Legitimacy in African

Politics
Neo-patrimonialism, personal rule and the
centralisation of the African state

Legitimacy
a psychological relationship between the governed and
their governors, which engenders a belief that the
states leaders and institutions have a right to exercise
political authority over a society.
Max Weber identified three pure sources of legitimacy:
traditional, charismatic and legal-rational authority

Two fundamental processes

The Centralisation of the African state
The Neo-patrimonialisation of government

Centralization The case of Ghana

1957, Kwame Nkrumahs Convention Peoples Party (CPP) won
Ghanas multi-party independence elections, and formed a
government under the inherited Westminster style constitution.
Although the CPP had won considerable electoral support, it faced
organised opposition in several regions of the country. In particular,
the Ashanti were seeking a degree of autonomy. Nkrumah refused to
tolerate any such separatism. The CPPs first step, therefore, was to
use its parliamentary majority to outlaw tribal-based organisations
with the 1957 Avoidance of Discrimination Act. With this one piece of
legislation an important conduit of civil society mobilisation,
ethnicity, was stifled. Regional assemblies were also proscribed. A
year later, Parliament passed the Preventative Detention Act. This
measure, suspending habeas corpus, was used to detain political
dissidents who continued to oppose the CPP. Leading opposition
members were intimidated, imprisoned or forced into exile. Similarly,
traditional leaders were stripped of their constitutional powers and
sidelined into an advisory House of Chiefs. Next it was the turn of
Ghanas independent system of justice. The judicial branch was
circumvented by establishing special courts to hear political cases of
treason and sedition. These trials were overseen by judges
appointed directly by Nkrumah himself. Given all these measures, it
was not surprising that when it came to the 1964 referendum asking

Parliaments lacking insight into

policies
Goran Hyden and Colin Leys remarked in their study of the 1969
Kenyan General Election, It is very difficult to identify any policy
decision or legislative act which is traceable to the electoral
outcome. Certainly there was a greater degree of linkage where
more open one-party elections were held, but even here civil
societys influence on public policy was limited. Instead, voters
were looking for lobbyists who could secure state resources for their
constituency (cheaper fertilisers, new water supplies or
employment opportunities, for example). The MP had to keep the
resource tap turned on, and the life chances flowing. Failure to
win these resources would result in constituents voting for an
alternative candidate in the next primary election (hence the large
turnover of personnel in Kenyas 1969 poll)

Flix Houphout-Boigny, President

of Cte d'Ivoire (1960 to 1993),
moved the capital to his hometown
ofYamoussoukro, where he built
the largest curch in the world, at a
cost of US$300million.

Patrimonialism
No system of government can be managed by just one person,
however, but instead of building legal-rational institutions to carry out
the duties of the state, patrimonial leaders distribute offices as
patronage among close relatives, friends and clients. As a result, all
these lesser officials have to demonstrate personal loyalty to the
leader in order to maintain office. In this respect, clients are retainers
tied to their benefactor, rather than salaried officials serving the
government institutions in which they are employed. Loyalty to the
leader brings rewards. Clients are free to exploit their position of
authority, creating their own fiefdoms. Historical examples of
patrimonialism include the monarchical and religious states of
medieval and early modern Europe (Alex Thomson)

Mobutu Sese-Seko, leader of CongoKinshasa for 32 years

No potential challenger is permitted to gain a power

base. Mobutus officials know that their jobs depend
solely on the presidents discretion. Frequently, he
fires cabinet ministers, often without explanation. He
appoints loyal army officers and other faithfuls as
provincial governors, but only to provinces outside
their home areas. And he constantly reshuffles and
purges his governors and high army command.
Everyone is kept off balance. Everyone must vie for
his patronage. Mobutu holds all the cards and the
game is his (Richard Sandbrook)

Clientelism
Christopher Clapham describes clientelism as a relation
of exchange between unequals. It is a mutually
beneficial association between the powerful and the
weak. A patron extends public office (a salary and access
to the state), security (freedom from violence), and
resources (such as wells, roads and medical centres) to
his or her clients. In return, the client offers support and
deference that helps legitimise the patrons elevated
position. In this respect, clientelism is a form of political
contract. (Alex Thomson)