Paper short abstract:

Implementation of advanced regional norms of democratic governance remains utterly incomplete. I argue that multiple memberships in different regional organizations and differing interests of (international) hegemons prohibit a coherent implementation of these norms.

Paper long abstract:

Sub-Saharan regional organizations are the most advanced regional organizations worldwide with regard to integration in the politico-security sphere. The regional legal prescriptions range from a prohibition to access or to prolong power with unconstitutional means to sanctions including military interventions in cases of non-respect of these norms. This paper analyzes not the establishment of these norms, but addresses their incomplete implementation in member states. In fact, although almost all regional organizations act in cases of violations of their principles, however, the results of these interventions are mixed. While in some cases the norms are protected, in others the regional organizations make themselves accomplice to the norm violators. What explains this incomplete implementation of the regional and continental norms of democratic governance?

Contrary to expectations from compliance literature, precise prescriptions and harsh sanctions do not automatically lead to coherent implementation. Also, explanations pointing to domestic factors or the role by individual member states can only partly explain the finding.

Comparing implementation in different West African states, I argue that this is due to the distinct configuration of regional integration schemes and to the role of former colonial powers and hegemons in sub-Saharan Africa. In fact, many states are members in 'regional' organizations on different levels. Only when interests and policies, for example, between the regional, and the continental level as well as the colonial powers and hegemons are in alignment - or at least in no contradiction - implementation of regional policies can be expected.