Autocrats on the march: Is Sub-Saharan Africa becoming less democratic?

Since gaining independence in the latter half of the 20^th century, many sub-Saharan countries have been keen to promote their pro-democracy credentials. While initially several countries adopted a single party system, since the end of the cold war and unilateral superpower support for favourable regimes, many multiparty elections have taken place. As of 2020, only Equatorial Guinea and Eritrea remain (openly) single party states. So, to the casual observer it would seem that within the region democracy is flourishing, but is this really the case?

In a poll conducted by Afrobarometer in December 2018 across 34 sub-Saharan countries, 68% of respondents stated they preferred to live in freer and open societies. Democracy and free societies had long been seen as indivisible from development, stability and social enrichment. However, an increasing number of people are looking to alternative and autocratic models of leadership, often referred to as ‘benevolent dictators’ or ‘strongmen’.

The poster boy of this style of government has been Rwanda’s President Paul Kagame, who has overseen the dramatic economic revival of the country since the 1998 genocide. Others have followed suit, such as Tanzania’s President John Magufuli, who won the general election in July 2015 with a campaign to rid the country of government overspending, corruption and regaining economic sovereignty. While these leaders would probably not refer to themselves as dictators (as elections are held in their countries), their alleged suppression and harassment of opposition figures could have come straight from the playbook of the likes of Mugabe or Amin.

So, why are people looking at these styles of government favourably, even though they are aware it may result in a clamp down on their civil liberties? One reason could be the failure of supposed ‘democratically’ elected governments to deliver real change and address the nations long standing problems. The term ‘legal but illegitimate’ has come to describe the process by which elections are held but the incumbent uses the powers of office to ensure they and their supporters stay in power. A winning template is often to pressurise the democratic institutions (courts, media, etc.) into doing their will, run interference on the opposition, misuse state resources, control information and subvert the election process. Power gained in this way frequently means that the subsequent tenure is not for the good of the country, but for the good of those who helped secure power.

‘68% of respondents stated they preferred to live in freer and open societies’

The situation is exacerbated by international election monitors rubber stamping these types of election as credible, even when there is widespread knowledge of irregularities. Benchmark standards for observer missions in sub-Saharan Africa are very low by western standards and are often just about preventing violence. An example of this can be seen in the Malawian May 2019 presidential election which saw the incumbent Peter Mutharika returned to power. The election was declared free and fair by a number of observer missions, which included the AU and EU. However, when the result was challenged by the opposition, Malawi’s Supreme Court found enough evidence of irregularities to overturn the result and order a rerun of the elections in June 2020.

Another possible reason for the rise in autocracy is the recent global trend towards populism. With international news channels being beamed across the continent and the internet accessible on a growing number of people’s mobile phones, the plain-speaking messages from populist leaders, such as Donald Trump, strike a chord with many people in African countries also affected by economic migrants and the growing presence of Chinese influence. Ironically, much of Trump’s rhetoric could have an impact on their lives, but in a negative way, and worsen some of their existing concerns. With the US and others pulling funding from overseas development projects to tackle issues (such as COVID-19) closer to home, less scrutiny is being placed on how African leaders spend their nations’ wealth. In the absence of Western donors, China (who has its own interests in tarnishing Western democracy’s image) is more than happy to fill the gap, providing funds without the caveats that money from the West comes with.

‘$150 billion – the amount China has lent to Africa in the last 20 years which accounts for about a fifth of all African debt’

Do autocratic figures and populist leaders ‘get things done’ as the perception goes? The evidence does not suggest so, at least not over the long term. While short term improvements in the economic situation may be achieved with a strong figure at the helm, the ‘benevolence’ of the dictator often soon becomes oppression of those who don’t agreed with their policies. Over time this can lead to simmering resentment, which can be violently exposed once their grip on power begins to slip.

Autocratic figures tend to suppress critical thinking, competition and innovation which are vital for long term growth and economic success. They also tend to be rearward looking, sticking with dogmatic methods of governance which have worked in the past. Given the issues the continent faces in the coming decades, such as population growth and increasing urbanisation, these may not be a suitable approach that will work in the future.

Democracies have posted historical growth rates that are one third faster than autocracies. Work by Joseph Siegle, the Director of Research at the Africa Centre for Strategic Studies, highlights that since the end of the cold war only nine out of 85 autocracies have realised sustained economic growth. Furthermore, in the UN’s Human Development Index the top 41 of 47 countries listed as having ‘very high’ human development indices are deemed to be free. So, it would seem that democratic societies are more conducive to both economic growth and human development over the long term than autocratic regimes.

Despite proven abilities to deliver better economic results, democracy may take a step backwards over the next few years in Africa. Given what is happening in the world at the moment to halt the spread of COVID-19, many governments in the region have imposed lockdowns, declared states of emergency, and granted ruling parties sweeping executive authority. Though during the initial stages of the pandemic these may have seemed justifiable, they could have long term impacts.

Now that changes to these powers have been enacted, some rulers may be unwilling to give them up once the emergency subsides. Additionally, leaders may perhaps take advantage of the current situation to curtail democracy, centralise power, or entrench authoritarian rule. COVID-19’s impact on sub-Saharan Africa may not just be on its people and economy, but also its democratic institutions. Many are being hollowed out while the world’s attention is elsewhere, which could set back democracy for a number of years to come.

Organisations wishing to operate in the region are faced with a number of challenges. Autocratic leaders may initially be receptive to international businesses, however they may then expect ‘favours’ for continued access to markets or permissions to operate. The danger of acquiescing to these requests is self-evident in the number of high-profile corporate scandals which have filled the headlines once these types of regimes lose power. ‘State Capture’ and ‘Cashgate’ are headlines no business would want attached to them. Therefore, organisations should ensure that they have robust internal governance and compliance mechanisms and avoid the temptation to take short cuts or use politically connected middlemen. Governance procedures should not only protect the organisation from the deliberate action of management, but also from the unintentional actions of employees and contractors who may treat facilitation payments, bribes and other non-standard practices as ‘just how things are done’. With the international reach of Western anti-corruption acts (e.g. US Foreign Corrupt Practises Act) any of the above could end up impacting the organisation negatively, both from a reputational and a legal standpoint. While a more autocratic region presents hurdles to organisations, those with the correct governance, compliance and awareness systems in place should still be able to capitalise on sub-Saharan Africa’s growing market.