Nowhere is Africa's democracy deficit more clearly shown than in Sub-Saharan Africa, a region where economics determines politics of the day and where a culture of democracy has been absent most of the time. For instance, there are few countries in Sub-Saharan Africa that extensively define democratic opportunities for the youth. Even the little democratic opportunities are economically conditioned especially during elections because of poverty, illiteracy and unemployment.

Democracy is the most complex of all forms of government because it is not compatible with all African traditions. For example, a transition from chiefdoms to democratic institutions will take time to fully embrace Western democracy. Every time African leaders try to adjust to the tunes of Western democracy, economic interests get in because it is filled with tensions and contradictions, and requires that its members labor diligently to make it work.

Democracy that is based on Sub-Saharan African traditions can be surplus or balanced to address both personal and social concerns like poverty, access to scarce national resources, education, pandemics or inequality. This is possible if a fine line is drawn between giving the executives (democratically elected presidents) sufficient powers to do the job and, at the same time, limiting that authority to prevent a dictatorship.This will make the presidents lead through their political skills, establishing a framework of co-operation with the legislature and above all with the people. The citizenry will consequently feel secure and apprehend that the presidents are always servants and not economic parasites.
 
In Sub-Saharan Africa, democracy is known for economic gains instead of accountability. Whoever goes to power through democracy perceives it as a finished product, not always evolving and for economic interests. Sub-Saharan leaders should not forget the best-known definition of democracy as "the government of the people, by the people, and for the people" (Abraham Lincoln 1809-1865).

Most Sub-Saharan African governments have changed the perception of democracy. For example, during presidential elections, they have always fought to be both loved and feared using national resources and to them, that seems to be the very best understanding of democracy. The governments try to keep their subjects faithful. They do not care about the infamy of cruelty, because very few elections have been free and fair. When one wants to be both loved and feared, it will be difficult to preserve democracy.

Similarly, if it is in the Sub-Saharan context, democracy can act as a political system that is capable of correcting its own dysfunctions. It is largely restricted to the economic institutional framework and not embodied in a culture, a state of mind that fosters tolerance and respect for other people, as well as pluralism, equilibrium and dialogue between the forces that make up a society.

In cases where Western democracy is to partly work in Sub-Saharan Africa, it requires all social, economic, governmental and non-governmental actors, as well as the relationship which links or separates them, to be taken into consideration. This further requires to be examined more closely so that public opinion everywhere can apprehend the challenge it represents. Most Sub-Saharan constitutions tilt toward dictatorships which are used to weaken the most important system of checks and balances that should help to involve the auxiliary precautions of impeachment and removal for high crimes and misdemeanors. Without checks and balances, democracy remains a deficit in Sub-Saharan Africa.

The checks and balances help to limit economic interests and presidential prerogatives. For instance, presidential appointments to high level government positions must be consented by the parliament through majority votes. The presidential powers to ratify treaties should be subject to the advice and consent of two thirds of the parliament. Any presidential executive order or agreement (with another nation) should be subject to the power of judicial review, whereby the Supreme Court may declare the order null and void on grounds that it is unconstitutional.

It is worth noting two major understandings of democracy in Sub-Saharan Africa: The first being political, where most Sub-Saharan nations fall. This is where leaders perceive their election as the apex and end of democracy. The second is economic, which seldom helps people. This defeats the purpose of democracy. For the former, political life is highest. For the latter, economic life is lowest. These differences have thus far remained unnoticed, or at least insufficiently understood.  Nevertheless, severe decline or loss in the equal practice of both the former and latter would be a source of corruption of the well-being.

I partly agree with Alexis de Tocqueville who is widely regarded as the most astute of American democracy that, "success is confined to the present; the long-term is insignificant. To live for ages is undemocratic sentiment. It is appropriate for democracy; to put limits on the exercise of leadership, but it would be a blunder to try to eliminate it". Therefore, for Sub-Saharan Africa to come out of democracy deficit, economic interests in the politics of every day should be checked. Above all, Africa should grow its own democracy that will among other factors emphasize the importance of education in civic responsibility in a bid to inculcate in modern individuals a commitment to public service.

By Meshach K. Ampwera.
The author [email protected]  is an  Alumni of  Mbarara University of Science and Technology