• Institutional development
• Institution building
• Parliamentary development
• Electoral systems & reforms
• Political parties
• Informal institutions
• Media

Institutional development

This document is composed of three papers: the contributions on Namibia and Botswana look at the extent to which these countries are able to set standards in terms of well functioning democracies; the paper on Zimbabwe argues that the African Peer Review Mechanism (APRM) should be enforced as a way out of the current impasse.

The first chapter evaluates whether Namibia’s institutions of national and sub-national governance comply with the principles of quality governance as well as with the demands of time and of new developments.The paper finds:

• Namibia is characterised by a working multi-party state with a weak opposition, not only in terms of numbers but also in terms of its contribution to a vibrant political debate
• Namibia is a dominant party state, and can easily become too regulative, too normative, too directive and too self-assured and absolute
• it is imperative that sufficient checks and balances of power are in place and are successfully working as control mechanisms, which is not the case in Namibia
  

The paper concludes that quality of governance will determine the success of any government. A government and its governance cannot be successful without capacitating people and without offering them an opportunity to take on co-responsibility through co-governance.

The second chapter examines the erosion of Botswana’s tradition of consultation in major decision making, using the government’s controversial decision to locate the country’s envisaged second university in a different place to that recommended through consultation. The paper makes several conclusions, including:

• · the culture of consultation has declined or been supplanted by representative democracy
• · the government decision was not based on tribalism and regionalism as some observers conclude, but was a case of realpolitik for the purpose of survival of the ruling Botswana Democratic Party (BDP)
• · such a move is likely to backfire since history has shown that the university is the breeding ground for opposition activists and support in Botswana

The stance taken by the government reinforces an already growing perception that its efforts at consulting the citizenry on critical issues of national concern lack commitment and the citizenry could lose confidence in the government’s consultative machinery on the grounds that it simply serves the rulers’ hidden agenda.

The third chapter discusses the quest for a peer review for Zimbabwe in the context of APRM. The paper highlights four compelling reasons for a peer review:

• accession to APRM will shake off the stigma of being seen as an absurdity in SADC and an outpost of tyranny at international level
• the APRM participatory process is ideal for an all-stakeholders review of the governance structure of Zimbabwe
• Zimbabwe needs a credible process to re-engage citizens, the majority of whom have disengaged from the state
• Zimbabwe desperately needs external aid to finance a turn-around programme of action and those countries that have acceded to APRM are well favoured by donors

The paper concludes that it would be a great achievement for the AU and its agencies to demonstrate to the whole world that it is able to take serious measures to institutionalise democracy and sustainable development in malfunctioning states like Zimbabwe.

• Full text of document
• Publisher details
• Send to a friend