dr. hilderbrand shayo on democracy and multi-party

The Future of Democracy

and Multi-party Politics in Tanzania

By Hilderbrand Shayo

While thinking on Tanzania’s future, and also reflecting on what we read on daily basis, especially the attention grabbing headlines, I become numb and unable to comprehend on our destiny.

Recently, the media took a swap on the position taken by speaker of our noble National Assembly Mr. Sitta, “Spika achochea moto wa Malecela”, Mama Maria Nyerere awalipua mafisadi”, unsolved and unexplained corruption charges, mysterious procurement contracts, contribution such as terror in the heartland, what is the root cause…debate, by John Mashaka, etc.

I received a very surprising call from a long time friend whom I have not spoken to for quite some time since 1989 when we met at national service training. Thanks to internet. Attempting to make up for lost time, we began our chat by getting to know each other’s struggle for life, talking about our respective families, education careers and how we were get by with life as Tanzanians and Diaspora. Having discussed those personal issues, we immediately jumped on to another subject that is a passion: politics and the Tanzanian dilemma.

True to my friend's nature and intellect, he began to wonder about the Tanzanian people and their politicians. He asked "why is it that the Tanzanian politicians and country are so oblivious to history?" I asked my friend what he was talking about. He began by offering an analysis of the legacy left by leaders and general presidential and members of parliament elections.

Among several factors, he advanced the view that Tanzanian politicians are missing golden opportunity by their failure to stick with a unifying strategy that would help to fight poverty in Tanzania or leave behind positive legacy that can be seen as role model, instead of being known as a corrupt leader etc.

My friend's standpoint seems to be shared by many observers and analysts of Tanzanian politics; their reading of the previous general elections echo with what occurred, when the country held its first multi-party elections. At that time, the voter had to confront emerging corrupt leaders, but failed to seize the opportunity by not working with one another, and providing a unified front, thus enabling corrupt motivated individuals to emerge victorious in the following elections.

On closer examination, the argument for a unified front seemed much stronger under one party system than it is now under multiparty. As a matter of fact, public confidence of the late has been eroded and this might signal a new generation of young challenger in the 2010 general election.

This brings us to a sober realization: What is the future of democracy and multi-party politics? Or better yet, what is the future of Tanzanian opposition parties? It would be rather difficult or foolhardy to peer into the crystal ball of what the future holds for Tanzanian politics, but if for nothing else, are there some important lessons to draw from our past and most recent practice. What lessons are we learning?

Tanzania has always occupied a rather unique place or position in the canopy of African politics. Unlike many African countries, Tanzania has followed a pattern all of their own, which other countries admire. None of its former presidents is in exile.

The country, for example, did not have to deal with the foreign presence of a colonial master (not exempting the fact that it wasn’t a settler colony). It also did not have to engage in an independence-nationalist struggle from foreign occupation like many African countries. But, like many African countries, Tanzania has not had any democratic traditions and had fallen into the same league of being a one - party state. It can be said, that the closest the country came to experiencing or developing a democratic foundation was during the decade of the 1985.

To be more specific, under President Ali Hassan Mwinyi’s rule, Tanzania witnessed the emergency of multipatism. And, of course, the rise of an activist, and burgeoning press was also evident. Some have referred to this period as one of Tanzania "finest decade" in which an atmosphere was created for the creative development of thoughts and ideas, business, that the country had never experienced before.
There was a sense that the country was going somewhere if the process had not been short changed by the so called corrupt and unfaithful leaders that have graduated, to what we all know to be a headache to many politicians as nation head to next general election. True, change was necessary but this is not what Tanzanians had envisioned. Given Tanzania’s unenviable history of failed attempts to develop a democratic way of life, the 2010 elections may provide yet another opportunity to unearth the corrupt roots and the corrupt leaders that if we not careful will continue to trouble us.
Clearly, elections do not guarantee democracy, but surely provide the seeds or basis for laying a democratic foundation if nurtured. Numerous examples abound both in Africa and elsewhere, where elections have been held, only to see the wheels of democracy reversed in a short space of time. Tanzania could be no exception if our fragile democracy and strong strategies to eliminate corrupt individuals out of public system are not nourished.

Democracy and good governance is a complex process of institution-building, development of a liberal political culture and traditions, an uninhibited growth of free speech, an unfettered development of the press, and respect for not only the rule, but the due process of law.

In addition, there are others who have argued that a successful democracy must have a stable "middle class," strong civil institutions and a literate population. A strong middle-class, they argue, would be well-placed to govern and manage civil institutions, and also pay taxes. Whereas a literate population would be educated enough about the issues, and could form alliances based on interests.

Evidently, there are opportunities that can enable Tanzania democracy succeed if the ruling government and the opposition begin to sort out their acts. Or for that matter, learn from the lessons and experiences of the past. Both are important stakeholders in ensuring that democracy succeed and war against corruption in their parties and in the public office.

Significantly, the ruling party cannot pretend to be the sole bearers of truth or claim to have monopoly over ideas. No person or group of individuals has a repository of solutions to our problems. The task of nation-building requires citizens' participation and involvement. And this can only occur where citizens have the liberty and means of expressing themselves freely and without suppression. The ruling government must also recognize that there will be differences of opinion and views regarding the direction of the country. A country bleeding from grand corruption and mismanagement of public resources for individual use cannot afford not to listen to the opinions of its citizens.

Then, of course, there is the question of the Tanzania opposition parties. What role should they play and how can they become an effective mechanism for developing the roots of democracy? Multi-party politics is central and it is a necessary condition for achieving a successful democracy, but it can also become problematic if it is not carefully managed.

One of the hard truths of the past held elections is that there existed too many political parties. Many contend that for a country like Tanzania with a population less than 37 million, and a high illiteracy rate, this may not portend well for the future of democracy.

The phenomenon of the multiplicity of political parties may be necessary in the early phases of developing our democratic culture, but if this trend continues it could become dangerous for our fragile democracy. In the Tanzania case, there existed no real ideological or programmatic differences amongst the political parties. All of the parties in their manifesto expressed their commitment to the three pillars of democracy: freedom of speech, freedom of the press, and the rule of law.

The only noticeable difference lay in the personalities who ran the party. Ethnic or regionally based, may not serve as a good beginning and a departure of what is typical of most other African countries where political parties are developed based on ethnic or regional loyalties, which has so often destroyed the very fabric of democracy.

The opposition, therefore, has an equal responsibility to ensure that Tanzania's unit is strengthened. Three proposals are in order here: First, Tanzanian political parties must find a way to begin developing "popular politicians" with broad appeal and the capacity to transcend ethnic, regional, religious, or professional lines; secondly, there is a strong case to be made for Tanzanian opposition parties to find a way to solidify their efforts through consolidation and mergers or alliances; thirdly, the Tanzanian opposition must initiate the process of discussing the need and formation of reducing the parties to no more than three or four political parties. This intra-party summit should be led by politicians with importance and integrity; thus, the need to make Tanzania a three or four-party state.

The litmus test of the maturity, growth and strength, and understandings of our democracy and where we want to be in future and our people in Tanzania are expecting of their leaders may actually come in the 2010 general election, by the time at least people would have understood why should vote to A and not B as their member of the parliament. Or test of the maturity of candidate selection process within the parties.

But how to get to this point will be a challenge for both the ruling party and the opposition parties. Now is the time to start.

Email:

shayohill@yahoo.co.uk