EDITORIAL:Africa Union must rid itself of Corrupt Dictators and their Sons

By Lord Aikins Adusei

At the inauguration in 2002, the Africa Union (AU) set itself ambitious goals "to promote peace, security, and stability on the continent; to promote democratic principles and institutions, popular participation and good governance; to promote and protect human and peoples' rights. It also aims to establish the necessary conditions which enable the continent to play its rightful role in the global economy and in international negotiations and to promote co-operation in all fields of human activity (in order) to raise the living standards of African peoples. The ultimate goal of the AU is to establish a United States of Africa" Source:http://www.africa-union.org

There are many issues that may derail the AU from achieving the goals it has set itself however the most critical of them has to do with the very kind of people who constitute the AU leadership. For example the current Chairman of AU in the person of Gaddafi has been a dictator since 1969. For forty years he has ruled his country with iron hand jailing opposition members, restricting freedom of speech, assembly and limiting political activities in attempt to stay in power for good. He frowns on any idea about democracy and has consistently argued that democracy is foreign and unAfrican.

Museveni of Uganda came to power in 1986 and has since ruled his country as his personal estate. In 2003 he had the presidential term limit set by the constitution abrogated so he could be president for life. Obiang Nguema of Equatorial Guinea came to power in 1979 after overthrowing his own uncle and executing him. In that same year Dos Santos of Angola took over power and begun to rule. Both are still president today. In Burkina Faso Blaise Campore has been in power since 1987 and is still adamant about leaving office. Congo Brazzaville´s Denis Sassou Nguesso has used every means just to stay in power. Since 1982 Paul Biya of Cameroon has won every election is his oil rich but economically impoverished country and likewise Hosni Mubarak of Egypt who since 1981 has been president of the North African country. Ben Ali of Tunisia has resisted every attempt to leave office changing the country´s constitution just to stay in power.

Gaddafi has never been elected in his forty year reign as the head of state of Libya. Omar Al Bashir has not been elected. There are no words to describe Mamadou Tandja of Niger and Yahyah Jammeh of the Gambia. Iddris Derby of Chad and Isaias Afewerki of Eritrea have spent more than a decade in power and there is no sign that they are prepared to leave. Ethipoia´s Meles Zenawi is still prime minister after 18 years and it is a waste of time to talk about the tactics he has used to stay in power.

The last time I checked more than half of the over fifty countries that make up the AU had leaders who are unelected and deeply corrupt. Even the rest who claim to have been elected more than half have had their elections questioned by both local and international election observers. Yar´Dua of Nigeria, Ali Bongo of Gabon, Denis Sassou Nguesso, and Mugabe and the elections that brought them into power have all been questioned. The resignation of the head of the electoral commission in Mauritania just immediately after election confirmed what everyone was saying privately at the time.

Thus from Libya where Gaddafi has managed to misrule his country for forty years, to Zimbabwe where the old man still thinks of himself as one that Zimbabwe cannot do without; to Uganda where Museveni and his family are anything but thieves; to Gambia where Jammeh continue to ridicule himself and that of his country with his treatment of HIV/AIDS sufferers; to Kenya where Mwai Kibaki refused to leave office after a humiliating defeat and had to resort to violence to keep himself in power; to Nigeria where corruption and embezzlement have produced a failed state; to Niger where Mamadou Tandja has staged a coup against his own government in an effort to rule for life; to Angola, Cameroon, Equatorial Guinea and Congo where a cabal of corrupt leaders preside over the looting of their countries´ oil revenues; to Ethiopia where Meles Zenawi has turned his country into a prison; to Eritrea where Isaias Afewerki has turned from a freedom fighter to a brutal despot and to Gabon, Togo and DRC where children of former corrupt dictators have assumed the mantle of leadership apparently to continue where their parents left off (including the systematic looting and mismanagement of their countries´ treasuries) there is no sign that continent is going to achieve the lofty goals it has set itself. One needs not look far to see how their incompetence and monumental failures have contributed to the demise of the continent, the countries swimming in rich natural resources yet the people lacking the basic necessities of life.

There are two main characteristics of these leaders which directly go to affect the achievement of the goals set by the AU. First they are all corrupt dictators who are unwilling to relinquish power despite their colossal failures. And second none of the leaders seem to have any good political, economic or social record. Their countries are deeply soaked in poverty. The key question is how is the AU going to promote peace, security, and stability on a continent full of unrepented dictators and how is the AU going to promote democratic principles, popular participation and good governance when the people at the helm of affairs on the continent consistently kick against those laudable ideas?

There is no point arguing that there are strong and direct link between dictatorship in Africa and the high level of insecurity and instability seen all over the continent. We need not to look too far to see how dictatorship, corruption and unfair distribution of resources (poverty) led to many civil wars, coups and counter-coups in the 1970s, 1980s, 1990s and even this 21st century. The logic is that if people who are poor cannot democratically change their leaders they will have no other alternative but to use force and violence to bring about a change of government hence the many conflicts and wars seen in Africa.

This logic of violent removal of governments was correctly echoed by President Julius Nyerere who warned against the consequences of over staying in power and stealing resources meant for the people:

"We spoke and acted as if, given the opportunity for self-government, we would quickly create utopias. Instead injustice, even tyranny, is rampant…We can try to carve for ourselves an unfair share of the wealth of the society. But the cost to us, as well as to our fellow citizens, will be very high. It will be high not only in terms of satisfactions forgone, but also in terms of our own security and well-being." Julius Kambarage Nyerere, from his book Uhuru na Maendeleo (Freedom and Development), 1973.

The consequences of a continent dominated by tyrants as echoed by Nyerere was given a boost by Obama in a speech to Ghana´s Parliament in which he linked tyranny and corruption in Africa to the high level of poverty, instability and conflict:

"But history offers a clear verdict: governments that respect the will of their own people are more prosperous, more stable and more successful than governments that do not. Democracy is about more than holding elections - it's also about what happens between them. Repression takes many forms, and too many nations are plagued by problems that condemn their people to poverty. No country is going to create wealth if its leaders exploit the economy to enrich themselves, or police can be bought off by drug traffickers. No business wants to invest in a place where the government skims 20 percent off the top, or the head of the port authority is corrupt. No person wants to live in a society where the rule of law gives way to the rule of brutality and bribery. That is not democracy that is tyranny, and now is the time for it to end". He added: "Make no mistake: history is on the side of these brave Africans and not with those who use coups or change Constitutions to stay in power. Africa doesn't need strongmen, it needs strong institutions". People everywhere should have the right to start a business or get an education without paying bribe. We have a responsibility to support those who act responsibly and to isolate those who don't" Source: http://www.ghana.gov.gh.11 July 2009.

As Nyerere and Obama correctly hypothesized you can only expect wars, instabilities and conflicts in an environment where tyrants and dictators dominate. Hence one may not be surprised to hear that Somalia is burning, or the Lord´s Resistance Army is heading to Kampala, or rebels have encircled N´Djamena the Chadian capital, or the Great Lake Region is in turmoil they are the consequences of dictatorial rule, bad governance, nepotism, cronyism and rampant corruption. The high number of dictators making up the AU leadership, their unwillingness to allow democracy to work will only continue to breed instability, conflicts and wars and hence will defeat the AU´s key goal of promoting peace, security, and stability upon which all the other goals depend.

Where is the AU heading with these dictators still in office? Can any progress be made towards Africa´s unity and can the United States of Africa be realised with all these tyrants in power? The answer is a big no. The fact is that if the AU is ever going to transform itself into a respected democratic institution made up of democratic member countries then it must as a necessity purge itself of these tyrants and their children who are holding the organisation in bondage.

The question is how can the AU rid itself of these selfish leaders? There are a number of things the AU can and must do.

It must first and foremost abrogate the automatic membership. Throughout the world all serious bodies have constitutions and charters that set out the benchmarks that would-be members must attain before they are admitted. This contrasts the AU where membership is automatic no matter the record of a government or the means by which it came to power. This system is not only wrong but it is also self defeating. It is one of the reasons why AU is full of corrupt dictators and tyrants. It is this automatic membership that has ensured that Mugabe could wrought violence against his people and still has the audacity to attend AU meetings. It is this automatic membership that has ensured that Nguema, Museveni, Nguesso, Santos, Afewerki, Tandja, Kibaki, al-Bashir, Mubarak, Gaddafi, Campore, Biya and Jammeh can do whatever they like in their respective countries and still attend AU meetings. The automatic membership must be abolished and benchmarks set for would-be members to attain before being accepted. That is AU must be made up of serious minded countries committed to democracy, rule of law, protection of human rights, peace, stability and fight the against corruption and poverty. Members must demonstrate their commitment to democracy, rule of law, and fight against corruption and poverty before being admitted as is seen in the EU. This must change if the AU is ever going to be a United States of Africa. In the European Union where membership is earned all the 27 members have democratic governments that respect human rights. Romania and other Eastern European nations whose governments were corrupt were forced to reform before they were admitted into the EU and we know how hard Turkey has tried to become a member without success despite the huge internal reforms it has carried out over the last couple of years. We cannot make the AU a body of no standards AU must have standards and benchmarks if it is ever going to eliminate dictatorship from its ranks.

The effort by some leaders to transform the AU into a Commission with more powers to conduct business on behalf of the continent has met fierce resistance and continues to be thwarted by these old corrupt guards who see every reform as a threat to their power and corrupt lifestyle. These tyrants continue to torpedo every effort of AU to move from its current position as a talking shop into serious solution solving body. Mugabe and his cohorts and their sons are holding the AU in bondage through their hold on power. They continue to resist every attempt to transform the AU into a useful body. These corrupt dictators have and still continue to frustrate the good intentions of the body but the AU must not capitulate but work to adopt and implement resolutions that will force these tyrants to improve human rights, empower women, fight corruption and poverty, promote democracy and ultimately give up power.

Furthermore, to prevent the AU from being dominated by tyrants and their children the Africa Union must insist that leaders who are not democratically elected by their citizens cannot become a Chair of the body. If a leader of a country wants to be the Chair of the august body then he/she must subject himself/herself to rigours of elections in his country. Such simple demands by the AU will make these tyrants consider their positions carefully. They will be ashamed to request for a chairmanship position when they know they are not democratically elected. The current situation in which Gaddafi a lifelong dictator chairs the body is not only unacceptable but is also an insult to all the democratically minded people in Africa.

Additionally to boost its position to rid itself of these tyrants the AU must lobby the democratically elected leaders like Senegal´s Wade, Ian Khama of Botswana, Ghana´s Atta Mills, Zuma of South Africa, Benin´s Yayi Boni and others to persuade these tyrants to adopt democracy. The tyrants must be persuaded to stand down and allow free and fair elections to be held. Any tyrant who refuses to stand down should be suspended until free and fair elections are held. The AU is not going to make any progress if the leaders are pampered to do what they want. AU leaders must recognise that Africa cannot harness her strategic importance in this new global order unless there are democratic and institutional reform that will rid the continent of absolute dictators and their corrupt machinery which for so long a time has been responsible for the misery and high levels of poverty seen throughout Africa.

Again the AU should push for genuine democracy in its member countries like the one in Ghana. I am not talking about just elections I am talking about free and fair elections that give opposition equal access to state media and resources. The situation whereby incumbent governments monopolise state resources and employ all manner of tactics to win power as happened in Equatorial Guinea, Congo, and Zimbabwe is a recipe for disaster.

In addition, the AU must insist that children of former dictators cannot automatically replace them when they leave office. The current situation where children of former dictators have been installed as presidents in sham elections is not only an insult to people of these countries but is an indictment on the credibility of AU as a body. It is unacceptable for Faure Eyadema of Togo, Joseph Kabila of DR Congo and Gabon Ali Bongo of Gabon to replace their fathers as presidents. These precedents and developments seem to have encouraged Gaddafi, Museveni and Hosni Mubarak who are busy grooming their children to replace them. This trend is not only dangerous but it is also a recipe for conflict and instability and the earlier the AU sends a clear message to these leaders the better. These dictators and their children must be prevented from establishing dynasties in Africa.

Also the current practice where a country is only suspended when there is coup is not fair to the citizens of Zimbabwe, Equatorial Guinea, Libya, Niger, Gambia, and Eritrea who suffer human right abuses on the daily basis. AU should not suspend only countries where coups have taken place but must also suspend all countries whose leaders engage in human rights abuses and corrupt practices that push their citizens into poverty and economic annihilation. If a country is suspended because a coup has taken place, is it also not morally right to suspend a country when its leaders loot their resources, and engage in human rights violation? If citizens of a country like Libya are denied a say on how their leaders are elected or how their country is governed is it not enough to suspend that country until the citizens are given the opportunity to determine who should lead them?

Again the AU must make sure its institutions are headquartered in countries that respect human rights and rule of law, eschew corruption and is a democracy. I cannot imagine Gambia being made the headquarters of the AU´s Human Right Commission when Jammeh is busy killing journalists in cold blood and has threatened to annihilate people who freely express their views in that country. It is very shocking that the AU seems to be pampering these leaders. I can hardly comprehend why and how a nation whose leader is known to be abusing the rights of its citizens is made the headquarters of a human right commission. AU has got to be really serious if it wants the rest of the world to take it serious. Therefore certain criteria must be met before headquarters are cited in a country and the AU must not hesitate to remove the headquarters when the situation there changes. Ethiopian leaders must demonstrate their commitment to democracy, rule of law, justice and equality before the law. The eroding of democratic values in that country must be of much concern to the AU. I strongly believe Ethiopia should loose its headquarters status if the leaders continue on the path of dictatorship. This will send a clear message to the rest of the leaders that dictatorship and human rights abuse will not be tolerated in the new AU.

Moreover, AU must compile annual reports about human rights, corruption, and abuse of power in all member countries and sanction those countries found to be in breach of AU Charter. If we are ever going to rid ourselves of the dictators and the rampant corruption and abuse of power associated with their regimes then the AU must act and apply sanctions.

AU should engage the people of Africa in its programmes. Very few people know what goes on at the AU headquarters and we are not going to build a successful Africa when the people who make up the continent are excluded from its activities. Universities and other institutions of higher learning must be involved in AU´s activities to sensitise the people and to build grassroot support in member countries. Therefore AU Chapters must be established across Africa: in universities, colleges and high schools to make the people aware of what AU is doing. AU must organise symposia and debates and other competitions in schools. The advantage is that since the students are going to be the future leaders and policy makers in Africa their involvement will help inculcate and build support for AU. To add to this AU must publish news letters and distribute them to schools, civil society organisations, government departments and other institutions to create awareness. Since we are in the information age internet, e-mail and other information distribution methods must be employed to deliver information about the AU to the people. Editors of both print and electronic media must be encouraged to cover AU activities and events.

The AU must also involve the intellectuals, diplomats and technocrats in Africa. President Julius Nyerere the illustrious son of Africa says:

"...intellectuals have a special contribution to make to the development of our nation, and to Africa. And I am asking that their knowledge, and the greater understanding that they should possess, should be used for the benefit of the society of which we are all members." Julius Kambarage Nyerere, from his book Uhuru na Maendeleo (Freedom and Development), 1973.

In short the people of Africa of whom the AU belong must be involved, but this involvement of the people will come to nothing if the dictators are not persuaded to hang off their glove.

Above all, the tyrants themselves must acknowledge that it is in their own interest to give up power and allow democracy and rule of law to prevail. The cost of holding on to power may be costly not only in terms of satisfactions forgone, but also in terms of their own security and well-being.

If the prosperity and stability Obama spoke about and the contribution of intellectuals Nyerere mentioned above as well as the AU´s own long term goal of a United States of Africa are to be realised and have effect in Africa then the AU must at any cost rid itself of the corrupt dictators and their children who are lining up to take their position. You cannot ask intellectuals to play a role while the dictators are undermining their effort.

The AU will not be able to reverse decades of low per capita income, low productivity, slow pace of social and economic development, poor state of infrastructures and weak economies if steps are not taken to ensure that democracy is established on the continent, and that all leaders subject themselves to the rigours of election, fight corruption and poverty and promote peace, stability and development.

If the AU is ever going to realise any of the goals it has set itself then it must as a matter of necessity purge itself of the dictators and their sons.

By Lord Aikins Adusei

Political Activist and Anti-Corruption Campaigner.

Ghana's Oil, Will the People Benefit?

Much has been said about Ghana's oil and the revenue that is supposed to flow into her coffers by 2010. The politicians and their associates are excited that Ghana will soon be swimming in oil money. But the people are not enthused as they know the history of oil rich countries in Africa. They are also not excited because years of gold, diamond, cocoa, timber and other mineral exports has not brought any benefit to them rather they are still wallowing in chronic poverty with no access to water, healthcare, education, electricity with transport and other infrastructures crumbling. The question is will the people benefit from the oil if they could not benefit from gold and other minerals? Is there any guarantee that the people will benefit from the oil proceeds when it begins to flow in 2010?

For decades several billions dollars has been realised from the sale of gold, diamond, cocoa, timber, bauxite and many more but Ghanaians still wallow in deep poverty without electricity, water, proper housing infrastructure, sanitation. The only people who seem to have benefited from the revenue from these valuable assets are the corrupt politicians, their associates and the multinational corporations and they are the very people who are likely to benefit from the oil. The only 'benefit' the people will have as is the case of gold and diamond, will be paying for the cost of environmental degradation, pollution of soil, rivers, wells, creeks that will render many farmers and fishermen jobless.

Already effort by the government to get Ghanaians to participate in forums to discuss how the proceeds from oil should be used to help the poor has been hijacked by the politicians and the so called elite with the people reduced to mere spectators.

What makes the situation troubling is the fact that Ghana is not the first country in Africa to produce oil or gas. Nigeria, Angola, Gabon, Equatorial Guinea, Libya and Algeria have been oil producing and exporting nations for decades. The reality is that none of these countries has been able to use the huge oil revenue to better the lives of their peoples with poverty and corruption sitting deep in those countries.

How will Ghana be different from her neighbours is still unclear but her own history of corruption in the mineral, timber, cocoa sectors and the history of her neighbours give an idea as to where she might go.

In Nigeria for example 80 million people or even more still live on less than a dollar a day despite nation receiving over $400 billion from the sale of oil. All that Nigerian leaders can show for the billions they have received are the deep poverty, violence crimes, kidnappings, instability in oil producing areas, massive official corruption seen at all levels of government both federal and state as well as environmental degradation and pollution of rivers, wells, creeks and the soil which has rendered millions of farmers and fishermen jobless. The events in Nigeria in the last 40 years since oil was discovered leave much to be desired. There have been more military rulers in that country than civilians with only one transfer of power from civilian to civilian in her 49 years of independence. The stories of Sani Abacha and that of the evil genius Babangida and how they amassed wealth at the expense of the country still resonate around the globe anytime corruption is mentioned.

The oil producing and exporting countries of Angola, Gabon, Algeria, Libya and Equatorial Guinea are not any better. Millions of people in those countries live in abject poverty and in squalor conditions while the leaders live in opulence with luxury villas and numerous fat bank accounts in France, Switzerland, United States, Britain and their colonies of save haven centres in Caymans Islands, Jersey and the rest.

The opulence among the leadership and the unparallel levels of poverty among the population in those countries, prompted a French judge to investigate how these leaders came to acquire the properties that they and families enjoy. The investigation follows lawsuits by the French branch of anti-corruption group Transparency International and rights lobby Sherpa Association. The presidents’ families and their associates have been accused of using government funds to buy luxury homes in Paris and luxury car models such as Bugatti Veyron, Ferrari and Maserati.

They also hold fat bank accounts in France suspected to be theft proceeds, mainly from oil resources. Mr Bongo of Gabon who died yesterday, “the king of bling”, and Mr Obiang of Equatorial Guinea are believed to have used their countries’ huge oil resources to enrich themselves, their families and friends. Sherpa claims the three leaders are using relatives as nominees to hide valuable real estate and cars in France as well as offshore bank accounts with huge volumes of loot.

President Bongo is suspected to be hiding 59 apartments, 70 bank accounts and nine luxury cars while Mr Denis Sassou-Nguesso of Congo is believed to be concealing 18 apartments and holding 112 bank accounts and several luxury vehicles all bought from money stolen from the oil revenues. Police investigations in 2007 revealed that Mr Obiang Nguema of Equatorial Guinea has an apartment and eight luxury cars in France. Only God knows how much money sits in those accounts. A US Senate investigation in 1997 found the spending habit of these corrupt leaders to be very astonishing. The report established that Mr Bongo and his family spend £55million a year, mainly from oil proceeds.

The Independent Newspaper writes of Angola: “As the threat of starvation sweeps across war-ravaged Angola, its secretive government is coming under pressure to explain how billions of pounds in oil revenues have gone missing. A fresh humanitarian crisis has hit Angola since fighting with UNITA rebels ended. Three million people are on the edge of famine. Angola's President, Eduardo dos Santos, has appealed for international help, pleading that his government is broke. But a swelling chorus of diplomats, campaigners and angry Angolans is asking why he is unable to pay his way out of trouble when his government earns billions of pounds from a burgeoning oil exploration business that will soon rival that of Nigeria as Africa's largest. And while only a tiny amount is spent on helping suffering Angolans, every year a large chunk of the profits – between 20 and 35 per cent – mysteriously disappears. Last year, for example, the International Monetary Fund estimated the oil revenues at £2bn, of which £750m simply vanished. Campaigners such as the UK advocacy group Global Witness call it wholesale state robbery. They say that Angola's vast oil profits are disappearing into the pockets of the Futungo – a secret, powerful élite linked to President Dos Santos – on a scale similar to the excesses of the notorious kleptocrat Mobutu Sese Seko of Zaire.” Source: the independent.co.uk

According to the Sunday Times, quoting a police probe report, the Bongos bought a mansion worth 18.8 million euros in Paris in 2007. The 21,528-square-foot home is in Rue de la Baume, near the Elysée Palace, the home of French president Nicolas Sarkozy. A Luxembourg-based company that bought the home is owned by two of Bongo’s children, Omar, 13, and Yacine, 16, and his late wife Edith.

So far there is nothing to show that the 1.4 million Gabonese have benefited from the oil. In fact they have become worse off as the following 2008 Human Rights Report by US State Department shows: “The country's human rights record remained poor. The following human rights problems were reported: limited ability of citizens to change their government; use of excessive force, including torture toward prisoners and detainees; harsh prison conditions; arbitrary arrest and detention; an inefficient judiciary susceptible to government influence; restrictions on the right to privacy; restrictions on freedom of speech, press, association, and movement; harassment of refugees; widespread government corruption; violence and societal discrimination against women, persons with HIV/AIDS, and noncitizen Africans; trafficking in persons, particularly children; and forced labour and child labour.”

The same poor human rights were recorded in the report for Angola, Equatorial Guinea and Nigeria with citizens subjected to torture, killings and inhumane treatment by the leaders. The fear is that like her neighbours in the region there is a high probability that the flow of oil money into Ghana may encourage unscrupulous army officers and unelected Ghanaian leaders to take over the administration of the nation by force and suppress all dissents as happened during gold and diamond discoveries where army officers seized power overnight, stole as much as they could and mismanaged what remained of their loot with Ghanaians and the economy ultimately paying for their reckless corrupt actions. This is what has sadly happened in Equatorial Guinea, Gabon, Angola, Libya and Congo which are all been ruled by corrupt dictators with over 150 years of reign between the five of them.

Apart from corruption, there is the added danger that the flow of oil revenue will lead to the collapse of other vital sectors of the economy such as agriculture and tourism due to over dependence on oil revenue. Nigeria for example used to be major cocoa and other cash crop producing hub but the discovery of oil has led to the collapse of that vital industry. Such a dependence as in Gabon has had very devastating consequences in terms of food prices, jobs and revenue losses. What is more, these countries remain crude oil producers with little diversification, a practice that makes them more vulnerable to the shocks that are associated with the oil market and explains why they continue to remain poor despite years of oil export.

Worst of it all, it is the role of multinational corporations who exploit the oil in these poor countries that leave much to be desired. These corporations acting in their own selfish interest have a history of paying bribes to corrupt leaders to secure concessions. They also have a history of helping the corrupt leaders to steal and hide their loot in foreign banks. In 2003 Elf executives admitted paying Omar Bongo $50 million a year through Swiss banks in order to win concessions. The Elf executives, who were themselves tried for corruption, also admitted paying huge bribes to Cameroon’s Paul Biya and his counterparts in Congo, Angola and Equatorial Guinea. In 2004 Royal Dutch Shell of Netherlands admitted fuelling corruption, poverty and violence in Nigeria and toady June 9, 2009 has agreed to pay $15.5 million to the family of Ken Saro-Wiwa and the Ogoni eight for her complicity in their execution by the corrupt Abacha regime. http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2009/jun/08/nigeria-usa. Their secretive and non-transparent dealings with corrupt governments are no secrete. In Angola, Western oil companies such as BP, Shell, ExxonMobil and Chevron stand accused of refusing to reveal their annual payments to the Angolan government a charge similar to those in Nigeria, Gabon, Congo, Algeria and E. Guinea.

What is worrying is that these are the very companies that are lining up to exploit Ghana’s oil and nothing shows that they will operate differently in the country.

Also the lasting environmental damage the corporations will cause Ghana and the ultimate price Ghanaians will pay for the destruction of the ecosystem and the pollution of their soils, wells, lakes, lagoons, rivers as well as the destruction of fish stock that have made environmentalists to worry and as a result gearing up for a long battle. Already the global environmental destruction caused by these corporations is estimated at $1.8 trillion with oil and mining countries in Africa sharing about a third of that. In Nigeria as is in many other places Shell has refused to clean up oil spills that have polluted rivers, lakes, lagoons and soil with the people enduring the health hazards posed by it. Anyone who visits the Niger Delta Region will find it hard to come to terms with the poverty, deprivation, collapsed infrastructures, environmental destruction and the billions of dollars Shell and her counterparts make in that country annually. The only thing that has kept millions of poverty stricken people surviving is a belief in God and a hope of a better life after death.

This has been the history of oil rich countries in Africa and guided by its own history of corruption in the mineral, cocoa and timber sectors there is no doubt that without a strong monitoring and strong accountability system backed by fiscal prudence, Ghana will join her neighbours in the chorus of poverty, violence, pollution and corruption. Already the Ghana National Petroleum Corporation has been embroiled in corruption and mismanagement allegations with its former head Tsatsu Tsikata who was sent to jail on the grounds of corruption and mismanagement.

However, Ghana can avoid the calamities of her neighbours by learning from the Gulf States notably Bahrain, Qatar, United Arab Emirates, Saudi Arabia where revenue from oil has changed the once barren and poverty stricken nations into prosperous ones. Even though there is a huge gap between the rulers and the people and corruption, nepotism and tyrants exist, during the last three decades these countries have been able to use revenue from oil to build their infrastructures, develop their industries and diversify their economies by focussing on technology, agriculture, tourism and financial products that is banking with success. More can also be learnt from Norway where sound fiscal management coupled with sound environmental practices has made her an icon in the world of oil production.

Instead of embezzling it or using it for white elephant projects, government of Ghana should use the proceeds to build durable roads, schools, hospitals, irrigation, sanitation, high speed train network linking all parts of the country, provide housing for low income groups and invest heavily in technology and agriculture so as to avoid being over dependence on oil revenue.

Ghana should put in place proper laws that will make the exploitation of the oil sustainable, environmentally and eco-friendly. Therefore environmental impact assessment should be conducted for every project linked to the oil operation.

The laws must also seek to ensure that oil money will not line up the pockets of the elite to the detriment of the people and the economy. Therefore, the utilisation of the proceeds must be transparent and democratic. The best way to do this is to actively involve all stakeholders including the people, the government, opposition parties, NGOs, CBOs, Church and all interest groups. Record must be kept by every institution that receives oil money and the release of those records to anyone with a genuine interest must be made mandatory.

All oil companies directly or indirectly involved in the drilling, marketing, distribution or export of oil must be made by law to publish what they pay. They must also indicate whether they have paid bribe to officials within or outside the country. Every ministry or department which receives oil money for project must publish in detail how it utilised it. The law must propose for stiffer penalties for officials and companies who will misconduct themselves.

Therefore, the law must take care of how the oil should be managed; how contracts should be awarded, how the proceeds should be utilised and how the environment should be protected. A fund could be created where all proceeds from the oil could go into with parliament given the sole power to determine and certify how money could be drawn from the fund. Therefore the proceeds should be removed at all cost from the control of the executive branch of government.

A financial court should be created to investigate and prosecute entities who may try to enrich themselves overnight. Government must hire experienced tax experts and fraud detectives to scrutinise activities of multinational corporations who may want to import their shady deals of theft, tax evasion, bribery and false accounting into the country. Government must do this as a necessity even if that means hiring foreign experts.

The media should play its role as the fourth organ of government any law that will hinder their operation should be repealed. More investigative journalists should be employed by the media houses and their capacities build up to reflect the challenges of the upcoming battle. The position of independent democratic and anti-corruption watchdogs such as Serious Fraud Office, Commission on Human Rights and Administrative Justice should be strengthened and provided with all the resources they need to function effectively.

With this Ghana could be praised again for leading the continent in the right direction as her democratic credential shows.

By Lord Aikins Adusei

*The Author is a political activist, anti-corruption campaigner and a columnist for American Chronicle. He blogs at www.ghanapundit.blogspot.com

Multinational Corporations:The New Colonizers in Africa

Before the end of the first colonialism African nations were properties of their colonial masters who did what they could to rape the continent of whatever resource they deem good for the development of their counties and citizens in Europe. Out of nowhere and without any consultation with the people in the continent the Europeans met and divided the continent amongst themselves in what has been termed the scramble for Africa.

Through the scramble France, Britain, Belgium, Spain, Portugal, Germany and Italy all went on a looting spree raping Africa of her resources without putting any of the proceeds back for the development of the continent.

When US President Franklin D. Roosevelt visited Gambia on January 13th 1943 he was so appalled by the conditions of Gambians so much so that he made this lamentation,

“It's the most horrible thing I have ever seen in my life..... The natives are five thousand years back of us....The British have been there for two hundred years - for every dollar that the British have put into Gambia, they have taken out ten. It's just plain exploitation of those people”.

“I must tell Churchill what I found out about his British Gambia today”. “This morning, at about eight-thirty, we drove through Bathurst to the airfield.” “The natives were just getting to work. In rags…glum-looking.…They told us the natives would look happier around noontime, when the sun should have burned off the dew and the chill. I was told the prevailing wages for these men was one and nine. One shilling nine pence. Less than fifty cents.” “An hour?” Elliott asked. “A day! Fifty cents a day! Besides which, they’re given a half-cup of rice. Dirt. Disease. Very high mortality rate. I asked. Life expectancy—you’d never guess what it is. Twenty-six years. Those people are treated worse than the livestock. Their cattle live longer!” US President Franklin D. Roosevelt 1943. Source: The American Heritage.

And the exploitation was not peculiar to only Gambia. Gold Coast (now Ghana), Nigeria, Ivory Coast, Zaire (now DRC), Namibia, South Africa, Congo and Angola all suffered from the same colonial exploitation and underinvestment.

For almost three hundred years the Europeans who were supposedly devout Christians and civilised, irresponsibly looted Africa’s resources and made slaves of the natives without developing the colonies. When the local population protested against the exploitation without a reciprocal investment they were brutally crashed as happened in Congo (now DRC) where King Leopold II of Belgium looted the resources, made slaves, and killed close to ten million of the Congolese.

In 1904 to 1907 the Germans led by Gen. Lotha Von Trotha also committed their first genocide of the 20th Century by killing 90% of the Herero and the Namaqua people of South West Africa (now Namibia) when the people protested against the exploitation of their resources. And the sad stories of South Africa, Zimbabwe, Algeria, Namibia, Kenya and Angola where people were denied access to land, citizenship and basic rights and had to take up arms before they were granted independence are in many history books.

We know how Nelson Mandela (now a hero in Europe) and a number of freedom fighters endured long prison sentences, torture, exile and deaths in the hands of their devout Christians and civilised European colonisers. The prevailling idea in Europe was that through the scramble for Africa they had bought Africa and had power to do as they wish hence the rape, torture, genocide and the mass killings. While Europeans became richer Africans became poorer.

For example with the loot of Congo’s resources, enslavement, amputations of hands and 10 million deaths, Brussels which now doubles as the capital of the European Union and Belgium was built. When they were given their ‘freedom’ the independent fathers inherited nothing more than empty treasuries. They realised that after more than 300 hundred years of colonial rule their colonial masters have left them with nothing, no money and no infrastructure. This bad situation and their eagerness to improve the lives of their peoples forced them to turn to the IMF and World Bank for assistance and when they went lo and behold the colonial masters were there waiting for them.

The colonisers used their majority votes to dictate to the Bank and IMF on how these former colonies should be helped. (Of the 185 members that make up the IMF, six colonial masters and their allies made up of the United States, Germany, Japan, United Kingdom, France, Italy control 42% of the votes). The colonial masters dictated to the IMF and the Bank that for Africans to be helped, they must open their economies to allow European corporations in. This underscores the numerous conditionalities that are associated with loans from these institutions. The conditionalities are nothing more than a smokescreen designed to ensure that Europeans never loose their grip on the resources of the colonies. Some of the conditionalities include instituting secrets memorandums of agreement, subsidies to foreign corporations and massive tax concessions (such as income tax, usage fees, property tax) -the primary source of revenue for “export-oriented” developing countries.

The sad thing is that Africans thought independence would give them respite to develop but this was never to be as the colonial masters used their corporations and intelligence services to deliver vengeance against the people: encouraging and financing civil wars; unashamedly polluting rivers, wells and the soil through their oil and mineral activities; understating their profits and falsifying profit documents; undervaluing their goods, smuggling and theft; false invoicing and non-payment of taxes; kickback to public officials and bribery; over pricing of projects; providing save havens for the looted funds; promoting the sale of guns; overthrowing African leaders; supporting dictatorships; and assassinating those who disagree with them. We know those who instigated the overthrow of Dr. Nkrumah and the tragic assassination of Patrice Lumumba.And we know the support the West gave Mobutu and other tyrants in Africa.In addition to these, the corporations who were forced onto Africa by IMF the Bank, US and Europe have been implicated in a number of cases for corrupting African leaders and stealing trillions of dollars worth of resources.

Global Financial Integrity says, “$900-billion is secreted each year from underdeveloped economies, with an estimated $11.5 trillion currently stashed in havens. More than one quarter of these hubs belong to the UK, while Switzerland washes one-third of global capital flight”. Out of this $900b that is secreted away yearly $150b comes from Africa.

“The idea that Switzerland has a clean economy is a joke; it is a dirt-driven economy,” says Richard Murphy, director of Tax Research LLP. The Swiss Bankers Association claims that four-fifths of the nation supports banking secrecy, which reveals a society deeply embedded in a culture of impunity and exploitation.

The fact is that those who steal must find a way to hide their loot and Switzerland provide the ideal environment for such crimes to take place. And it is not Switzerland alone that does not have a clean economy. Britain, France, Germany, Luxembourg can all be described as vampires.

In an article by Khadija Sharife entitled Capital Flight: Gingerbread Havens, Cannibalised Economies she wrote: “The IMF and World Bank tax policies towards the developing world is very lethal especially where the poor are now caught in tax brackets, courtesy of the IMF and World Bank’s structural adjustment programmes (SAP), instituting policies ranging from tax holidays to the privatisation of state services, carving out huge slices of natural capital at corporate auctions. Africa has collectively lost more than $600-billion in capital flight, excluding other mechanisms of flight such as ecological debt (globally estimated at a potential $1.8-trillion per annum), the cost of liberalised trade (just under $300-billion)”. Source:http://www.greenleft.au. Thus with the support and collusion of IMF and the Bank these corporations are paying close to nothing for the resources they take from Africa.

Africa has been labelled the world’s most corrupt region because multinational internal mispricing makes up 60% of capital outflow, with corporations declaring profits in tax havens, as opposed to the country of performance. Corporations declare about 40% of their profits in African countries where they operate and siphon the rest into their save havens accounts in order to avoid paying tax which could be used to eradicate poverty. And this is not the end of the corruption and the day light robbery story.

We know how Elf operated as an arm of the French state supporting dictators, looting the resources and establishing flush fund which was used to bribe African leaders so they will look the other way while Elf loot Africa’s oil and gas.

Nicholas Shaxson, author of Poisoned Wells, wrote of the subject: “Magistrates discovered the money from Elf’s African operations supplied bribes to support French commercial, military and diplomatic goals around the world. In exchange, French troops protected compliant African dictators.” This explains why there are so many corrupt dictators in French-Speaking Africa than anywhere in Africa. Omar Bongo, Eyadema, Mobutu, Lansana Conte, Felix Houphouet-Boigny, Blaise Campore, Sassou Nguesso and Iddriss Deby are some of the compliant leaders who were or have been protected by France.

And what happened to the non-compliant African leaders? Your guess is mine. Please find time to read more about Bob Denard, a French who made a career as a mercenary overthrowing African leaders. French author Jean Guisner says: “Denard did nothing that was contrary to French interests - and he allegedly acted in close cooperation with French Intelligence Services”.

In the Elf corruption case Andre Tarallo the real boss of Elf-Afrique' “Told the court in June 2003 that annual cash transfers totalling about £10m were made to Omar Bongo, Gabon's president, while other huge sums were paid to leaders in Angola, Cameroon and Congo-Brazzaville. The multi-million dollar payments were partly paid to ensure the African leaders' continued allegiance to France. In return for protection and sweeteners from Elf's coffers, France used Gabon as a base for military and espionage activities in West Africa”. Source: Guardian, Nov. 2003.

The real deal is that Elf, Shell BP and their counterparts in Europe and America pay bribes to African leaders to induce them to look the other way while they plunder the resources. Ask any Gabonese or Congolese whether they have benefited from the oil and diamonds and the answer will be a big no. What is so tragic is that the people know they have oil, diamonds and see these companies processing them everyday yet do not know where it goes, who buys them and where the proceeds go.

In UK former Prime Minister Tony Blair was accused of selling a device with an ageing technology to Tanzania. “The UK sold a useless air traffic control system to Tanzania in 2001 in a scandalous and squalid deal, the House of Commons was told.” Clare Short an MP said, “The deal was useless and hostile to the interests of Tanzania”. She said, “Barclays Bank had colluded with the government by loaning Tanzania the money, but lying to the World Bank about the type and size of the loan.” Ms Short said “Tanzania could have paid much less for the same equipment which cost them £28m”. Shadow international development secretary Andrew Mitchell said “BAE had used ageing technology and said the system was not adequate and too expensive.” Source: BBCNEWS, Wednesday, 31 January 2007.

And it all happened after they had bought Tanzania officials to look the other way while a device with an ageing technology was sold to the country. BAE colluded with Tony Blair and Barclays Bank to sell a useless commodity at exorbitant price to Tanzania. This is nothing but a continuation of the contempt and impunity in which Europeans have treated Africa before, during and after colonialism. BAE is indirectly saying that Africans do not deserve the latest technology even if they pay cat throat price. It is also a message to Africans that they must develop their own technology and not rely on the generosity of others.

It is no secrete that Shell Oil Company colluded with the corrupt Abacha regime to steal oil, pollute the rivers, wells, creeks and soil and render millions of famers and fishermen in the Niger Delta jobless. Shell “admitted that it inadvertently fed conflict, poverty and corruption through its oil activities in the country. Nigeria contributes to about 10% of Shell's global production and is home to some of its most promising reserves, yet the country is steeped in poverty and conflict”. Source: bbcnews 18 June 2004. So Shell in addition to stealing Nigeria’s oil and polluting rivers, wells and soils also promote corruption, poverty and conflict.

In DRC about five million people have died in a war whose motive is to satisfy the West insatiable appetite for high quality but low price cell phones, laptop computers, play-stations, jewels, diamond and coltan. And who cares about five million deaths in Paris, London, Brussels, Berlin, New York or Washington anyway? Why has the DRC war not ended? Who supplies the rebels their arms and for what and who buys the minerals they mine illegally? Why have Uganda and Rwanda forces crossed several times into DRC? And whose agenda are they pursuing? A report by the UN says it all.

The panel calls for financial restrictions to be levied on 54 individuals and 29 companies it said are involved in the plunder, including four Belgian diamond companies and the Belgian company George Forrest, which is partnered with the U.S.-based OM Group. The individuals named include Rwandan army Chief of Staff James Kabarebe, Congolese Minister of the Presidency Augustin Katumba Mwanke, Ugandan army Chief of Staff James Kazini and Zimbabwean Parliament Speaker Emmerson Mnangagwa, BBC Online reports (Oct. 21, 2002).

The report also accused 85 South African, European and U.S. multinational corporations – including Anglo American, Barclays Bank, Bayer, De Beers and Cabot Corporation of violating the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development's ethical guidelines on conflict zones.

The guidelines they were accused of violating relate to arming Rwanda, Uganda and Congolese rebels and profiting from their illegal looting of Congo’s minerals as the following excerpt shows: “Despite the recent withdrawal of most foreign forces, the exploitation of Congo's resources continues, the report says, with elite networks and criminal groups tied to the military forces of Rwanda, Uganda and Zimbabwe benefiting from micro-conflicts in the D.R.C.” "The elite networks derive financial benefit through a variety of criminal activities, including theft, embezzlement, diversion of public funds, undervaluation of goods, smuggling, false invoicing, non-payment of taxes, kickback to public officials and bribery," and added that such pillaging is responsible for much of the death and malnutrition in eastern D.R.C.” Source:http://www.unwire.org.

And so while millions die in Africa with the complicity of the corporations, Europe and North American citizens with all their hypocrisy enjoy lavish holidays. And when Africans try to reach Europe the citizens say rain in on them, Europe is full no more immigrants. Where do the queens and kings in Europe get the diamonds and gold that they use to show off? Is it not from the blood diamonds from Congo, Sierra Leone and conflict zones in Africa that are smuggled out and sold in Brussels, Zurich, London and New York?

And this is not their only crime. We know how Halliburton established $180m flush fund and bought Nigeria officials to secure a $10b oil contract. We know Acre International of Canada paid $260,000 to secure $8b dam contract in Lesotho. We know Swiss, British, German and French economies and banking institutions have made fortunes by providing save havens for funds looted by Sani Abacha, Mobutu, Omar Bongo, Lansana Conte, Arap Moi and the rest of the dictators in Africa. And it is no secrete Belgium is angry with DRC government for inviting China into the country because they are privy to and beneficiary of all the day light robberies going on in the resource rich but economically impoverished country.

Africans know that these corporations are making fortunes but see no benefits from these fortunes. Ghanaians know gold and diamond are being mined at Obuasi and Akwatia but they do not know where it goes, who buys them and where the proceeds go and the same is true of the oil in Nigeria, Gabon, Cameroon, Algeria, Angola and Equatorial Guinea and as for DRC a nation with one-third of world’s natural resources the little I say the better.

This corruption and day light robbery is what has been polished as globalisation which Europe, America, IMF and the Bank want Africa and the third world to join. My question is whose globalisation? Is it the globalisation that only those with blue eyes enjoy or what? If the answer is no then the IMF and the Bank should explain why the world is divided between the “whites haves and the coloured have-nots”. Is this not the second colonialism dressed as globalisation?

Dr. Susan Hawley says it all: “Multinational corporations’ corrupt practices affect the South (i.e. Africa, Asia and Latin America) in many ways. They undermine development and exacerbate inequality and poverty. They disadvantage smaller domestic firms and transfer money that could be put towards poverty eradication into the hands of the rich. They distort decision-making in favour of projects that benefit the few rather than the many. They also increase debt that benefit the company, not the country; bypass local democratic processes; damage the environment; circumvent legislation; and promote weapons sales. Bribes put up the prices of projects. When these projects are paid for with money borrowed internationally, bribery adds to a country's external debt. Ordinary people end up paying this back through cuts in spending on health, education and public services. Often they also have to pay by shouldering the long-term burdens of projects that do not benefit them and which they never requested”. Source: The Corner House, June 2000.

And in all these, the Western media have kept silence. They have not raise a voice against what their governments, intelligence services, corporations and businessmen are doing to Africans. They prefer instead to criticise China for courting the same African leaders Euro-Americans have been protecting for decades. A clear hypocrisy isn’t it? These are the same criticisms King Leopold II levelled against the Arabs who were competing with him for resources and slaves in Congo and we know what Leopold, the 19th century Hitler did in DRC in the name of Christianity and civilisation.

The meaning of their criticism is that with China as a fierce competitor, Africans now have a choice not to go to the World Bank and IMF for conditional loans. They also have a choice to either give their resources to Chinese companies or European and American cartels. It may be the beginning of the end of colonialism, slavery, instabilities, dictatorships, corruption and all the ills that Europeans and Americans have been exporting to Africa. It may be the beginning where Africa’s resources will be bought and payment made to the people and a new chapter that will usher in Africa’s development and close the poverty gap from five thousand years to perhaps one-hundred as observed by Franklin D. Roosevelt.

By Lord Aikins Adusei 

The Author is a Political Activist and Anti-Corruption Campaigner. 

He blogs at http://www.iloveafrica2.blogspot.com and can be contacted at politicalthinker1@yahoo.com

Fulfilling Africa’s Economic Dreams

Part I: Africa Must Achieve Political Stability First Before Economic Development

The greatest threat to the economic development of Africa is political instability. Political stability is the foundation of economic development; it is the magic bullet and the magnet that holds all other activities in a country together; and provides the avenue for investment, job creation and raise the necessary revenue needed to fight poverty and diseases. It is an indisputable fact that Economic development thrives well in atmosphere of peace and tranquillity. 

However, since independence many of the countries in Africa have known only wars, coups, dictatorships and violence. This cycle of wars, coups, dictatorships, violence and political instabilities has established the continent as a no go area for investors. Africa scores badly among investors as a place where the risk of investment is high and where businesses are done contrary to norm. Such concerns are largely informed by the anarchy in Somalia, Democratic Republic of Congo, Sudan, Northern Uganda, Guinea, Mauritania and the dictatorships in Gabon, Libya, Equatorial Guinea, Zimbabwe and many other places. 

It is also informed by the violence in Kenya, Zimbabwe, Nigeria and the tensions in Ivory Coast. Such instabilities, wars and election violence seen in Africa are the major reasons why investors shy away from the continent; capital flight is high and the confidence of those with investment in the continent continue to wane. At the moment about $150b leave the continent annually due in part to the political stalemate in Sudan, Chad, DRC, Niger Delta, Northern Uganda, and the Great Lake Region. 

The chaos, confusion and violence that always characterise elections create an atmosphere that only work to isolate the continent as attractive destination for investment and are the reasons why the continent is seen as the most expensive place in the world to do business. All these instabilities do not help the image of the continent and is a factor why endemic poverty is rampant.

Therefore to ensure investor confidence, promote and sustain economic development and growth, there should be a complete political stability in the whole of the continent. Without political stability it is impossible to achieve any economic development and fight poverty. It is a fact that you cannot rebuild your house while it is still in flames and so African countries must ensure they get stability first before talking about economic development. How do you construct roads in war zones or build a factory in militarised territories? Political stability is the homework African countries must do in order to achieve economic development. Establishing political stability through a democratic process is the magic bullet needed to defeat poverty. 

To achieve political stability there area a number of tough decisions Africans must make. First the leadership in the continent must realise that instability anywhere is a threat to stability everywhere. Therefore they must work together to eliminate all those factors that act as magnet to engineer and fuel the instabilities. 

Tyrannical rule, civil wars, and military adventurism must give way to democratic governance. It is the only way that can bring stability to the continent and prepare her for the economic development that has eluded her peoples for decades. Political stability is highly compatible with economic development; a disruption of one is a disruption of the other. Democratic governance is the political path Africa must chart if it is to prepare itself for economic development and social progress in this 21st Century and beyond. 

This therefore calls for an end to dictatorial rule in all parts of the continent especially in Gabon, Equatorial Guinea, Angola, Congo, Libya, Egypt and Zimbabwe where few people, their families and cronies have hijacked their countries and taken the people hostage. 

All undemocratic leaders and tyrants must be made to understand that the days of unchecked power and despotic rule are over. The current situation where Gaddafi, a dictator is calling for a federal Africa is totally unacceptable. The only acceptable way is for all leaders including Gaddafi, Obiang Nguema, and Blaise Campore to make themselves available for free and elections if they wish to serve the people and I mean serve the people not to be served by the people. All leaders in the continent must be reminded that they do not own their countries and the resources in them. The claim by Mugabe that “Zimbabwe is mine” should be condemned unequivocally. 

The stability also calls for an end to all civil conflicts, military interventions and armed rebellious currently seen in Sudan, Uganda, DRC, Guinea, Mauritania, Chad, Nigeria and Ivory Coast. Use must be made of the few Africa role models in the continent like Joachim Chissano, Kofi Annan and Desmond Tutu to mediate to bring an end to the conflicts in Darfur, Somalia, Northern Uganda, DRC and all the troubled parts of the continent. They should also encouraged the dictators and kleptocrats to loose their grip on power; allow free and fair elections and return all the funds they have looted. All parties including individuals and groups with grievances must be encouraged to seek redress from the Africa Court of Justice instead of rushing to take up arms. 

The current state of political unrest in Africa is in nobody’s interest not governments, opposition parties or the people and that is the more reason why democratic reforms must be spearheaded in countries where people have fewer political rights and cannot democratically change their leaders. People must be given the chance to elect their own leaders. 

There should be a level playing field for the ruling governments and opposition parties so as to avoid allegations of vote rigging that are major cause of instabilities and violence in Ivory Coast, Kenya, Zimbabwe and Somalia among others. To ensure this there should be financial support to political parties and all must have unrestricted access the state media. Again election observers must be allowed without any restriction to observe elections and make their own assessments without pressure from any quarters. 

The AU and the sub regional bodies such as ECOWAS, SADC, EADC, COMESA, AMU and ECCA have a major role to play in ensuring the stability. The AU leaders must be reminded that instability anywhere is a threat to stability everywhere. The days where few individuals take over power and do what they like without the AU or sub-regional bodies saying or doing anything must end. Therefore, the Charters of AU and sub regional bodies should be implemented to the letter and all those who violate the charters should be punished severely. All clauses that limit the bodies from criticising or having greater role to play in times of crisis should be removed. The democratic countries in the continent should work closely together and encourage the less democratic ones to adopt reforms with the aim that Africa stands to gain more from being democratic than being under dictatorships. Therefore all nations must be encouraged to ratify and implement the New Partnership for

Africa Development (NEPAD) charter. 

In addition each country should have a constitution that caps or stipulates a fixed term of office for political office holders and that fixed term should be adhered to even if a candidate is a messiah.

The current situation in Algeria and Tunisia where both presidents have changed the constitution in order to run for a third term of office and in Nigeria where Olusegun Obasanjo tried unsuccessfully to run for a third term is very unfortunate for and must be discouraged at all a cost for it is such actions by African rulers that have brought wars, coups and mayhem to however a peaceful people. Such actions only fuel corruption, nepotism, cronyism, abuse of power and mistrust between the ruling and opposition parties and serve as breeding ground for coups, civil unrest and political instabilities.

Even though the number of armed conflicts has gone down compared to a decade ago, the continent is still prone to instabilities and giving such a political climate, it is obvious that political stability will not be possible without an African Military High Command with powers to crisis, emergencies and crash any rebellion, arms insurgence that may show its ugly head in the Africa political scene. The establishment of AMHC should be done on condition that all leaders will submit themselves to the rigour of elections and allow their people to choose whoever they want to lead them without intimidation, threats or whatsoever. 

Tyrannical rule and military regimes are highly incompatible with the establishment AMHC and therefore all effort must be made to ensure that democracy is respected and that leaders are not forced on the people. Already the Southern Africa Development Community has created what they call SADC Brigade and it is beginning to make impact in the region.

The Pan-Africa Parliament should be fully resourced to deal with issues affecting the continent more importantly corruption, poverty, environmental degradation and political instabilities. Laws enacted by parliament must be binding on all members and countries that frown on the laws must be severely sanctioned. 

The Africa Court of Justice must be made the highest in the continent with powers to settle disputes between and within countries. It must be a court of last resort in the continent. Africans cannot build a just society without a strong media and without contribution of civil society organisations. The media, civil society organisations must be allowed to operate freely without fear of intimidation or attack and under no circumstances should a media house, NGO, and CBO be barred from operating in a country. Therefore in Sudan, Zimbabwe, Equatorial Guinea, Guinea and in many other countries where the media and NGOs have been banned governments must be forced by the AU to let them in. 

Western political and business leaders must stop doing business with all the dictators, and coup makers the likes of Bongo, Obiang Nguema, Gaddafi, Mugabe and all those who have used undemocratic means to hold on to power. Sanctions and embargo targeting these leaders (not their people) should be enforced so as to force them to loose their grip on power. Western and Asia defence companies and contractors who illegally and irresponsibly ship arms to the continent to fuel the conflict and create instabilities for their own selfish interests must be identified and barred from doing any business in the continent. 

A democratic Africa free from tyrants, coups, civil wars is the single most important ingredient necessary for attaining economic development because it is an undisputable fact that development thrives in atmosphere of peace and tranquillity not hostilities, instabilities and tyrannical rule. There is no way Gaddafi who doubles as Chairman of AU and head of state of Libya could advice Mugabe or Mwai Kibaki to accept election defeat when he (Gaddafi) has been a dictator for 39 years. There is no way Omar Bongo could advice Obiang Nguema when Bongo is the longest ruling head of state in the world. For Gaddafi and Bongo to offer any genuine advice they must relinquish power and allow free and fair elections to take place. 

Tyrannical rule, civil wars, and military adventurism must give way to democratic governance. It is the only way that can bring stability to the continent and prepare her for the economic development that has eluded her peoples for decades. Political stability is highly compatible with economic development; a disruption of one is a disruption of the other. This is the political path Africa must chart if it is to prepare itself for economic development and social progress in this 21st Century and beyond.

By Lord Aikins Adusei 

The Author is a Political Activist and Anti-Corruption Campaigner