Latest News Archive

Please select Category, Year, and then Month to display items

Africa Day reflection – Africa’s crisis of leadership and lack of credible institutions

25 May 2021 | Story Dr Sunday Paul C. Onwuegbuchulam | Photo Supplied

DrSundayOnwuegbuchulam_web read more — Dr Sunday Paul C Onwuegbuchulam is from the Centre for Gender and Africa Studies, University of the Free State (UFS) who writes that African politicians must learn to respect the land and the people.

It is once again the month of May and there are many preparations being made for the celebration of Africa Day. I do not believe in or subscribe to the logic of having a specified day or month to celebrate Africa. But importantly, the present state of the socio-political and economic landscape of Africa leaves nothing to celebrate. It still baffles me that there is notable hype surrounding this so-called Africa Day celebration, especially considering the state of decay in the continent. I am aware I sound rather negative, but this is how I feel about the continent which almost 1.3 billion people, including myself, call home. There are several issues that we can talk about that go to ascertain that there is indeed nothing to celebrate today in Africa but the fact is we should rather be mourning. My focus is on the crisis of leadership and the weak institutions in most African countries.

I am not saying that Africa has not made progress after the years of slavery and colonialism meted on the continent. No, I am sure that good stories are coming out of some African countries, seen in different forms of development, strong institutions and credible leadership in the said countries. Botswana offers a good case in point, as it is a country that has used its diamond resources to develop itself and its citizens. Arguably, Botswana’s success story can only be credited to the availability of strong institutions and leadership which considers the interest of the country and the wellbeing of the people as a priority. Perhaps another good story coming from Africa is the way South Africa, and indeed some other African countries, have dealt with the issue of the COVID-19 pandemic. It is said that Africa, with close to 17% of the world’s population, came out rather ‘okay’ with regards to not bearing the brunt of the negative impact of the pandemic. This can also be attributed to some good leadership, especially as seen in South Africa, which, though not perfect, debatably helped to minimise the impact of COVID in the country. It is also true that some African countries were not honest in reporting the levels of infections and some were in denial of the pandemic, which in itself led to the deaths of many including some among the political class in these countries.

Leadership in Africa

Let me then talk about the issue of problematic leadership in Africa which has left the continent on its knees: today most African countries suffer from the problem of having inept and morally bankrupt leaders. South Africa is currently still going through the state capture saga playing out at the Zondo commission. The stories emerging from that commission, if true, point to a growing culture of corruption and sleaze that needs to be addressed, if South Africa will avoid becoming like other African countries ruined by the corruption phenomenon. Nigeria as a case in point is battling systemic corruption which has eaten deep into the socio-political and economic fabric of the country. Nigeria’s fight against corruption has become a losing battle with the current president, Muhammadu Buhari, obviously inept in dealing with the syndrome. Buhari coming into power in 2015 made several assurances that he would fight corruption and insecurity in the country. A few years into the second term of that administration, it can be said Nigeria is worse than Buhari found it. Corruption, insecurity and economic hardship have left Nigerians dazed and the assertion in some circles is that the Buhari campaign was the greatest fraud on Nigerians since its independence.

Nigeria’s case perhaps offers a basis for the analysis of the crisis of leadership and weak institutions in African countries. Africa’s mostly ageing ruling class has failed African countries as a result of their power hunger, blatant ineptitude and lack of moral and political will to establish strong institutions. On these, it will seem that some African politicians are yet to learn what democracy and respect for the will of the people are all about. We have African presidents changing their constitutions to stay longer in office. There has been a history of this phenomenon in many African countries. For example, Djibouti, with president Ismail Omar Guelleh in 1999; Chad with president Idriss Déby in 2005; Cameroon with president Paul Biya in 2008 who has now stayed in office for close to 39 years; Zimbabwe with the late Robert Mugabe in 2013; Congo Brazzaville with president Denis Sassou Nguesso in 2016; 2017 in Rwanda with president Paul Kagame, who has now stayed in office 21 years and counting; Uganda in 2005 under Yoweri Museveni with the supreme court quashing the age limit for the president, thereby allowing Museveni to contest the 2021 elections.

The case of Uganda’s Museveni is perhaps the one that warrants dwelling on. The man is being sworn in for the sixth time as president of Uganda amidst claims of a rigged election. Events leading up to and during the said election leaves one with little to write home about, with reported widespread intimidation of opposition party supporters, shutting off the internet and all sorts of electoral abuses which are callously engineered to steal the people’s mandate. It is pathetic to hear Museveni always tout “democratically elected” in answer to any question which seems to suggest that he is now a dictator after having ousted one (Idi Amin).

One interesting thing that emerges in the discussion of African leaders wanting to stay in office longer than they should is their rebuttal that democracy in Africa should not be seen as democracy as obtained elsewhere in the world – the US for instance, where a president has only two terms of four years each. African presidents see themselves and indeed democracy in Africa as incommensurate with that in Europe and the West. Hence it is not susceptible to being measured by the standards of democracy in other parts of the world. In their view, democracy is not perfect anywhere, therefore they need the world to leave them alone to practise the understanding of democracy as they see it. It is interesting to hear some politicians disingenuously use as an example the Trump saga in the US and his refusal to acknowledge defeat in an election – to buttress their point about democracy not being perfect anywhere. On this, it will seem to me that these African leaders fail to understand that Trump’s case was just what the philosopher JJC Smart called a nomological dangler. Trump’s case is a nomological dangler because it was outside of the norm in the history of relatively successful American democracy, which perhaps has become the archetype of democracy in the modern world. It is sadder to see how these politicians use the Trump case as a basis to justify their incessant craving for power and their wish to die in office. It would seem that some African leaders have converted monarchical rule to what they call democracy. A feature of democracy is the choosing and replacing of representatives through a free and fair election. This presupposes a limited time in the office of a representative, who then is replaced through a free and fair election. Democracy is then not a monarchy in which leaders die in office and or abdicate because of some reasons. Notably, in the case of African politicians, they do not leave office even when they are incapacitated by health issues. Take the recent case of Ali Bongo of Gabon.

Live liyengcayelwa

Africa is really in trouble if this trend in leadership continues. Africa cannot progress when politicians in different countries think they are the best the country can produce to lead. African politicians should learn to stay their time in office and leave when it is time, handing over to successors who will continue where they stopped and move their countries forward. Elections and the will of the people should be allowed to reign and politicians should stop the pogrom meted out on the will of the people. This needs strong institutions which are lacking in most African countries and this is because in most cases these morally bankrupt and inept politicians have rendered these institutions useless in their countries. It is a sad issue and one which needs to be corrected if Africa and African countries will have anything good to celebrate.

A very important African ethos is vital for us to begin to solve our problems and that is live liyengcayelwa. Live liyengcayelwa is an isiSwati saying that admonishes respect for the land and the people. This is what I am proposing to African politicians – that they learn to respect the land and the people. They do this by accepting when their time in office is up and leave peacefully. They should learn to establish strong institutions which will help in stabilising true democracy and achieving proper development in African countries. Through these, we might perhaps have a true cause to celebrate Africa.

Opinion article by Dr Sunday Paul C. Onwuegbuchulam, Centre for Gender and Africa Studies, University of the Free State.

News Archive

Stem cell research and human cloning: legal and ethical focal points

2004-07-29

(Summary of the inaugural lecture of Prof Hennie Oosthuizen, from the Department of Criminal and Medical Law at the Faculty of Law of the University of the Free State.)

In the light of stem cell research, research on embryo’s and human cloning it will be fatal for legal advisors and researchers in South Africa to ignore the benefits that new bio-medical development, through research, contain for this country.

Legal advisors across the world have various views on stem cell research and human cloning. In the USA there is no legislation that regulates stem cell research but a number of States adopted legislation that approves stem cell research. The British Parlement gave permission for research on embryonic stem cells, but determined that it must be monitored closely and the European Union is of the opinion that it will open a door for race purification and commercial exploitation of human beings.

In South Africa the Bill on National Health makes provision for therapeutical and non therapeutical research. It also makes provision for therapeutical embryonical stem cell research on fetuses, which is not older than 14 days, as well as for therapeutical cloning under certain circumstances subject to the approval of the Minister. The Bill prohibits reproductive cloning.

Research on human embrio’s is a very controversial issue, here and in the rest of the world.

Researchers believe that the use of stem cell therapy could help to side-step the rejection of newly transplanted organs and tissue and if a bank for stem cell could be built, the shortage of organs for transplants would become something of the past. Stem cells could also be used for healing of Alzheimer’s, Parkinson’s and spinal injuries.

Sources from which stem cells are obtained could also lead to further ethical issues. Stem cells are harvested from mature human cells and embryonic stem cells. Another source to be utilised is to take egg cells from the ovaries of aborted fetuses. This will be morally unacceptable for those against abortions. Linking a financial incentive to that could become more of a controversial issue because the woman’s decision to abort could be influenced. The ideal would be to rather use human fetus tissue from spontaneous abortions or extra-uterine pregnancies than induced abortions.

The potential to obtain stem cells from the blood of the umbilical cord, bone-marrow and fetus tissue and for these cells to arrange themselves is known for quite some time. Blood from the umbilical cord contains many stem cells, which is the origin of the body’s immune and blood system. It is beneficial to bank the blood of a newborn baby’s umbilical cord. Through stem cell transplants the baby or another family member’s life could be saved from future illnesses such as anemia, leukemia and metabolic storing disabilities as well as certain generic immuno disabilities.

The possibility to withdraw stem cells from human embrio’s and to grow them is more useable because it has more treatment possibilities.

With the birth of Dolly the sheep, communities strongly expressed their concern about the possibility that a new cloning technique such as the replacement of the core of a cell will be used in human reproduction. Embryonic splitting and core replacement are two well known techniques that are associated with the cloning process.

I differentiate between reproductive cloning – to create a cloned human embryo with the aim to bring about a pregnancy of a child that is identical to another individual – and therapeutically cloning – to create a cloned human embryo for research purposes and for healing human illnesses.

Worldwide people are debating whether to proceed with therapeutical cloning. There are people for and against it. The biggest ethical objection against therapeutical cloning is the termination of the development of a potential human being.

Children born from cloning will differ from each other. Factors such as the uterus environment and the environment in which the child is growing up will play a role. Cloning create unique children that will grow up to be unique individuals, just like me and you that will develop into a person, just like you and me. If we understand this scientific fact, most arguments against human cloning will disappear.

Infertility can be treated through in vitro conception. This process does not work for everyone. For some cloning is a revolutionary treatment method because it is the only method that does not require patients to produce sperm and egg cells. The same arguments that were used against in vitro conception in the past are now being used against cloning. It is years later and in vitro cloning is generally applied and accepted by society. I am of the opinion that the same will happen with regard to human cloning.

There is an argument that cloning must be prohibited because it is unsafe. Distorted ideas in this regard were proven wrong. Are these distorted ideas justified to question the safety of cloning and the cloning process you may ask. The answer, according to me, is a definite no. Human cloning does have many advantages. That includes assistance with infertility, prevention of Down Syndrome and recovery from leukemia.

Back

Economic and Management Sciences

Education

Health Sciences

The Humanities

Law

Natural and Agricultural Sciences

Theology and Religion

Open Distance Learning

Business School

We use cookies to make interactions with our websites and services easy and meaningful. To better understand how they are used, read more about the UFS cookie policy. By continuing to use this site you are giving us your consent to do this.

Accept