Democratisation Processes in Eastern Africa: Kenya Tanzania and Uganda

Meena Ruth

This study is a contribution to the debates and studies of the democratic transition in Africa on a basis which is both empirical and theoretical. Theoretically, it contributes to the African critique and the debate on liberal democracy particularly those debates which attempt to test the applicability of democratic rules and institutions in the African context. Empirically, the study analyses both the institutional processes that are taking place during this material time, and the struggles to dismantle the authoritarian regime. The three case studies provide rich empirical data to this end. This study is hence organised in four sections. Section one engages on the theoretical and conceptual debates on democratic transition. This is followed by detailed descriptive analysis of the process which we are referring to as democratic transition for individual cases. The third section summarises general trends, similarities and differences. Finally a synthesis of the general observations, are made as conclusions and recommendations.
Generally the process of opening up the political space for more players is slow and state controlled. Two trends can be discerned from the three cases. One which is engineered and controlled by the state and a second one engineered by popular forces but taken over by the state. Through political calculation, for instance, Tanzania leadership decided to open up the political space for more actors despite the fact that the majority of the people who had been consulted said no to multi party elections. The Kenya situation is slightly different in a sense that there has been stronger popular demand for political pluralism, which continue to be suppressed by the incumbent regime until it recognised that it could no longer resist both the internal and external pressures. Having recognised this, the regime hurriedly organised multi party elections in which participating political parties were not adequately prepared. Hence, while the electorate made a choice to " vote out" " the Moi government, and Moi, the opposition parties, ironically, voted him in. For Uganda, the popular support to the transition during the early years, has not been sustained, due to absence of checks and balances that would have limited the powers of the chief executive versus other organs of the state.
Political parties remain weak and their linkage role is limited due to state control over their activities and also largely due to divisions among and lack of clear ideology which would challenge the incumbent regime. In Uganda, political parties have a right to exist but not a right to effectively participate in political activities. In Kenya and Tanzania, political parties other than the ruling parties are too divided and lack any coherent ideology to be able to play a serious linkage role that has the capacity to challenge the ruling parties.
In Kenya and Tanzania, the electoral system is based on simple majority rule, which have made it difficult for voters to translate their votes into parliamentary seats. Uganda combines simple majority and proportional representation.. This limitation notwithstanding, the pressure to hold periodic elections which are free and fair is a potential opening which will provide the system with an opportunity for the opening of the political space for more actors. The legal and regulatory environment in all the three cases limit associational life, and hence constrain civil society actors from effectively influencing the transition. Both Uganda and Tanzania provide for affirmative actions in the area of promoting women in politics. But this does not seem to have basically changed the rules of the game in favour of women in politics. The study made the following general observations. Political pluralism particularly as expressed in multi party politics does not automatically lead to more democracy, it nevertheless opens doors for democratic practices. It is therefore necessary a condition for participatory political process.
The current process towards multi party political system is essentially controlled by the elite and is characterised by intra elite power struggle. Nevertheless, other civil society actors, including the youth, women's movement, religious organisations, and the media have found entry points to influence the process. There is a gradual process of establishing democratic institutions, but they remain weak and vulnerable. The parliament, for instance, is yet to assert itself as a representative organ of the state due to limited participation by opposition. The judiciary and individual members of the judiciary have been struggling for independence and impartiality, but the executive continues to interfere with its autonomy. Political parties continue to remain weak as linkage institutions due to intra elite power struggles. Electoral regimes are yet to translate voters interests into parliamentary representation.
Politics of social exclusion continue to characterise the transition period and particularly exclusion of women. Nevertheless, women continue to organise and challenge patriarchal and undemocratic structures. The civil society remains weak, but has the potential of strengthening through organising for transformation. Civil society organisations however, remain a potential force for transformation of the political culture of intolerance, authoritarianism, and culture of violence into a political culture characterised by civility and gender sensitivity. This will only be possible if the civil society organisations adopt a new form of organising, through developing norms and practices which will guide their social practices and norms.