Address at the Joint Colloquium on Democracy in Pluralistic Societies
Date: 26 Jan 2000
Speaker: Secretary-General Chief Emeka Anyaoku
Location: Yaoundé, Cameroon
I cannot say that there are many Commonwealth countries that I have visited so many times over such a short period. Undoubtedly, this has something to do with the warmth and hospitality that my colleagues and I have always received from the Government and people of Cameroon, but it also reflects the active role that Cameroon plays in Commonwealth and international affairs.
Cameroon has often been referred to as Africa in miniature, partly because of its ethnic, cultural, religious and linguistic diversity. Cameroon is also a valued and influential member of both the Commonwealth and La Francophonie. It is therefore both symbolic and fitting that this joint Commonwealth/ La Francophonie colloquium on Democracy in Pluralistic Societies should take place here.
Mr President, I thank you and your Government for agreeing to host this event, and you Mr Government Delegate for welcoming us with open arms to your lively and beautiful city.
The idea for this joint colloquium arose from a conversation I had with Dr Boutros-Ghali, following a Commonwealth/UNESCO symposium, which looked at ways of managing diversity and encouraging constructive pluralism. The conclusion from that meeting was that pluralism can and should be a positive phenomenon. It should be celebrated as a measure of the diversity and wealth of a society. Yet, unfortunately, in many circumstances, it is allowed to be a cause of marginalisation, exclusion and oppression.
Dr Boutros-Ghali and I were well aware of the consequences of marginalisation and exclusion in societies that have fallen victim to divisive pluralism.
We also knew that its effects were not confined to a single type of state: you can find divided societies in both rich and poor states; in the affluent north as well as the developing south, in mature democracies, as well as in those where democracy is in the process of construction. Our two organisations have within them examples of both positive and divisive pluralism.
We can all see only too clearly the challenge of building positive pluralism. In the world today, there are some 190 countries, which contain over 5,000 ethnic groups. For example, in sub-Saharan Africa there are 1,300 language groups in 42 countries and India alone has 300 languages and numerous castes and religions. In fact, only a few states can claim to be ethnically homogeneous but, even those that are, may still contain differences that are capable of exacerbating communal tensions.
And the international community knows the cost of divisive pluralism. A recent study found that between 1989 and 1992, of the 82 conflicts taking place in the world, 79 were intra-state and only three were between states. In the last four years alone, we have seen the tragic consequences of divisive pluralism in places like Bosnia, Kosovo, Rwanda, Burundi, Sri Lanka, Sudan, Algeria and Indonesia.
Managing pluralism calls for much more than political tokenism. It requires a serious endeavour on the part of each society to employ its differences in building a joint community of interest: a moral and political community based on valuing each other's religion, culture or tradition so as to achieve a genuine mutuality of tolerance and a celebration of diversity.
In examining how to ensure stability and progress in pluralistic societies, I am convinced that we need to focus sharply on that single, overarching feature of governance, which shapes the settlement between a state and its citizens - democracy.
This is not to say that there is a single model of democracy. Democracy does not come in one universal format for progress which, once adopted, is capable of resolving differences equitably and creating a framework for meeting our varying needs for recognition and self-advancement.
But democracy, in whatever form at it comes, must have essential ingredients which, in my view, should be universal.
These essentials are:
the right of people to freely and periodically choose their government;
basic freedoms including those of association and expression;
the rule of law and independence of the judiciary;
the right to hold the executive publicly accountable.
Precisely how these key ingredients are to be applied may differ, depending on national circumstances.
This was recognised by Commonwealth Heads of Government when they adopted their Harare Declaration in 1991.
The Declaration was a collective recognition of the need for protecting and promoting the fundamental political values of the Commonwealth. These core values - democracy and democratic processes; just and honest government, a respect for fundamental human rights and equality for all - have become an integral part of Commonwealth thinking.
The Harare Declaration was both visionary and pragmatic: visionary, in that it foreshadowed the newly emerging international consensus in favour of human rights and good governance; and pragmatic in recognising that democratic traditions differed from country to country.
One only has to see how different the British Westminster format is to the French system, and how different they both are in practice to the United States model. Yet all are based on a similar set of democratic values.
Therein lies the key to progress and freedom.
Modern democracy also faces another challenge - the emergence of globalisation. We now live in a world economy where enormous volumes of' capital ebb and flow seemingly arbitrarily; where 'boutique industries' and 'silicon valleys' are increasingly replacing old methods of production and manufacture; and where the growth in telecommunication on the one hand gives us access to knowledge and information while, on the other, leads us to face the reality of inequality on a daily basis.
Globalisation has led to heightened perceptions of the chasm that separates the rich and the poor; of the few who are able to be part of the 'knowledge economy' and the billions who are not; of the fact that the turnover of corporations is several times the annual product of many countries; and of glaring injustices such as where a refugee child in Sierra Leone sees that the cost of a life in his village is worth less than the cost of a life in Kosovo.
Of course, it does not have to be like this. Globalisation too, has a positive face. It is capable of delivering unparalleled growth and economic prosperity through trade; of expanding scientific knowledge to enhance all our lives through, new technologies and products; of transferring 'value added' with minimal capital investment in new industries; and of creating new forms of employment and enterprise.
For policy-makers everywhere, managing pluralism democratically [and] in the face of growing globalisation, presents a special challenge. Let me here turn to how Africa is facing that challenge.
In the last decade, Commonwealth Africa has undergone much restructuring. It has developed its democratic systems; instituted new or revised constitutions; established election management bodies; formed political parties; and embraced multi-party democratic elections as the norm. Of the 29 official Commonwealth observer missions that I have sent to elections in various parts of the Commonwealth, no less than 19 have been in Commonwealth Africa.
As we know, however, it takes more than a constitution or ballot boxes to secure an effective and lasting democracy. Critical to the consolidation of democracy, in every part of the world, is the exercise of responsible power by politicians of all political parties.
Under a democratic order, the ruling party derives its mandate from success at the ballot box and, for a defined term, has the exclusive responsibility for governing the country within limits that are constitutionally defined. But electoral majorities come and go, and no ruling party, however popular at the time, can plausibly see itself as the sole conscience, the sole embodiment, of the will of the people.
Neither can the ruling party afford to be seen to be gathering all power and influence within the state to itself, thereby denying a legitimate role to the opposition.
By the same token, it is the duty of the opposition to undertake its role: to question, to scrutinise, and to probe the policies of the Government in a context of overall loyalty to the interests of the state. It will be a disloyal opposition that encourages unconstitutionalism and fans actions that weaken democracy in order to win popular support.
A sense of the obligations and benefits that all share as stakeholders in a society is vital for the establishment of trust which is an essential ingredient in managing pluralism successfully. An important component of building such trust can be the electoral system and the manner of governance adopted by the pluralistic state concerned. Would the electoral system produce a government, which, while respecting the majoritarian principle, excludes representation from significant minorities in society? And would the manner of governance-adopted end up as no more than an exercise in dominance by the majority and in pursuit of their exclusive interests?
I recognise that, entrenching democratic practice cannot be achieved overnight. It has to become a frame of mind - a way of thinking. In Africa, we still have some way to go in reaching that goal.
The problems of course have been significant: among them, the colonial legacy of arbitrary national boundaries drawn in disregard of the existence of natural communities; the ever persistent competition for the control of state power among the different tribes or sections of the society; and severe economic deprivation.
And there is the additional problem of the re-emergence of military rule. We have recently seen military coups in Pakistan (a Commonwealth member) and the Côte d'Ivoire (a member of La Francophonie).
We in the Commonwealth have come to regard the overthrow of an elected government through force of arms as an unacceptable violation of the fundamental principle of our association.
This is why we moved so quickly to send a. signal to Pakistan that, whatever the justification, democratic governments must be removed by legitimate means and, on that basis, we were not prepared to allow its military government to remain in the councils of the Commonwealth.
I was glad to see that similar developments in the Côte d'Ivoire had provoked a strong response from the Secretary-General of La Francophonie.
We can therefore together send the strongest signal to all would-be coup-makers that they will find no support in either of our organisations, and that the promise of democracy is not to be extinguished by force of arms.
I believe that the Commonwealth and La Francophonie are capable of achieving many of our shared objectives through co-operation. With the population of the Commonwealth at 1.7 billion people and that of La Francophonie at 500 million, we together cover over a third of the world and our combined tally of' member states represents 105 countries in the UN system.
It is therefore fitting that we have come together as co-sponsors of this joint colloquium on democracy in pluralistic societies - a subject where our combined experience has much to contribute. Besides, our joint presence here today is symbolically important to show our desire to be a unifying force in this continent which has been so marked by the divisions of history.
I will now conclude with some thoughts on this colloquium. The subjects we will touch on here - the characteristics of pluralistic societies; methods of governance; institutional structures; the creation of civil society - are all those that have been subject to much academic scrutiny. What is now needed is a bridge between the world of ideas and the hard reality of decision-making.
I am confident that a colloquium of this calibre will do more than deliver a worthy academic exercise. Looking around us, I see many experts from around the world - academics and practitioners with a wealth of accumulated experience. It is my hope that your deliberations will identify practical measures that can be adopted by policy-makers in dealing with these complexities.
Your Excellencies, we know this is an important task that deals with one of the key challenges facing humanity. If we are able to point the way forward here over the next few days, this colloquium will have left a lasting legacy.
24-26 January 2000
Yaoundé, Camero
delicious
digg
reddit
facebook
stumbleupon
News feeds