A number of African countries adopted multiparty elections in the 1990s. However, critics have pointed out that, in reality, this did not alter the structure of power in these countries and the personalistic and clientelistic basis of political rule.This study, for Comparative Politics, suggests that as critical as elections are to democratisation, a more important locus of the struggle for political reform in Africa has been with associations that are seeking to establish and maintain their autonomy from the state.
Liberal democracy encompasses regular, free and fair elections, freedom of expression and association, equality under the law, the rule of law, and the protection of civil liberties. Many new democracies in Africa hold regular elections but fall short in other areas. Tanzania held its first multiparty elections in 1995, but since then the government has shown little interest in consolidating democracy. Despite this, the fact that there is an opposition, a free press, and freedom of association, albeit all limited or restricted in some way, allows room for societal organisations to maneuver and opens up possibilities for legislative change. Limited democracy is still preferable to authoritarian rule.
Associational autonomy is important at a general level because it allows non-governmental organisations (NGOs) to gain leverage with which to demand policy changes. In the African context:
- NGOs can determine and broaden their own goals, regardless of whether or not they conform to those of the government.
- They can also select their own leadership, rather than have officeholders selected by government based on political loyalties, as occurs in many state-controlled organisations in African countries.
- Autonomy means that organisations can pursue collective action aimed at improving the welfare of the community.
- It has also allowed marginalised sectors of society to challenge existing resource and power distributions that have discriminated against them.
- Significantly, autonomy allows NGOs to operate outside of state-based patronage networks.
The Tanzanian government’s decision to liberalise the country politically was taken, not because of pressure from a massive popular movement, but because they knew democracy was spreading throughout Africa at the time and that, if they jumpstarted the process, they could manage it without risking their own political standing. This has been vindicated by the incumbent party, Chama Cha Mapinduzi (CCM), dominating recent elections. The government, believing they have satisfied the minimum expected of them by donors, has since brought the process of liberalisation to a halt.
Throughout the 1990s the number of NGOs increased exponentially due to economic crisis and new space outside government jurisdiction opening up.
- They provided basic services, protected citizens from government action, and lobbied for change.
- Most organisations were independent of government but faced government attempts to limit and influence their activities.
- Refusal of registration, deregistration, refusing permission to hold meetings and rallies, establishing government controlled umbrella organisations to co-opt NGOs, and attempting to pass restrictive NGO legislation are examples of strategies used.
- Those who did not toe the line were subject to harassment and denied opportunities for employment.
- In particular, the independent media has been a critical force for change in Tanzania. As the government has attempted to increase its regulation and restrict its coverage, media workers have initiated unprecedented efforts to defend freedom of speech and expression.
