These have been trumpeted to us day in day out by all manner of persons. You name it; academicians, philosophers, and any other think tank you can think of. In order not to veer off this discussion, let’s get back to what Abraham Lincoln told us what democracy is and further interrogate it.
When government turns out not to be for the people and by the people, it turns out not to be democracy and becomes something different, perhaps you can help me out with that. Henceforth whatever at all that fails to be for the people also seizes to become democracy.
Therefore societies, and for that matter organizations, should instill that democratic tendencies in its mode of operation in running the daily affairs of the organization by getting everyone involved.
It is again argued that when that particular organization prefers a particular leader or a particular system and unanimously assents to that system or that style of leadership, it is qualified to be called a democratic system since the will of the people is recognized.
On another breath, when the majority of the people again decide the system they prefer, it is still considered or qualifies to be democracy even when the minorities do not accede to that system of rule or policy intended to be carried out. So they just have to shut up and follow the majority decision or opinion.
The minority in this case do not have any locus to call for a change of that system voted for. What they do usually is to challenge the eligibility of the said policy the majority intends to carry out. One may ask, how do you determine the majority? It is normally put into a vote or by popular acclamation sometimes.
So therefore if a country or an organization chooses its leader by voting or by popular acclamation, it qualifies to be called democratic. When United State citizens decide to choose their leaders or government by the popular vote of the people, it is called democracy likewise the good citizens of France who choose their President to serve a minimum tenure of office. Also when the British citizens choose their leaders to serve through the same channel is also democracy.
In another breath again, democracy still recognizes the situation where a leader is been chosen by some selected executives of an organization for an overall leader of the entire organization. Such as delegates or executives of a political party who elect the flag bearer of the entire political party. In a situation like this I perfectly hope that you will agree with me that this mode of election still falls within the democratic domain: Just like the Pope being elected by some selected Bishops to lead the whole catholic faith.
Henceforth irrespective of a situation where the leader is chosen genuinely it is still recognized as democracy since it is the government of the people, by the people and for the people. The million dollar question here is does this situation really happen in Africa? Well, I may say in some situations, YES and in other situations, NO.
No in the sense that when a military man takes the gun and subverts the constitution of a nation and runs a one man affair, that fails to be a democracy. YES in the sense that when the good people of a nation choose a leader either by popular acclamation or by voting, it still qualifies to be called a democracy and this system is surely practiced in many African countries like Ghana, Botswana, South Africa and others.
When a system of governance is recognized by the people, it is absolutely qualified to be deemed democratic. Therefore when the people of Libya decide to adopt a political philosophy known as the JAMAHIRIYA one is absolutely right to tag it a democratic rule; or perhaps because it does not come or emanate from the west or not a western philosophy, it fails the test.
One may ask what the JAMARIYA System is. Well its legal base is on the legislative general people’s congress represented by 2,700 of the basic people’s congress and the executive general committee headed by the General Secretary, who reports to the Prime Minister and the President. This system of governance or mode of selection thus not in any way contradict any form of democratic system.
After Colonel Gadhafi’s coup which of course was illegal the Libyan people recognized the system and got on board with it. This of course really included all the masses.
It is high time African leaders and for that matter governments desist from this long culture of pusillanimity and stand firm and tell the whole world, especially their western allies, that we have our own system to run our affairs and we are really good at it.
To say that we discard our own system and follow the western system is like sewing a corn or rice in the desert and expecting it to germinate.
The Chinese and the Japanese are the economic and the technological giants in the world now simply because they have not discarded their culture and are developing alongside their culture, therefore when we toe that line, the brighter our future will be.
Credit: Abdulai Baba Muftawu
Zhongnan University of Economics and Law
bmuftau@msn.com
Wuhan China
View original post here:
Feature: Who decide the future of Libya?