By Umaru Fofana
For some reason only two political parties have governed Sierra Leone since independence in 1961 – excepting the army which seized power in the 1960s and in the 1990s. Unlike most other countries in West Africa, the country is still bogged down with the party that led it to independence and its offshoot: the Sierra Leone People’s Party and the All People’s Congress respectively.
Liberia, Guinea, The Gambia, Ghana, Nigeria, Ivory Coast, Mali, etc have all done away with the parties that existed at independence or were formed around that time. This has not taken away tribalism from the countries’ politics but has brought about the realisation in politicians that the people will not remain clung onto parties and self-serving politicians like their very existence, if only to serve the purpose of mono-ethnic politics.
Or may be that – existence – is what politics has come to mean in Sierra Leone. So much so that those at the helm of the parties have been impervious to reforms that can bring them up to the present day reality. Consequently they have not bothered to make certain clauses of their parties’ constitutions consistent with the national constitution.
Our political parties – without exception – are in dire need of internal democratisation. Even the new ones are in democracy deficit. And until we get them to get it right we are wasting our time in thinking that democracy can advance a step forward. I will expatiate on that shortly, but for now this:
How can you have a country whose constitution prescribes that to become president you must be elected, yet you have a political party that ascribes to SELECTION or even IMPOSITION as a way of choosing its standard bearer? And I think it will make a lot of sense to have political parties have a second ballot at their primaries if no presidential aspirant gets more than half the votes cast, as is prescribed in the national constitution for a presidential election. It is a no-brainer that it is preferable if a political party’s constitution was not inconsistent with the national constitution. If should be made obligatory for all parties to hold proper primaries to build up to a national delegates’ conference. Even the much hailed National Grand Coalition (NGC) did not meet this minimum benchmark. Never mind the Coalition for Change (C4) – the two new kids on the block. This is why political parties have fallen on the way side – they’ve been formed by and for certain individuals. Otherwise how does anyone explain the fact that the UNPP which arguably won the presidential election in 1996 would disappear just five years down the line.
It all boils down to personalising or tribalising political parties instead of institutionalising them. Undemocratic parties cannot provide democratic leaders. And our parties must know this and change, or we all suffer and die because the incubator of democracy is suffocated. A party in power today enjoys the status quo, and when it leaves power it feels the edge of the sword. And they quickly forget AGAIN when they return to power. A vicious circle of greed that sadly politics has come to represent in our society!
All of that begs the question why do we have the Political Parties Registration Commission (PPRC). A provision of the 1991 constitution that came into being after the war, it has been struggling even for its relevance. So much so that one gets the feeling that no government wants to strengthen it for fear it may come to bite and even beat them and force them into civilised democracy.
Before the 2012 election that saw Ernest Bai Koroma re-elected as president, the PPRC proposed some amendments to the Act that set it up to make it more relevant and effective. Among other provisions, they wanted a name change. You may wonder what is in the name. A lot in this case! As it currently is, strictly speaking the PPRC cannot regulate political parties – it can only register them. So it wanted and still does want to be called the Political Parties Registration and Regulation Commission (PPRRC) which can enable it sanction political parties.
So in the case of campaign financing for example which is well covered in the act, the commission cannot take action against a political party that breaches that provision. So what we witness during our elections is that so many outside interests get involved – by giving huge amounts of cash – and naturally get paid back after election albeit often at the expense of the masses. The PPRC is powerless to act.
So on the eve of the 2012 election, the amendment was thrown out by parliament on the clay-legged grounds that the amendments would hinge on or even conflict with entrenched clauses in the constitution. Balderdash!
Now we have a PPRC which over the years spent more time reigning in on the opposition to conform, while allowing the ruling party to behave as they desired. Remember the back and forth in the then opposition SLPP party while the ruling APC had a field day? I wouldn’t be surprised if the same thing happened between the PPRC and the now opposition APC party who were allowed to do whatever they wanted, while the SLPP were now allowed to do as wished.
A presidential candidate who rose through the ranks on a solid democratic foundation is bound to be democratic if elected president. Conversely one that passed through a dark tunnel would not wish for daylight in governance. If they became a candidate through manipulation, they would ineluctably run the country manipulatively if elected.
I leave you with Article 6 of the Spanish constitution which says: “Political parties are the expression of political pluralism; they contribute to the formation and expression of the will of the people and are a fundamental instrument for political participation. Their creation and the exercise of their activities are free in so far as they respect the Constitution and the law. Their international structure and operation must be democratic”. I say no more. See you next time.
(c) 2019 Politico Online
