African Presidents manipulating their country’s constitution to allow themselves more time in power is nothing new. Several African countries have experienced an erosion in their democratic electoral process over the last few decades. Various responses to these power-grabbing tactics have been witnessed, ranging from coups to protests.
In recent years, the new tactic seems to display African presidents’ awareness that they cannot hold on to power violently. Unleashing militia and police violence during election seasons is producing anger in their nations and calls for them to step down. So, the new tactic is to behave as though law will be abided by while secretly strategizing one’s way into a third term as President.
Contemporaneous Cases
Recent examples of this include Democratic Republic of Congo, Zambia, and Zimbabwe. Zimbabwe’s current President, Emmerson Mnangagwa, came into power through a coup in 2017. Prior to this, Zimbabwe’s 2013 constitution stated that a President would be limited to two five-year terms in office, after which they would need to step down from power and handover to a successor. An election took place in 2018 and Mnangagwa officially became President of Zimbabwe. He was re-elected in 2023, and when speculation of his third term gained prominence, he declared himself a constitutionalist, intent on following the law. However, talks to extend his term from 2028 to 2030 began, and the constitution was amended to allow this despite citizens resistance towards it, witnessed in extensive talks opposing this manipulative legal move. After Bill No. 3 was finalised, ZANU PF began lobbying for a third term for the President.
The Zambian election took place in August this year, mired by a lack of transparency and a number of alleged violent incidents against the opposition candidate and his supporters. President Hakainde Hichilema won the election, securing his second term as President. Immediately after this, speculation over a third term began. Like Zimbabwe, Zambia’s constitution limits Presidents to two five-year terms.
The Democratic Republic of Congo erupted into protest in September this year over proposed constitutional amendments to allow President Felix Tshisekedi to serve for a third term. Their next election is set for 2028, as would have been the case in Zimbabwe before Bill No. 3 was finalised. However, the population remains opposed to this, insisting that the democratic process be followed.
Meanwhile, other countries continue have long standing Presidents, many of whom have lost support owing to reasons such as poor governance and old age. Cameroon’s President Paul Biya’s rulership in absentia has drawn significant criticism in recent months, with his treatment of his country like a holiday home sparking conversation about his successors. This is further fuelled by speculation of his sons following his footsteps, as well as his refusal to name a Vice President. Uganda’s President Yoweri Museveni has been in power for 40 years. The 82 year old shows no signs of stepping down and has had a history of suppressing his opposition candidates, most recently, Bobi Wine. His son, Muhoozi Kainerugaba, is widely considered his successor. Equatorial Guinea’s Teodoro Obiang Nguema Mbasogo has been in power for 45 years, while Republic of Congos’ Denis Sassou Nguesso has been President for 28. Egypt’s President Abdel Fattah Al-Sisi secured his third term in 2023. A constitutional amendment allowed him to extend his term from four years to six. However, he claims he will step down in 2030.
Some African Presidents reside over their countries for extended periods for complex reasons. Eritrea’s Isaias Afwerki, for example, has been in power for thirty-three years and rules a country struggling with security issues. While one might encourage Eritrea to become democratic and abolish its one-party system, the limitations to creating an electoral system at the same time as a war become apparent. Eritrea is also faced with competing international interests owing to its position in the Red Sea meaning a one-party system may be preferable to maintain order and national interests. In Rwanda, President Paul Kagame has been credited with rebuilding his country after the genocide. Rwanda has remained stable and has become a development success story despite its struggles. Continuity might be preferred in such a situation as well, with countries preferring a leader with the same ideas and same plans to complete their long term development projects.
However, the fact remains that, in the future, Africa needs to move towards a more democratic environment. This does not mean they need to follow the western model, or change their systems. Having locally produced succession plans can avoid domestic tension while maintaining political interests.
Proposed Alternatives
In countries like Zambia where elections are usually safe and successful, the issue of third terms is unlikely to become a permanent feature. However, it should be strongly encouraged that a candidate step down and allow for a successor to take over, even if the party is to remain in power for a third term. The issue here is personality cults and unfair power grabbing by a single person rather than the effectiveness of a parties policies and projects.
Similarly, in Zimbabwe, ZANU PF has remained in power for 46 years, ranging of a total lack of opposition, to claims that opposition parties were working with foreign powers to destabilise the country. Many attempts have been made to encourage the entire party to come out of power, with historic displeasure in Mugabe’s leadership as well as the behaviour of other ministers and cadres of the party at the time. Corruption scandals and political violence had been witnessed throughout the time that the late Morgan Tsvangirai opposed Mugabe. His successor, Nelson Chamisa, was not as well loved, but produced a feeling of hope in young people, seeking to have a young president after decades of being ruled by an old man. Feelings of stagnancy have been expressed by some youth with no sight of a return to democracy.
In situations like this where it is not just a person but a party holding on to power, it may be wise to then compel individuals specifically to step down. If claims that foreign powers are using opposition to destabilise a country, then this only explains why an opposition should not rule. It does not explain why one person should remain in power for more than a decade. Hence, compelling such leaders to be clear on who will rule after the 10th year is a sensible alternative for stubborn parties. This should mean that such parties are responsible for the planning of a successor as soon as the second term term begins. Such plans hold the party accountable, while also compelling them to think ahead beyond their own desire for unquestioned power. It eliminates the argument that one person is needed so that plans can be followed through, as this means that the party needs to teach its Vice President to follow through with the plan properly. This also allows for newer iterations of the same idea to be produced as a younger candidate is likely to be elected after every two terms.
This can also apply in one-party states like Eritrea. If it is accepted that the same party will remain in power, then plans for the party to have succession plans is key to maintaining stability and avoiding political upheaval when such leaders die suddenly. This also means that one-party states can benefit from fresh ideas. This is not an alien idea, as China, which has been a one-party state since 1947, has chosen new leader every two or three terms and therefore progressed rapidly as ideas constantly evolve and modernise. China has become a global superpower through this methodical planning, so it is not unrealistic to imagine an African country becoming powerful while having a one-party state, rather than being plagued by instability due to one person holding on to power unreasonably.
Such political moves could avoid situations such as coups, as the army will no longer have a justification for overthrowing a leader who holds on to power unreasonably. It can also avoid foreign intervention, as countries like the USA will no longer have the excuse to assassinate or overthrow a leader who has been in power for a prolonged period. Succession plans produce national unity as there will be less to debate and clash over when countries are aware of their political future and how their rulers plan to maintain their stability and democracy for the future.
Conclusion
In summary, succession plans not only hold leaders accountable, but ensure that the citizens of each country live in a safe political environment. Youth in DRC and Zambia have shown clear tentativeness to follow Zimbabwe’s path. While this is concentrated in Southern Africa, this sends a message across the continent that the tides are turning and the youth will no longer tolerate the political problems their parents and grandparents faced.
It compels African leaders to adopt modern approaches to developmental issues which have plagued the continent for decades. Africa is often stereotyped at being in the stone ages while the rest of the world progresses. However, development success stories like Rwanda, and democratic success stories like Botswana, Mauritius and Seychelles proves that Africans are capable of ruling themselves in a conducive manner. The problem is not a so-called “African mentality” that blocks the continent from moving forward, the issue is, rather, a failure to see alternatives to a local problem, or trying to apply Western standards to African problems where the situations and environments are simply not the same.
Reimagining African leadership landscapes as a having potential for change rather than remaining as unmoving rocks pushes us into a situation where we not only demand better standards from our leaders, but pave the way for the current and next generations to realise their potential, rather than holding on to the dreams of the aged and retired. However, it is still important to recognise that Africa still faces problems and that a perfect democratic situation with regularly elections is not universally applicable and that room must be made for unconventional changes to the political landscape. Therefore, succession plans are the simplest and most conflict avoidant way to begin to solve Africa’s democratic issues rather than forcing the continent to comply with Western standards of election. Succession plans have been tried and tested elsewhere with a reasonable success rate. If others can transform their countries, so can Africa redeem itself and pave the way for a bright future for its youth.
