By Dr. Masimba Mavaza | In recent years, some African revolutionary movements have suffered embarrassing democratic losses, exposing cracks in their ideological and political foundations. Ethiopia, for instance, has ushered in a new leader with promising potential for change, even after the country’s contentious 2015 elections. Meanwhile, Liberia and Sierra Leone have elected new leaders.
However, many leaders on the continent continue to disregard constitutional term limits, leading to the weakening of revolutionary parties. The Democratic Republic of Congo’s Joseph Kabila eventually relinquished power, though he clung to office long after his term ended in December 2016. Similarly, Uganda’s Yoweri Museveni has ruled since 1986, while Denis Sassou Nguesso has held power in Congo for nearly three decades.
The refusal to step down at the right time undermines governance principles adopted as Africa transitioned from liberation politics to post-independence struggles for democracy. The transformation of the Organisation of African Unity into the African Union (AU) in 2001 symbolized this shift. Governance tools like the African Peer Review Mechanism, spearheaded by leaders such as Nigeria’s Olusegun Obasanjo and South Africa’s Thabo Mbeki, were designed to promote accountability and progress.
Yet revolutionary movements like ZANU-PF have drifted from their original purpose. These movements were never intended to become political parties but to nurture and support a democratic political system. Their role was to remain national institutions, guardians of unity and development, fostering diverse political voices under the umbrella of Pan-Africanism.
Instead, ZANU-PF and similar movements have allowed individuals without liberation credentials to claim ownership of these organizations. The movements have devolved into partisan entities, diminishing their role as unifying national institutions. Revolutionary movements like ZANU-PF and FRELIMO should focus on becoming non-partisan guardians of national unity, similar to institutions like the army, which exists to serve the entire nation.
In China, the Communist Party (CCP) is often seen as a national institution, but it too failed to transcend party politics and nurture diverse political voices. African liberation movements must learn from such examples and redesign their institutions to effectively serve their nations.
Declining Popularity of Revolutionary Movements
Many African revolutionary parties are losing popularity due to their inability to adapt to modern democratic expectations. Leaders often surround themselves with sycophants who prioritize personal loyalty over national interest. This creates division and weakens the party’s legitimacy.
In Zimbabwe, President Mnangagwa introduced commendable reforms, but his vision risks being undermined by individuals who use flattery to manipulate power. These actions not only damage the President’s legacy but also erode the party’s credibility.
Revolutionary movements must resist becoming instruments of oppression—the very thing they once fought against. Instead, they should focus on creating frameworks that prioritize national interest over party politics. A “sovereign council,” similar to a constitutional body, could oversee political activities and ensure that liberation movements remain accountable to the people.
The Case for Term Limits and Democratic Transfers
The AU’s Charter on Democracy, adopted in 2012, emphasizes good governance, democracy, and security. However, these principles are often undermined by leaders addicted to power. Term limits are vital for regulating leadership succession, providing citizens hope for change, and ensuring accountable governance.
Countries like Mauritius, Ghana, Botswana, and Zambia have demonstrated the benefits of regular leadership changes. These transitions encourage new policies, foster hope, and challenge leaders to govern effectively. Conversely, countries like Rwanda, Uganda, Burundi, and Congo Republic have seen leaders manipulate constitutions to extend their rule, undermining democratic progress.
The lack of succession planning and entrenched corruption are major reasons why some leaders refuse to step down. They fear losing the privileges and wealth accumulated through their positions of power. Without strong constitutional safeguards, many countries remain vulnerable to autocratic and kleptocratic regimes.
Zimbabwe’s Path Forward
Zimbabwe’s readmission into the Commonwealth represents a significant opportunity for the country. However, the actions of individuals who prioritize personal loyalty over constitutional adherence risk derailing this progress. Zimbabwe needs dedicated leaders who uphold the constitution and prioritize national interest over personal gain.
Revolutionary movements must evolve to remain relevant in a changing political landscape. The people’s respect for liberation efforts does not translate into perpetual support for outdated governance models. A new institutional framework is necessary to guide these movements toward becoming inclusive national entities that transcend party politics.
The truth may be uncomfortable, but it must be acknowledged: without reform, revolutionary movements will continue to lose their relevance. Zimbabwe, and Africa at large, deserve leadership that prioritizes unity, democracy, and accountability over personal ambition.