Skip to main content

Faulting Dictatorship

If there is an easy thing to do, it seems, is to fault dictatorship. And dictators. Simply because they are dictators.

It is as if by virtue of them being dictators, all evil is theirs.
\
Take Gambia. Yahya Jammeh.

A few days ago, Jammeh shocked the African continent. In what appeared to be a predictable election, with him as a winner, Jammeh lost. He did not only lose. He conceded defeat. Long before the Electoral Commission in the country officially declared the winner.

It was unprecedented. Both the loss and the concession. For, Jammeh in his dictatorial rants had once said that he would rule the Gambia for a billion years -- if Allah would will.

However, when the loss was in the air, he resigned to fate.

The optimists celebrated, the loss and the concession. They said Africa was slowly maturing, in its democracy. The pessimists, however, were not sure of what to make of Jammeh's loss and the concession. It seemed surreal.

Not long after, the Breaking News appeared on our Facebook timelines and their televisions: Jammeh had withdrawn his concession of the loss. He was calling for a fresh election. The reason being that he considered the election flawed. Not only did he consider that the electoral process was flawed but the Chairperson of the country's Electoral Commission had indeed accepted that there were irregularities with the process, especially the tabulation of votes.

Yes, the results did not change who the winner was but they narrowed the gap between the winner and the runner-up. Adama Barrow, for that is the name of the 'President-elect' of the Gambia was not anymore a very clear favourite over Jammeh, the runner-up.

This prompted Jammeh to take to the television waves of Gambia to annul the election, the results and his concession.

Drama. Typical of dictators.

Not long after, the public intellectuals came on Facebook. Jammeh is a dictator, they said. He is preparing a civil war in Gambia, they said. Their choruses were echoed by the international community. All those voices were merged into one: Jammeh had to do the right thing, step down for Barrow.

The way the international community and everyone has rushed to slam Jammeh would make you think it is a clear cut issue. But, personally, I think it is not as clear cut.

It is easy to fault Jammeh, more because he is a dictator; but I hold that Jammeh is not to be faulted.

If anything, the people to be faulted are the members of the Electoral Commission in Gambia who presided over the election. The callousness with which they conducted their voter tabulation is the one that has led the Gambia to where it is.

Jammeh was accepting defeat on the supposition that he was accepting defeat in a free and fair election. But was the election free and fair? I do not think so with the revelations and confessions made by the Gambian EC that they were on the wrong on vote tabulation.

That, the mistake they made at tabulation, has ripped the whole process apart. It has created room for doubts, fears and mistrust of the whole electoral process. No dictator, surely, would accept defeat in such an election. And, not just because he is a dictator but because he is human.

It needs a greater sense of statesmanship to accept the result in such a flawed election. And, Jammeh, we all know is nowhere to being near that honour. Even if he had graciously accepted such a flawed result, we know we would never have had him in the same regard as the statesmen of this world -- or the continent. He has such a dark record that could not be washed away by a simple peaceful transition of power.

I was lucky, for a stint, to have worked in an electoral support organisation. Any issue that deals with elections, to politicians, is sensitive.

We were advancing causes on electoral reforms but one could feel the mistrust from political players. To them, everything to do with election is a potential live wire, with the propensity to set the whole nation ablaze.

I do not think that is only the case in Malawi. It must be, also, in Gambia.

Considering the sensitivity of such a process, if there is anybody to be blamed in the whole Gambia fiasco, it is the Electoral Commission and the lackadaisical approach with which they did to the election.

It is easy to blame dictatorship, yes, but dictatorship usually starts and flourishes under the support of weaker institutions. In this case, Jammeh's dictatorship has been urged on by the weaker institution that is the EC.

Maybe when we move beyond faulting personalities, and start faulting institutions, can we then expect a healthy democracy. This, the case in Gambia, presents us with a better place for that: the faulting of institutions.      

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

The hate that hate produced: the John Chilembwe story

1915 : a middle-aged man in his mid-forties stands amongst a group of his loyal followers. They are about 200. Perhaps, it is a chilly rainy night with the silence of a graveyard surrounding the church. “The white man has sat on us for so long,” declares the tall man with obviously a mild temper. “We need to do something, we need to act. We must send him packing from our land.” Possibly, the men listening to him shake their heads in unison. Others are yet to comprehend what is driving the man of God in front of them for they have known him as a quiet man for a long time. Thus, the story of John Chilembwe’s rebellion begins, in the January of 1915, years long before the wind of freedom and change begins to sweep in the 1960s. Many years before the bells of freedom begin to ring on the African continent. John Chilembwe, writes Robert I. Rotberg in a 2005 Harvard Magazine article, was not a radical man such that nobody could expect him to stage a rebellion. He appeared

What would Jesus do?

The sun was just beginning to burn the shores of the Sea of Galilee. Some weeks before, four fishermen had been fished from their trade by the carpenter’s son to be his disciples. They were now with him. Sitting on the shores of the sea they had always regarded as a home. Their past, forgotten; hope erected in the future. Jesus, for that was the name of the son of the carpenter whom the church had denounced, was busy preaching to his congregation. His voice was small, his frame was little – almost frail. The cloth he had used to wrap his body in was dirty such that in within his congregation you could hear some little whispers of people wondering what made this man believe he was the son of God and not just Joseph, the carpenter. His voice had no charisma. It lacked that magic and fire that John the Baptist (now in prison) had had in those days when he had baptized people in this very same sea, calling them of the wicked generation, calling them to turn away from their sins

DNA's feminism

The song that placed DNA on a pedestal, Mukandipepesele , was not – at least in gender relations – ambivalent. It was clear. It was a song that portrayed the world of men: a world in which they make mistakes that leave a trail of hurt – unintentionally; and, thereafter, they seek to make things right – with little success most times.   Now, he has returned. This time, his album is called Dziko la amuna . In recent years, an album has never been ambiguous as the 13 track album that DNA has released. The literal translation of Dziko la amuna is twofold: one, it is a world for males; two, like in the song that introduced him on the local music scene, it is a world of males – that invisible yet occupied space. In the song that introduces the album, Odala , there is little that relates to the album title. It is, however, in the second song that DNA takes his audience through the world of males. A world in which value is based on the monetary possessions of a man. Not his intention