by ANB-BIA, Brussels, March 1998
We have seen that the late 1980s and the first part of the 1990s were years of dramatic change for Africa. The idealism which heralded Africa's original independence movement had returned.
In the years following independence, Africa's rulers had perpetuated the myth that one-man, one-party rule and the suppression of political opponents, free speech, and a free Press were all essentials for national unity. At the same time, they did their very best to control the one body which could act as guarantor of any country's liberties - the judiciary.
We have also seen that there came a time when people became aware of their leaders' mismanagement, of their government's incompetence. The spirit of freedom, encouraged for a variety of reasons by the West, was sweeping across Africa. Multi- party democracy was born.
From the emerging "second liberation", from the "new Africa", came the hopes and the promises of all that goes to make true freedom in any society. Hand in hand with the development of true democracy came the freedom to think, say and write as one thought. A government-controlled media found that in addition to more ambitious publications, small independent publications were beginning to mushroom everywhere. Some of these were very modest in presentation, very irregular in appearance, but all of them determined to have THEIR say.
A new, bolder, radical and unfettered Press was being ushered in. These independent publications were the "voice of the people" who wanted to make their views heard in the new climate of tolerance and freedom. Journalists everywhere dared to be more outspoken, more objective in reporting what they saw and heard.
Press freedom is an expression of true democracy, and in some African countries this is now an established fact. But, unfortunately, such is not always the case and where there is no true Press Freedom, there is no true democracy.
A report published by the International Press Institute's director in 1995, speaks about the "cosmetic changes" made by African governments to create an illusion towards democracy. The report states that this requires a shift in the means used to control the Press. "Rather than using overt violence...many governments seek recourse through the Courts in an attempt to criminalise the actions of journalists".
In an attempt to demonstrate a liberal attitude, some governments now permit independent publications. But independent publications are now subject to punitive taxes and regulations, controls on the importing of newsprint or on printing presses and distribution channels.
In a report published by African News Bulletin (ANB-BIA) on 1 January 1996, on "Press Freedom in Africa", journalists from 29 different African countries gave their views on what is happening in their own countries. The following common facts emerged from the report, which reflect on Press Freedom as an expression of true democracy.
At the time of writing, the situation regarding the Media has not changed very much, generally speaking. If anything, it has worsened, with constant reports coming from Africa, of journalists arrested and their publications suspended.
In today's Africa, there are problems relating to the judiciary, and one major problem concerns the independence of the judiciary from the governing authority. In some countries, either explicit reference is made in the Constitution to the judiciary's independence, or there is a definite policy of not interfering with the judiciary in the exercise of its function. How this is carried out in practice varies from country to country, especially when it concerns appointments to the Bench. Frequently, the ideal of a completely independent judiciary remains just an ideal, but one thing is incontrovertible - an independent and impartial judiciary is the cornerstone of the rule of law in any democracy.
A judiciary's independence will largely depend on how judges are appointed and on whom they depend. Many countries have some kind of an Appointments Committee under a variety of names: Judicial Services Commission, Higher Judicial Council, Council of Magistrates etc., who recommend to the Head of State, the names of judges for appointment to the Bench. The problem is, that frequently, members of this Appointments Committee are themselves presidential appointees!
Some Constitutions provide for the independence of the judiciary, but do not spell out how this is to be achieved. Typically, members of the judiciary are dependent on the Minister of Justice - an administrative organ of the executive power. In short, it would seem that the judiciary in most African countries is part and parcel of the civil service, which in itself, is not independent.
A major problem which inhibits the administration of justice in Africa is, in many places, the small number of trained magistrates and justices available for hearing cases. In Togo, for example, there's only 107 judges for more than four and a half million people. Chad's judiciary consists of 120 judges plus 400 other officials associated with the administration of justice, and this for a country of some 1,248,000 sq.kms Benin, with a population of five million, has at present only 156 judges. Zambia's situation is even worse. A recent survey at the Judicial Department in Lusaka, found that magistrates had to be sent around the country's 61 districts to help clear up a backlog of cases. Zambia has 30 High Court judges spread across the country. Of these, only 14 are actually sitting. Malawi's judiciary currently suffers from under-staffing, poor record-keeping, shortage of trained personnel and heavy caseloads.
END of PART 4/6
1. The winds of change ||
2.Democracy in Africa - Reality or Myth?|| 3. Africa and the World Community
5. The realities of Globalisation || 6. Towards the news Millennium Whither Africa?
CONTENTS | ANB-BIA HOMEPAGE | WEEKLY NEWS
PeaceLink 1998 - Reproduction authorised, with usual acknowledgement