Tag: ECOWAS

By Paul Ejime

At 49, the Economic Community of West African States (ECOWAS) should be celebrating based on its past achievements as the foremost among Africa’s eight Regional Economic Community (RECs). However, the 15-nation regional economic bloc, once acclaimed as a trailblazer, is now fighting for survival and under serious threat of disintegration.

Since its establishment on May 28, 1975, through the Treaty of Lagos, only Mauritania has pulled out of ECOWAS (in 2000) but is now seeking re-admission, while other countries, even outside the region, are also applying to join.

However, rather than build on its solid foundation, things seem to be falling apart for ECOWAS. Four of its member states – Guinea, Mali, Burkina Faso, and Niger are under military rule, while the last three have served notice of their intention to withdraw from the regional organization, altogether.

Granted, the times and circumstances are different between 1975 and the ecosystem/dynamics of the world today. There have been life-changing geopolitical and strategic shifts, characterized by emerging threats such as terrorism, violent extremism, economic recession, global pandemics, flaws of experimentation of democracy, environmental changes, high rates of unemployment, youth bulge, and technological advancements, particularly the invasion of social media, dis/misinformation, and fake news.

Read Also: ‘How to transform Nigerian Army into highly-motivated force’

But effective performance under challenging circumstances is what sets individuals and organisations apart. At a time when ECOWAS is expected to demonstrate visionary and dynamic leadership, it has been found wanting.

Ironically, the leadership deficit has been most pronounced in the peace and security, conflict prevention, management, and resolution domain, where ECOWAS had been most effective.

Whether by default or experimentation, ECOWAS leaders, mostly military officers at that time, could fashion effective tools such as the ECOWAS Ceasefire Monitoring Group (ECOMOG) created in 1990 that facilitated the end of the civil wars in Liberia and Sierra Leone.

The strict application of regional instruments, such as the Authority’s Declaration on Political Principles in 1991, the ECOWAS Revised Treaty of 1993, the 1999 Protocol relating to the Mechanism for Conflict Prevention, Management, Resolution, Peacekeeping and Security (or The Mechanism), and the Supplementary Protocol on Democracy and Good Governance adopted in 2001 as an integral part of The Mechanism, guided the construction of regional peace and security architecture.

The 1999 instrument inspired the adoption of a similar mechanism by the African Union several years later.

Also, apart from an early warning system, which facilitated collaboration with state and non-state actors and civil society to monitor and report threats to peace and security in the region, ECOWAS utilized its Mediation and Security Council and the Council of the Elders/Wise as additional tools for conflict prevention, mediation, and resolution towards consolidating peace and security.

The Supplementary Protocol on Democracy and Good Governance set minimum constitutional convergence criteria for ECOWAS membership based on shared values of democracy and free market, separation of powers, popular participation, the democratic control of the armed forces, guarantees of fundamental freedoms, and especially ‘zero tolerance’ for power obtained or maintained by unconstitutional means.

The ECOWAS Conflict Prevention Framework (ECPF), adopted in 2008 and the Monrovia Declaration of 2010 are other instruments adopted to strengthen the ECOWAS peace and security architecture, with emphasis on preventive diplomacy and proactive mediation responses.

The organization has used a combination of the above-named instruments to resolve conflicts in member-states including in Cote d’Ivoire, Mali, Niger, Guinea Bissau, and The Gambia.

The applied measures included suspension, imposition of sanctions on erring member-states or the refusal to send observers to Gambia’s 2011 presidential election, for lack of transparency under the regime of then-President Yahya Jammeh’s regime, now exiled in Equatorial Guinea. However, the political will and/or capacity to make tough decisions based on principles are now lacking at the national and regional levels of ECOWAS leadership.

Political leaders/heads of states have hijacked control of ECOWAS institutions, particularly the Commission, thereby rendering the overstretched and capacity-challenged technocrats ineffective.

Critics now see ECOWAS more as a “toothless organization,” where political leaders hold sway for their selfish interests, including by unilaterally changing their countries’ constitutions and electoral laws, rigging elections, suppressing opposition, and trampling on citizens’ human rights in clear violation of ECOWAS texts and instruments with impunity and without consequences.

Meanwhile, the same leaders only become powerful in the condemnation and imposition of sanctions whenever the military seizes power from civilians. The military juntas in Mali, Burkina Faso and Niger cite this inconsistency by ECOWAS leaders as one of the reasons for their decision to pull out of the organization.

Even so, military rule is not the solution to the myriad problems facing ECOWAS member states. If anything, the disposition of the juntas, especially their political transition programmes, may have revealed their real intentions, as opportunistic power grabbers on tenure elongation adventure, the same allegations they levelled against the civilian leaders.

The global decline in multilateralism, compounded by the geopolitical games being played by the superpowers, reminiscent of the Cold War era, is also present in the ECOWAS and Sahel region. Centuries of imperialism and exploitation of Africa, especially by France in its former colonies, have combined with corruption and mismanagement by post-independence leaders to unleash poverty, inhumane conditions, deprivation, and bad governance on the long-suffering citizens.

The anti-French sentiment expressed by the population in the Francophone countries is justified, but with the long periods of transition and a provision that junta leaders are eligible to participate in the post-transition elections in respective countries, the soldiers would appear to be riding on the wave of sentiment and a false sense of popularity to want to perpetuate themselves in power.

Similarly, while sovereign states reserve the right to choose their bilateral partners, the juntas in Mali, Guinea, Burkina Faso, and Niger, are not helping their case by replacing one foreign power with another, and at the same time accusing ECOWAS of being tele-guided by external powers.

ECOWAS faces existential threats due to acts of omission/commission by its leaders. Even so, the community of an estimated 400 million people can only achieve more in unity.

Dr Omar Alieu Touray, President of the ECOWAS Commission, acknowledged this much in his message to mark ECOWAS’ 49th Anniversary.

“As we celebrate our 49th anniversary, insecurity continues to threaten our region. Some of our member states are battling terrorist groups on a daily basis, and a large number of our population faces displacement and food insecurity,” he said. In the two-and-half-page message, where “unity” or “united” is mentioned seven times, Touray said: “It is clear that we must stay united if we want to be successful in the fight against insecurity. But it is our unity which now stands threatened.”

Quoting Nigeria’s former Head of State, Yakubu Gowon, one of the founding fathers of ECOWAS, the commission president said: “Neither the generation of our founding fathers, ‘nor the present or future generations can understand or will be forgiving for the breakup of our community.’”

In an interview that coincided with the ECOWAS anniversary, Ambassador Abdel-Fatau Musah, the Commissioner for Political Affairs, Peace, and Security, quoting data from a survey by a non-profit Afrobarometer group, noted that despite the military incursions, and the weaknesses in the democratic practices, ECOWAS citizens were still positively disposed toward democracy.

While Liberia and Senegal have shown some prospects following their recent transparent elections and successful transfer of power from sitting governments to the opposition, Togo has thrown up another challenge with its divisive and controversial legislative vote held under dubious constitutional changes in clear violation of the ECOWAS protocol.

Other potential crisis points could be Guinea Bissau and Sierra Leone, with lingering post-election rumblings, and then the Gambia, Cote d’Ivoire, and Ghana with forthcoming elections.

ECOWAS can still redeem itself. But it is all down to the courage in upholding its standard, the sincerity of regional leaders to stop corruption, respect national constitutions and the rule of law, stop rigging elections and providing citizens with the benefits of good governance.

•Ejime is a global affairs analyst.

By Paul Ejime

As widely expected, Togo’s national electoral commission has declared the ruling Union for the Republic (UNIR) party, as the overwhelming winner of the country’s divisive parliamentary and regional elections held on April 29, paving the way for President Faure Gnassingbe to accomplish the dream of prolonging his 19-year stay in power.

According to the results announced by the commission, the UNIR won 108 of the 113 available seats in what opposition parties and civil society groups dismissed as a sham vote that followed the government-pushed constitutional changes approved by the UNIR-dominated parliament 10 days before the elections.

David Dosseh, one of Togo’s prominent civil society activists fighting against injustice and impunity, has described the changes as a “constitutional and electoral coup.”

Speaking after the elections as a panellist on a television programme with this writer, Dosseh explained that “most of Togo’s estimated nine million citizens have not seen the texts” of the constitution passed by the parliament on April 19.

The hurriedly passed changes preceded by two postponements of the elections have far-reaching consequences on Togo’s political governance and electoral system.

Without adequate consultation, the changes turned Togo from a presidential to a parliamentary governance model and from a direct system of electing the president/prime minister to an indirect one.

Ninety-one MPs had emerged from the opposition-boycotted 2018 parliament elections in Togo.

Following the changes, the number of parliamentarians was increased to 113, who are now to elect the president of the republic, with a largely ceremonial status for a five-year mandate. The MPs from the majority party in parliament will also elect the prime minister/president of the council of ministers with executive powers, who will serve for six years.

Read Also: Nigeria galvanizes ECOWAS to combat region’s health challenges 

This is even though, Article 2(1), SECTION II of the 2001 ECOWAS Supplementary Protocol on Democracy and Good Governance, clearly states that “No substantial modification shall be made to the electoral laws in the last six (6) months before elections (in member States), except with the consent of a majority of political actors.”

Before the latest elections, ECOWAS, the regional economic bloc had sent a pre-election fact-finding mission from 15th – 20th of April to Togo.

The objective of such missions in the past was to ascertain the level of preparedness, identify challenges if any, and determine whether the political environment met international standards for credible and transparent elections.

Like in previous elections in Togo, where politics has been dominated by the Eyadema family since the country’s independence from France in 1960, the last polls were overshadowed by political tensions and government suppression of opposition and public protests.

Faure assumed power in 2005 following the death of his father Gnassingbe Eyadema, who ruled Togo with an iron fist backed by a notoriously repressive armed forces for almost four decades.

According to the opposition, the same armed forces, with senior officers drawn largely from the Kabye ethnic group of northern Togo, imposed Faure on the country and have continued to support him to the hilt. They are afraid of losing power to another ethnic group while Faure is also riding on the crest of his father’s dictatorship.

Faure’s current mandate ends in 2025 but with the ‘fait accompli’ achieved with the pre-determined outcome of the elections based on questionable constitutional and electoral changes, the coast is now clear for him to assume the position of prime minister/president of the council of ministers to elongate his tenure.

Dosseh acknowledges that neither the opposition parties nor the civil society groups in Togo are in a strong position to challenge the Faure government. This is mainly because poverty and repression have been weaponized, leaving the citizens in a traumatized, if not dehumanized state of permanent fear.

External support also appears not forthcoming. For instance, ECOWAS, which under normal circumstances, should take a principled stance by calling out the Togolese government over the violation of the regional protocol appears to be “playing it safe.”

Four of its 15 member states – Guinea, Mali, Burkina Faso, and Niger – are under military dictatorships, and the last three countries have already served notice of their intention to quit the regional organization altogether.

There is therefore the fear by the ECOWAS leadership that Togo could join the rogue group if the organization came hard on the country.

So, instead of capitalizing on the recent positive development in Senegal, where the opposition parties combined with the population and vibrant civil society groups to checkmate President Macky Sall, who had wanted to play a similar tenure elongation game, ECOWAS developed cold feet, further eroding what remains of its dented integrity and reputation.

Faure has contributed to the disunity in the ECOWAS ranks by fraternizing with the military juntas and making the regional sanctions ineffective. By sparing him the consequences of his “bad behaviour,” ECOWAS is vindicating critics who accuse the organization of weakness and inconsistency by applying one set of rules for “political, constitutional and electoral coups” and another for military coups.

The critics have cited several recent instances, such as the dissolution of Guinea Bissau’s parliament by President Umaro Embalo; former President Sall’s sacking of Senegal’s electoral commissioners close to the last presidential election, which his ruling party lost, and now, the controversial constitutional and electoral changes, less than two weeks before the parliamentary and regional elections in Togo.

While the implications and potentially negative consequences of the Faure government’s violation of the ECOWAS protocol against an unconstitutional change of government may yet unfold, the regional organization, along with the African Union and La Francophonie, which observed the elections at the invitation of the administration in Togo have failed the people of Togo and Africans in general.

Against their standard practice, the three organizations did not issue preliminary observation reports on the elections. They merely released a timid joint statement, saying that the vote was “inclusive,” contrary to widely held opinion in the country.

By their act of omission or commission, the three organizations might have allowed the Faure administration to use them to rubber-stamp an illegitimate act.

The ECOWAS Commission in 2009 stopped the then-President Mahamadou Tandjan from dissolving Niger’s parliament, and also in 2011, declined an invitation to observe the presidential election organized by then-President Yahya Jammeh because there was no level playing field for the poll.

The commission refused to recognize the outcome of that election and Jammeh held another election in 2016, which he lost but wanted to claim victory before ECOWAS intervened, resulting in his current exile to Equatorial Guinea.

The African Commission on Human and Peoples’ Rights has its headquarters in Banjul, the Gambian capital, yet the AU could not muster the courage to take the type of tough but principled decisions that earned ECOWAS international acclaim.

If ECOWAS is to regain its past glory, this is the time for tougher, strategic result-oriented, impactful, transformational and pro-people actions borne out of critical thinking.

Inconsistency, duplicity, fear, or sitting on the fence will further divide the organization and derail the regional integration goal of its founding fathers.

On the other hand, Togolese citizens, especially the pro-democracy advocates owe themselves and the region a patriotic duty to work together against all undemocratic forces in their country.

Time and circumstances might be different, but the anti-apartheid fight in South Africa, is an illustration that outside support will only complement a focused, united and aggressive internal struggle.  Right, liberty or freedom is taken not given!

•Ejime is a global affairs analyst