Paper long abstract

‘Men fall from great fortune because of the same shortcomings that led to their rise.’ It is a comforting thought that flawed leaders will eventually self-destruct.” (Jean de la Bruyère)

Serious political assault on their countries’ democratisation efforts is what first, Zambia's unsuccessful Chiluba, Togo's Eyadema, Uganda's Museveni and most recently Nigeria's Obasanjo and Cameroon’s Biya are most associated with. These however are only a small clique of an increasing pattern of similar action by African incumbents. What is most troubling to democratic transition enthusiasts is a concerted effort by these African leaders to throttle their faltering young democracies in the name of their continued ‘service’ to the people. This paper seeks to analyse why African leaders are dumping term limits in favour of open-ended tenures or seeking ‘presidential careerism’. The article argues that while most of these states have been cited for embarking on some semblance of democratic rule, their rulers have utilised their weak democratic institutional structures, co-opted the elite and rallied the ‘mob’ to commit democracy ‘infanticide’.

Paper long abstract

What is required for ethnoterritorial autonomy to be maintained once it has been granted by national political actors? Neither the normative nor the empirical literature on identity politics addresses this question. The normative literature makes liberal arguments in defense of group rights with the assumption that, where group claims are legitimate, the national government would credibly commit to autonomy. The empirical literature also assumes that where political conditions are threatening, the centre will devolve power. Both assumptions are contradicted by the reality that autonomies granted are either artificial or re-appropriated by the national government. The public choice literature attempts to answer the question but its argument about market preserving federalism presents respect for local autonomy as a voluntary act by national rulers. As in the normative and empirical literature on identity politics, the question of what is required for autonomy to be sustained remains unaddressed. This paper tries to fill the gap by hypothesizing that group unity premised on fundamental issues of identity and the practice of democracy make for durable territorial autonomy. This thesis is developed by examining two cases: Quebec in Canada and states creation in Nigeria. The first case will prove the presence of the above listed variables as critical conditions for durable autonomy. The second case information will indicate that where the variables are lacking, autonomy will be elusive.