Democracy in Africa is at a crossroads. While regimes do hold elections, many still fail to deliver on their democratic promises. Mebratu Kelecha argues for a non-adversarial form of democracy inspired by Africa's rich Indigenous Gada system, which emphasises inclusivity, consensus-building, and cooperation
Democracy in Africa faces fundamental challenges. Despite varying governance regimes, many countries in the continent share common challenges stemming from the colonial structures imposed upon them. Regimes may hold regular elections, but these often fail to ensure true representation. Power remains concentrated in a small elite that suppresses opposition and dissent. Democracy becomes more a façade than a genuine expression of popular will.
The core problem lies not merely in the inherent flaws of elections, but in the broader concept of democracy. Democracy is a Western export. It emerged in a distinct cultural context and has been forced upon African nations, where it often fails to accommodate the continent's unique social, economic, and political realities. For democracy to function meaningfully, it must actively engage citizens before, during, and after elections. Africa needs a reimagined system, free from colonial legacies, where non-adversarial democracy, rooted in African identity, fosters inclusivity, social cohesion, and participatory governance.
Liberal democratic models are often adversarial. Political parties vie for power, fostering division and sidelining the losers. But what if democracy didn’t have to be about simply winning or losing? What if, instead, it focused on cooperation?
The non-adversarial model of democracy draws inspiration from African Indigenous practices, such as the Gada system, emphasising consensus-building, cooperation, and shared leadership. It presents a new democratic vision — one that prioritises unity over division, cooperation over confrontation, solidarity over polarisation, dialogue over conflict, and mutual respect over distrust. It is built on inclusivity, creating an environment where all voices have value, including those of minority groups. Its emphasis is on shared decision-making and distributed leadership. The people hold their leaders accountable throughout their term of office. And the people can recall those leaders if they fail in their duties. Thus, they ensure that democracy is a living, ongoing process, constantly responsive to the needs of the people.
In a non-adversarial democracy, the electoral system fosters internal cooperation within political parties, while encouraging cooperation between them. Though multiple parties exist, a power rotation mechanism avoids rivalry. Parties fill leadership roles through internal competition, based on merit and collective responsibility. This system ensures periodic shifts in power, and maintains responsiveness to the people's needs, while fostering collaboration and constructive debate within the system.
One-party systems rely on internal factional competition. Non-party systems eliminate party structures altogether. In adversarial multi-party systems, direct competition for power often prevails. By contrast, in non-adversarial multi-party systems, power rotation replaces direct power competition, and encourages internal leadership competition within parties.
In a non-adversarial democracy, the electoral system fosters internal cooperation within political parties, while encouraging cooperation between them
The non-adversarial system operates through a cohort structure comprising the incumbent, incoming, and outgoing cohorts. The incumbent cohort governs, the incoming prepares for governance, and the outgoing transitions into a non-executive advisory role. Rotation ensures that leadership is shared, power distributed equitably, and no single group can monopolise control.
The system also redefines the role of opposition. Rather than opposing the government for political gain, the outgoing cohort provides constructive checks and balances, offering critiques and refining policies without aiming to return to power. This fosters a more collaborative political environment and ensures decisions reflect diverse perspectives.
A critical feature of this system is the rigorous vetting and evaluation process for potential leaders, which separates election for the cohort of future leaders and the assumption of power into two distinct stages. Rather than being thrust into power, future leaders undergo extensive evaluation based on their abilities, community service, and commitment to social justice. This thorough vetting builds trust, ensuring that only qualified individuals ascend to leadership roles. It guarantees that transitions are smooth, and that leaders are fully prepared to take on their responsibilities.
Rather than being thrust into power, future leaders undergo extensive evaluation based on their abilities, community service, and commitment to social justice
At mid-term reviews, leaders' performance is assessed by their party-member peers and the broader community, through deliberative meetings. This ongoing evaluation holds leaders accountable, ensuring they act in the people's best interests, rather than merely holding onto power unchecked.
Transitioning to a non-adversarial democracy in Africa, however, will face fierce resistance from political elites. These elites, who benefit from the power structures inherited from colonial systems, may view the shift as a threat to their privileges. Moving away from winner-takes-all politics requires a cultural shift — one that embraces African solutions, and prioritises collaboration and shared leadership over competition. The diversity of Africa also poses a challenge. The continent is vast, with hugely differing political, social, and economic landscapes, so a one-size-fits-all approach will not work. Non-adversarial democracy will thus have to be tailored to fit the specific needs of each country and community.
Many African regimes have a long history of political distrust. People will need tangible evidence that a non-adversarial democracy is in their best interests
Securing public trust is another significant challenge. Many African regimes have a long history of political distrust, often shaped by colonial legacies. Reconnecting with African Indigenous cultures offers a path forward, but overcoming this historical distrust will require time and effort. People will need tangible evidence that this new system is truly in their best interests.
Despite the challenges, non-adversarial democracy offers a path toward a more stable, inclusive, and participatory political system. The road to this change will be difficult, but the potential rewards are worth the effort. A shift to a system that emphasises consensus and cooperation, rather than division and rivalry, could lead to a more effective and representative form of democracy.
For Africa to overcome the limitations of its current political system, it must embrace non-adversarial democracy, a model that can create a governance structure truly responsive to the people's needs.
