatory democracy that the local councils represented. - Editor





NULGE protests planned scrapping of LGs

• Tuesday, Jul 29, 2008
Source: http://www.thetidenews.com/article.aspx?qrDate=07/29/2008&qrTitle=NULGE%20protests%20planned%20scrapping%20of%20LGs&qrColumn=FRONT%20PAGE

The Rivers State chapter of the Nigeria Union of Local Government Employees (NULGE) has indicated its willingness to participate in the national protest march which comes up in Abuja on August 7.

The protest, which is at the instance of the national office of NULGE, is to protest the alleged plan to scrap the local government system in the country.

Briefing the press in Port Harcourt, the state President of the union, Apostle Godwin Tumini Diri said that NULGE in Rivers State would join its counterparts in other parts of the country to condemn the call from some quarters to abolish the local government system which provides opportunity for participatory democracy, social mobilisation and social services.

The state NULGE boss said that since the nation’s democracy cannot survive in the absence of a viable and sustainable local government, scrapping it will bring more problems to the country.

“The union is rather asking the various responsible organs of government in the country to guarantee the existence and continuity of the local government system in the proposed constitutional amendment, he said “

According to him, some of the ways of doing this is by increasing council allocation from the present 20 per cent to 30 per cent, invalidate the state joint allocation accounts while Local Government Service Commission should be included in the Constitution.

Also, the concept of uniformity in the political system of local government should be institutionalized,
Apostle Diri said, adding that NULGE believes in the use of peaceful approach in sorting out its differences.

Our recourse to this civilised approach is strengthened when we realised that majority of Nigerians, including most of those providing leadership at the state levels are supportive of sustainability of the local government system, he said.
_____________________________________________________________________________

NULGE resumes strike in Imo

Source: http://www.triumphnewspapers.com/nugl2282008.html

The Nigeria Union of local government Employees (NULGE) in Imo state, resumed its suspended strike, accusing the state government of failing to meet its demand.

The union had asked the state government to withdraw the 27 civil servants it posted to local governments as Directors of Administration and General Services.

The News Agency of Nigeria (NAN) reports that most of the councils visited were deserted and that the few staff around sat in clusters, discussing the strike.

It would be recalled that the state government on July 25, appointed 27 state civil servants to replace the local government directors.

The measure was vehemently opposed by NULGE, which said it amounted to interference in the running of the councils.

The union on Aug. 7 issued a 14-day ultimatum to the state government to rescind the decision.

Government, NAN learnt, did not respond to the union's demand.

Chief Linus Nwajere, the union's President in the state, told newsmen in Owerri that the strike would not be called off until government cancelled the postings.

He also said the state government erred by transferring civil servants to local governments.

He said NULGE viewed the postings as an attempt to destroy the careers of local government workers. 'The time to say no is now.

All council workers at the local government service commission and local government staff pensions board should stay at home for now,'' he said.

Nwajere said that the government invited the union on Aug. 2 for a meeting, where a truce was brokered.

The NULGE chief said the State's Deputy Governor, Dr Ada Okwuonu, led the government delegation.

He said that the decisions reached at the meeting included the suspension of the first strike and the cancellation of the postings.

He said while the union suspended the strike, government failed to recall the civil servants it appointed as directors in the local governments.

Nwajere however, commended the state government for directing the Auditor General for Local Governments to audit the accounts of the councils from May, 2007.

He said that audit reports would let the people to know the actual amount each council had received from the federation account, including the oil windfall.

``This will make the audit exercise more meaningful to Imo people,'' he said.

NIGERIA: Local Government Councils Need More Autonomy

The following examines the functionality of local council governance in Nigeria. In order to enhance the effectiveness of participatory democracy, these local councils must cease to be dominated and squelched by the higher levels of government, state and federal. The grassroots must be recognized as a meaningful and powerful third tier of government, - Editor

Local Govt As Beacon Of Sustainable Democracy

Source: http://www.leadershipnigeria.com/product_info.php?products_id=31822&osCsid=6a39659307e3289180456a047c9ea35f

How is the local government administration fairing under the present system of governance? What are its problems and possible prospects? These and many more are analysed by our correspondent, ABU DOOSHIMA, in this piece. Her verdict is, joint account kills the local governments

The relevance of local government councils to sustainable development at the grassroots level was the inevitable conclusion during the 1976 local government reforms. It accorded the local governments a status of the third tier of government vis-a-vis the federal and state governments. This recognition is influenced by the strategic position of the local governments in the sense that it hosts a number of wards which allows mass mobilisation for national goals to be attained very fast.

The local government as a third tier has been the closest arm of government to the people. Therefore, its responsibility to address the basic needs of the people through the promotion of socio-economic programmes amplifies democratic governance via participatory democracy. For example, the electoral agency or body, delineates local governments into wards and constituencies in which the will to test power starts. This is why politicians must register first at their wards before becoming relevant at the local, state and possibly federal level. From wards, even federal legislator say a senator could be called home the moment the mandatory number of signatories recalling him or her home is achieved.

However, the current domineering influence of the state governments over the local governments has adversely affected the desired development expected at the grassroot. The performance of local councils chairmen in rendering dividends of democracy to the masses has been mellowed therefore, impairing good governance at the grassroot level.

The inter-dependence of the local government on state, can be likened to parasitism, a mode of feeding where by the organism depends on its host until it destroys it. The incessant complaints of non performance of council chairmen by the masses, is largely as a result of councils inter-dependence on state.

You would largely agree with me on the fact that there is no fair electoral process in our local governments that would guarantee a level playing ground for all actors. This has been reflected in the anomalities that surround accompanied the local governments election.

It was annoying when I realised that some policians who won the local government election as council chairmen were actually not qualified and were not the choices of the people. But were imposed on the people by the state government to enable it achieve its looting ambition.

How can there be meaninful development, when those in office, lack the charistma for leadership, the local governments have been dominated with, purposeless, visionless, and passionless leaders who got into power because of their association with the state government. How do we expect a blend man to lead the way anyway?

Most at times this position is given as gift to a ‘thug’ who has fought tooth and nail for the governor during the gubernatorial election.

In a bid to show appreciation, this local government chairmen pay total alegiance to the state governors even when it is detrimental to the growth and development of their councils. This has been succinctly captured within a time-worm proverb which says “he whou pays the piper, dictates the tune.”

It is in this regard that political scientist consistently insist that the interdependence of states and the local governments should be complementary. Therefore, the total independence of the local government should be paramount if sustainable development must be achieved in the country.

I am of the view that, the success of the state government in manipulating electiosn at the local level is largely due to its economic power. The joint account system has undully empowered the state government placing her at an advantaged position in managing the available resources of the local governments.

When projects that would guarantee development is initiated by local government chairmen, such initiative is delayed because of the process it has to undergo before execution. It is pathetic to disclose that often times bribe some state government officials for their projects to be approved. Its even worse when the chairman is from an opposition party.

It is pertinent to note that even when these projects are approved, the fund for its execution is delayed by the state government. The state governors, have now seen the local government as an outlet to enrich themselves.

This however makes the local government chairmen adamant to new initiative that would translate to the growth of the local government area.

It is worthy we know that the low sense of nationalism witnessed in our country today is largely attributed to the neglect of governments in meeting the yearnings and aspirations of the demoracy. It is this lack of sense of belonging that has made Nigerians adamant to government policies. They have developed a lackadasical attitude towards their leaders.

It is no doubt that if local governments are allowed to run their affairs as opposed the practice of joint account system it would quarant*** development at the grassroot level.

This is because each local council, knows its own peculiar problems and needs and would design measures for solutions, thereby rendering dividend of democracy to the people interms of social infrastructure.

Decentralisation to locally elected governments which should serve as a means to improving incentives of public provider for service delivery to the poor masses has declined in achieving its purpose due to state government interference.

I would sincerely advocate for council independence as it serve as only alternative to liberating the councils from its exploiters.

If the local governments is left to run its affair, I may suggest that they should be consolidated. The 774 councils we have Nigeria may pull their resources together and invest in some profitable venture such as refinaries and manufacturing plants whose dividend will help sustain them as a joint property. y and large, these business vitality could lead to political fraternity, because local governments would be existing as a formidable block.

This in turn, will encourage participatory democracy therefore boosting development at the grassroot. The dreams and aspirations can be translated into reality therefore, giving the masses a sense of belonging.

The electoral agency must guarantee the survival of these councils and the judiciary must help to consolidate the independence of the councils by holding various states government officials accountable to the people.

SOUTH AFRICA: SACP African Participatory Democracy Conference

AFRICAN PARTICIPATORY DEMOCRACY CONFERENCE

Source: http://www.sacp.org.za/main.php?include=docs/conf/2008/democracy/details.html

CONFERENCE DETAILS

1.1 OPEN INVITATION

To: All Interested Organisations in Africa

INVITATION TO THE AFRICAN PARTICIPATORY DEMOCRACY CONFERENCE, 14-16 AUGUST 2008, SOWETO, JOHANNESBURG, SOUTH AFRICA

In the context of fluid global developments and both challenges and potentialities of mass democratic participatory politics in localized processes, the South African Communist Party and the Left Party of Sweden (Vänsterpartiet) through the Left International Forum are engaged in a collaborative effort to host a Southern African conference on Participatory Democracy which will be held in Soweto, Johannesburg in South Africa.

We hope to assemble an array of regional and international civil society activists, social movements, scholars and campaigners in various fields with social, political and gender orientation as well as representatives of rural and indigenous movements with extensive expertise in grassroots mobilization and politics of democratic mass participation. We want to focus on the experience of people’s participation, expanding the democratic space, developing an alternative peoples economic, political, social and cultural agenda, as well as of alternative forms of popular governance.

This conference is a continuation of an International Conference on Participatory Democracy held in Stockholm, Sweden, in 2004 and a Latin American Conference on Participatory Democracy held in Caracas, Venezuela, in 2005. Documentation from these conferences is available at our website, www.participamos.org.

We are inviting all South African and other African interested organisations to register their participation for the congress.

By June 2008 a conference programme will be available for distribution on our website. For more information, please don't hesitate to contact Mr. Mothusi Mongale, Tel +2711 339 3621, Fax: +2711 339 4244, Fax +27866 179 105, Mobile: +2783 2600 392, thelma@sacp.org.za , Maria.Brendler@vansterpartiet.se

Dr. Blade Nzimande Eva Björklund
SACP General Secretary Left Party Board, in charge of international relations

For programme details visit the following site: http://www.sacp.org.za/main.php?include=docs/conf/2008/democracy/details.html

Conferencia Africana sobre democracia participativa 14-16 agosto de 2008, Soweto, Johannesburgo, Sudáfrica

En el contexto de desarrollos fluidos a nivel global y los desafíos y posibilidades de políticas participativas, democráticas y masivas a nivel local, el Partido Comunista de Africa (South African Communist Party) y el Partido de Izquierda de Suecia (Vänsterpartiet) a través del Foro Internacional de la Izquierda (VIF), están colaborando en la organización de una conferencia sobre Democracia Participativa, que tendrá lugar en Soweto, Johannesburgo, Sudáfrica

Deseamos reunir a un gran número de activistas de la sociedad civil regionales e internacionales, de los movimientos sociales, académicos y activistas en diversos campos con orientación social, político y de género, así como representantes de las zonas rurales y los movimientos indígenas con amplia experiencia en la movilización popular y la política democrática de participación de masas.

Esta conferencia está incluida en una serie de conferencias internacionales sobre democracia participativa organizados por el VIF que empezó en Estocolmo 2004, siguió en Caracas 2005, en Manila 2007, en Diyarbakir y Zagreb 2007. Documentación de estas conferencias están a su disposición en nuestra pagina web www.participamos.org.

En la pagina web también pueden, a partir de Julio, encontrar el programa de la conferencia en Soweto. Para más información por favor no tarde en contactar al Sr Mothusi Mongale, Tel +2711 339 3621, Fax: +2711 339 4244, Fax +27866 179 105, Mobile: +2783 2600 392, lucian@sacp.org.za, o Maria.Brendler@vansterpartiet.se

Dr. Blade Nzimande Eva Björklund
SACP Secretario General Foro Internacional de Izquierda

Para ver más detalles del programa visita la pagina siguiente: http://www.sacp.org.za/main.php?include=docs/conf/2008/democracy/details.html

South Africa: Participatory Democracy Must be Deepened

Citizens of South Africa face similar problems to many countries around the world in the respect that although constitutions may provide for public participation, the way our governments actually function is often far from being in line with founding constitutional principles and mandates. -Editor

The people must participate

Published:Jun 17, 2008

Source:

http://www.thetimes.co.za/News/Article.aspx?id=784745

Photo: POPULAR STRUGGLE: The goal of a ‘deep democracy’ was conveyed symbolically by the posters of the liberation struggle — they often showed people marching under banners and flags

A lack of effective, democratic engagement is destabilising our democracy, writes Frank Meintjies

Much of the current political uncertainty in South Africa — the lack of focus, a sense of crisis on many fronts, large areas of misalignment between leaders and the population, a resurgence of street protests — can be explained by a lack of effective democratic participation.

South Africa’s struggle was a popular one, and the intention was always to construct a society in which democracy meant more than taking part in periodic elections.
The goal of a “deep democracy” was always part of liberation discourse. That intent was conveyed symbolically by the posters of the liberation struggle — they often showed masses of people marching under banners and flags. It was also captured in a Freedom Charter clause, “The people shall govern”, and expressed through the grassroots education we undertook in the struggle.

Our constitution calls for citizen and community participation as elements of a vibrant democracy. Fourteen years after the advent of the new South Africa, that vibrancy escapes us and the lack of participatory democracy is visible at all levels.

Effective participation is either absent or deficient in the practice of politics , leading to a troubling disconnection between political parties and the people.

In the ANC, this rupture was clear at its Polokwane conference where there was a horizontal split (ANC vs ANC) and a vertical split (bitter conflict between the base and bigwigs).

For other parties the estrangement is indicated in low voter support and a limited role in filling in the cracks in our society.

Participation is largely absent or completely marginal to the operations of national and provincial government. National and provincial government are relatively distant from the people, as are their policy development and review processes.

Early in the new democracy, and especially following the completion of the first round of policy development after 1994, officials took the view that the ANC had a clear mandate to govern and ought not to waste time with wide consultation on policy. W hat was needed for revved-up delivery was a strong government acting decisively.

And so, with limited participation, many government decisions are based on internal conversations, on an over-reliance on technical knowledge and on input from formal interest groups; there is little space or time for community-level engagement.

Technocrats, who by and large do not see public consultation as a core part of their duties, drive decision-making at programming level.

Government imbizos began as a good idea, but they are clearly inadequate. Many burning issues are taken to the streets instead. It is also not clear if, and how, imbizos affect policy making or review processes. Thus, at national and provincial level, the systems exclude the poor and marginalised.

At local-government level, the problem may be worse and has more drastic implications since local government is meant to be most accessible and attuned to citizens and poor communities. Despite various laws calling for effective participation in local governance, indications are that local governments have failed to ensure participation and, in many cases, lack the political will to deepen participation.

For many years, concern has been expressed about the lack of meaningful participation in the drafting of integrated development plans. Usually drawn up by consultants , the plans, in the words of Stephen Friedman, emerge from a simulation of democratic participation rather than the real thing. The thousands of service delivery protests each year testify to an alarming gap between local government and poor communities.

The lack of effective democratic participation is destabilising the new democracy. F or many in society, the sense of shared goals between government and themselves has become weak. We see the fracture of political parties, a breakdown of communication between leaders and people, as well as regular protests (including the current wave of deplorable xenophobia).

With regard to the xenophobia, indications are that the communities concerned had nowhere to raise their frustrations, discuss their perceptions of their foreign neighbours and explore urgent solutions to poverty.

In the last decade or so, meaningful citizen and civil society engagement would have provided us with more robust and sustainable solutions on foreign policy, including responses to regional instability; apart from the greater consensus on how to handle the Zimbabwean crisis, the government would benefit from “intelligence” about attitudes at grassroots level.

Civic engagement may have also circumvented Eskom’s electricity crisis; given the choice, citizen groups may well have opted for gradual increases in the past and expansion of generation capacity instead of initiatives such as Coega and the pie-in-the- sky pebble-bed reactor.

With respect to HIV-Aids; active engagement and true partnership with civil society in the last decade would have ensured a less fragmented national response and more effective rollout of prevention, treatment, care and support.

Our leaders must acknowledge that meaningful and sustained participation does not happen naturally or automatically in formal democracy (regardless of the democratic ideals and struggle credentials of the people involved), but with political will, planning and commitment. If the government’s reward system prioritised it, it could be achieved.

It is time our leaders realised that even though many citizens were initially inclined to leave it to government to deliver us from various evils, many are now reverting to active citizenship and are demanding participatory democracy. — SACSIS

Meintjies is a freelance writer and author of the blog Sideview

NIGERIA: Participatory Democracy Key to Sustainable Development

This article from Nigeria highlights the trends that many activists have been reporting in that country. It outlines the reasons why participatory democracy is the best system for self-governance and how it can improve the way that countries develop. -Editor


Participatory democracy as tool for sustainable development

Saturday, Jul 5, 2008


Source: http://www.thetidenews.com/article.aspx?qrDate=07/05/2008&qrTitle=Participatory%20democracy%20as%20tool%20for%20sustainable%20dev&qrColumn=OPINION


The fact that democracy connotes a system where the citizens are actively involved, either directly or indirectly, in making decisions affecting their destinies has elicited a widely held belief that democracy is the best form of government.

The debate on the extent to which popular sovereignty should be guaranteed has existed over the years among political philosophers, especially among the social contract school. While scholars like Thomas Hobbes and Roseau subscribe to absolute sovereignty, John Locke emphasises limited state sovereignty in which the citizens can hold the government accountable. The Lockian idea has been the basic of the American (otherwise known as liberal or preventative) democracy which Nigeria has adopted since the second republic.

Today, representative democracy, especially in the or consciously replaced, sometimes with such ideas as politics of accommodation, elitism or godfatherism. Godfathers are those with considerable means to successfully foist their will on the public, instead of their political parties doing so. Under this circumstance, political parties lack the capacity to act contrary to the wishes and aspirations of these godfathers because they depend on them to bankroll their campaigns and deploy their influence to see candidates through elections.

When this takes place, it becomes impossible or even an offence for citizens to question the actions of the government, since in the first place, the process of election was not on the whims and caprices of the electorates.

The consequence of this scenario further reproduces itself in situations where sustainable development is defined as a development that meets the needs of the present without even compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs. It is a development that is not only all encompassing but equally enduring.

It is no gain saying, that when the citizens are actively involved in the democratic process, inform of voting their choice candidates, involvement in the development programmes, consultations before bye laws are enacted and even criticising existing structure and making policy recommendation, it becomes easy for them to enjoy some since of belonging. It also gives them the room to take part in deciding their destinies. Most importantly, participatory democracy help, to a large extent, in the appropriate channelling of the development programmes.

Furthermore, to ensure participatory democracy, citizens should be made politically conscious by both the National Orientation Agency (NOA), the public and private print and non print media and the non-governmental organisations.

The government can also do this by encouraging and enabling laws that will properly and fundamentally integrate local agencies like the C.D.C., the community based organisations (CBOS) among others in the planning and execution of projects especially in the rural areas.

This will help not only to erace the conversion of the LGA treasury into a group and family purse, but will also expunge situations where elected political leaders become unquestionable and unaccountable to the people.

Class and ethnic marginalisation is another important antithesis to sustainable development. Political office holders and indeed our democratic system should ensure that programmes on both infrastructural and human capacity development cuts across class and ethnic boundaries. It is when these are done that we can hope to see the possibility of domesticating the aims of the New Partnership for Africa Development (NEPAD) as well as the United Nations Millennium and Development Goals (MDGS) to which Nigeria is a signatory and which stimulated Nigeria’s initiation of a new medium term development strategy titled the National Empowerment and Development Strategy (NEEDS) in May 2004.

Participatory democracy will also help to engage the idle youth and by so doing reduce social volatility and youth restiveliness .

With the recent conclusion of the local government elections the emerging leaders should see the entire local government as their constituencies irrespective of party and intra party affiliations. Their policies and programmes should assume a colouration of “NO VICTOR NO VANGUISH”.

It is only when these are done that we can claim to have made our democracy not only participatory and people oriented but equally an agency for sustainable development.

Uranta is a political scientist and lecturer at RSCOE, Port Harcourt.

NIGERIA: Participatory Democracy Part of Sustainable Development

The people must have a say in how their country creates the necessary infrastructure to ensure that all citizens have the opportunity to be successful and healthy. Leaders have historically manipulated the hopes of the population in order to gain political support, power, and money. But when the people have the opportunity to take part it structures of governance, suggestions regarding development are much more specific to the locality and the region instead of being imposed from above. Not only does this eliminate corruption, it ensures that the development will be sustainable and upheld by the people whom it directly effects. Nigeria is a popular topic because there have been many efforts at improving governance in that country, especially evidenced in this speech by Governor Aliyu. -Editor

Participatory democracy as an ingredient for sustainable development (1)

By Muazu Babangida Aliyu

Dr. Muazu Babangida Aliyu,
Niger State governorDistinguished scholars, today’s event is indeed a historic opportunity for me to share my views and experience with you with a view to stimulating our collective thinking on how we can evolve and sustain a credible development process in Nigeria through participatory democracy. I believe for us to achieve that, we should look at such variables as transparency, accountability, leadership and good governance. This may require us to enlighten, educate and mobilize the common people, for everybody to understand their role and place in the community, and to understand what to expect and what is expected of them.

Let me emphase how strongly I share the view that unless we in the developing democracies are able to systematically evolve a political system that takes account of our socio-cultural peculiarities and characteristics, we run the risk of thinking that the wholesale robust economic and democratic ideas and precepts of the developed world would have the magic wand to solve our developmental problems

We thus may be under a dangerous illusion that we are making progress while in the actual sense, we may indeed be engaging the reverse gear and be going in the reverse direction, because of wrong applications to different settings and environments. In other words, we must domesticate democratic principles to take cognizance of excellent values and institutions.

We need to understand that although there are general elements and principles of democracy - participation and inclusiveness, responsiveness, free and fair multi-party elections, freedom of speech and association, respect for human rights, observance of rule of law, etc., there is no universal blueprint for development. Development, in my view, must be home grown, home-made and targeted at improving the lives of the people. Indeed, development must be people-conscious and people-centred. And this precisely underscores the critical role of participatory democracy in sustainable development.

But first, we should be clear about what participatory democracy implies. In my view, the term ‘participatory democracy’ is tautology as the two words describe the same thing - depicting a process that emphasises the broad participation (decision-making) of constituents in the direction and operation of political systems. Whereas, in the actual sense, any democracy would rely on the participation of its citizens, which is the etymological root of the term ‘democracy’, derived from the Greek ‘demos’ and ‘krotos’ – combined to suggest that “the people rule”. This provides the general basis for the simple and widely held definition of democracy as ‘a government of the people, for the people and by the people’.

As earlier pointed out, we must appreciate that there is no universal blueprint of development or democracy. What matters most is which works well in bringing about good democratic practices that promote good governance to facilitate sustainable development in different settings. What do I mean here? Some forms of democracy tend to limit citizens’ participation to voting, thereby leaving actual governance to politicians, who often do not know any better than the electorate; especially if we consider the general psyche of Nigerians in 1999 when politics was left in major parts to charlatans and the unemployed. Many politicians see victory at the polls as an opportunity to make money, to plunder the state and corruptly mismanage the resources. No, it is not so and should not be so. Politics is too important to be left to the Nigerian politicians alone.

My strong view in this regard is that the Gown must make conscious efforts to meet the Town. Intellectuals and academics must participate in politics if we really desire sustainable development. We need to refocus attention on community-based activity which strives to create the opportunity for all members of the society, and not just the politicians, to make meaningful contributions to decision-making in the overall interest of the society. There is no such term as ‘professional politician’ who most often give the impression that they have the monopoly of wisdom in providing leadership. We – academics, public servants, farmers, artisans, etc - must all stand up to challenge this misleading assertion, and exercise our obligation to participate in governance at our individual levels. We can do this effectively by paying close attention to the programmes and manifestos of the political parties, by monitoring and asking questions about the implementation of the campaign pledges, by sending written contributions on ways to improve governance and indeed by having sympathy for or being bonafide members of a political party of our choice.

In order for participatory democracy to attain legitimacy and reinvigorate democratic politics as a whole, the institutional frameworks have to be established and certain conditions need to be in place.

• Participatory arrangements need to be open at their foundation to everyone affected by such decisions and people made aware of how such decisions affect their lives.

• There is need for mutually-agreed and openly-negotiated rules to be upheld by everybody, and mechanisms for sanctioning deviants.

• There should be an enabling environment for participatory institutions and groups to monitor implementation of government’s decisions. We should create both formal and informal institutions that should monitor, checkmate public servants with the objective to enhance their performance.

• There should be general sharing of knowledge; where users and service workers, for instance, can share their ‘inside knowledge’ to improving services, thus making the public service reform process democratic. People must be carried along in the entire decision-making process – from the inception through the implementation and review

For this concept to take firm roots and to produce desired effects, every social unit of the society needs to imbibe democratic ideals. This should in effect start at the family level, with parents being open and involving all family members, particularly the children, in decisions that affect the entire household. It should then go on to the school system, where democratic principles should be applied in the entire running of the schools, particularly on matters that people are likely to have differing positions and interests.

The same should take place in our faith-based groups and associations as well as in the large civil society, so that democratic values become fully established and entrenched in the society, rather than limiting such to party politics. In that process, people develop confidence in themselves, in their institutions and in the leadership

I had an opportunity to travel to Brazil on study tours, first, on federation and federalism, and second, on public services. I noted that when participatory democracy was introduced in municipal administration of Brazil’s Porto Alegre, it enhanced transparency, reduced corruption, assisted in the redistribution of public resources from the high income areas of the city to the poor areas and improved the efficiency of the social services. Indeed, people were/are willing to blow the whistle on corrupt public officials and began/begin to see public property as the peoples’ property, with a sense of ownership being translated into positive protection and increased value

It is significant to stress that popular participation in politics not only enhances good governance – exposing corruption, challenging bureaucratic systems, keeping close to the real needs of the people – it also raises ‘political consciousness about economic power at every level’. What I observe in Niger State is that many people, many villages and indeed many communities know and understand their problems; they understand their needs and the solutions to their problems. However, many do not appreciate the concept of economic power – that every kobo allocated to their local government or state is actually their money; that they need to ask questions and to hold whoever is in charge of the resources responsible – be it the President, the governor, the local government chairman or even the councillor – for every expenditure or the lack of it

They should therefore demand not only for quality services to be delivered transparently but also respectfully, because government is about people and for the people and not about some esoteric ideas that have no bearing with peoples’ lives

We demonstrated this concept of people-centred and people-conscious politics during our recent local government elections which our party, PDP won in all 25 local government councils, for the first time in the political history of Niger State. How did we achieve that feat? Simply, we insisted on non-interference with the political process leading to the nomination of candidates; that is, non-imposition, and therefore discouraged ‘godfatherism’. But above all, we were sensitive to the expressed needs of our people and earned their confidence through demonstrated commitment to the improvement of the quality of their lives

The point to note in this is that when you demand, as an individual, to know the state of public expenditure simply for your selfish reasons, so that you can be ‘settled’ as a way of sharing with the corrupt ones, then you become compromised as one of them and you remain a beggar, - an apologist

Dr. Aliyu, the Niger State governor, delivered this paper at the Foundation Day lecture of the Igbinedion University, Okada, Edo State on Saturday, May 10, 2008