Mushroom
political parties: A
danger to Cameroon’s democracy
Another
opposition political party, whose name is not worth mentioning so as not to
give it undeserved publicity, was last week launched in Yaounde to add to some
300 others existing in Cameroon. They are instead a hurdle to the democratic
process given that most of them do not contest municipal, parliamentary,
senatorial or presidential elections. So what is the purpose of their formation
and existence?
Several
reasons have been advanced in the past by political analysts. The most repeated
has been that some of these family-seize parties front for the ruling party so
as to divide the opposition. There are others whose interest is to scramble for
the left-over of the CPDM dinner table in the name of “presidential majority”.
These
pseudo-politicians have been assisted in their misadventure of creating
political parties because of the liberal nature of the liberty laws. It is
easier and cheaper to create a political party in Cameroon than a civil society
organisation such as a common initiative group.
Some
of these political parties subsist purely in the imagination of the owners.
They have no known office other than the private residence of their founders.
They contest no election and do not even have a sheer brochure in which their
policies are explained.
Of
the 300 political parties in existence in Cameroon, only some 45 took part in
the last legislative and municipal elections. In 2007 when 207 political parties were in existence,
about the same number participated at the municipal and legislative polls.
At the start
of multi-party elections in 1992 when just 69 political parties were
registered, 32 of them actually participated in the legislative elections at
which the leading opposition party, the SDF boycotted.
The
pro-rata trend has indicated that the more the parties, the less the number
taking part in elections. The raison d’être for the creation of any purposeful
political party is to contest and win elections through pragmatic ideologies.
Such philosophical concepts of development must be significantly different from
those of the party in power. If a political party has the same ideology with
that of the CPDM for instance, why would it hang on the apron strings of the
ruling party in the name of “presidential majority” instead of just joining the
party?
The
reason is that the hangers-on get more financial benefits and trappings than if
they were members of the party. The plethora of opposition parties also bank on
the financial assistance given to some of them for political campaigns if they
do struggle to pay the required deposits.
Some
pundits argue that the motivation of so many political parties being registered
is to squeeze some of the money usually allocated to political groupings taking
part in elections.
Those
that cannot afford to raise the minimal deposit drop by the wayside. But what
of those that do provide the deposits even if through loan? The government has
failed to monitor how the money is spent the reason why it is often
misappropriated by the party leaders.
There
is the other school of thought which holds that the multiplication of mushroom
political parties is a design by the CPDM government. Francis Nyamnjoh, himself a presidential
candidate on two occasions in an
article on Democracy And The Politics Of Belonging claims that
“The multiplicity of parties, most of which had no existence outside the
personality of their founders, can be explained partly by the government’s
interest in dissipating real democratic opposition”.
Critics hold
that the creation and sponsoring of dummy political parties whose role is to
muddy the political waters, serve as relay points for government’s unpopular
position issues of the day, and dilute the strength and votes of the
opposition.” If that was the case in 1992 when the CPDM found itself unable to
have an absolute majority in parliament, the case isn’t the same today.
The
opposition has, because of its egocentric tribal considerations remained
disunited. They are criticising the CPDM but doing almost the same thing. There
is hardly any difference in the way the CPDM parliamentarian manages his
micro-finance grant from the performance of his counterpart in the opposition.
All major
opposition political party leaders from John Fru Ndi of the SDF to Bello Bouba
Maigari of the UNDP to Adamou Ndam Njoya of the UDC have remained glued to the
leadership of their political parties since creation in the early nineties.
They all
preach change. They indict President Paul Biya for holding tight to power and
resisting change but are doing exactly what the CPDM patron does. And the
power-hungry politicians who call themselves leaders tumble over each other to
create their own banana political parties.
But does
that help to advance Cameroon’s democratisation process? At The Guardian Post, we believe the
formation of political parties that exist only on paper, propaganda tracts and
small press conferences wreck the advancement of our democracy.
The democratisation
process will be better enhanced if the country can have two or three main
political parties with known ideologies as it is the case in Britain, the
United States or next-door Nigeria.
The
government cannot keep talking of promoting “national unity and integration” if
political parties are formed on myopic tribal lines. The law for independent
candidates in Cameroon ensures that any postulant demonstrates a national
acceptance. He is required to obtain at least ten signatures from Councillors,
parliamentarians and first class chiefs from all the ten regions of the
country.
Shouldn’t
the same demonstration of national reception be required for the formation of a
political party? Neighbouring Nigeria, for instance, does something close to
that by ensuring a political party demonstrates its existence in all the states
with a secretariat.
That
discourages adventurers from disturbing and slowing down the democratisation
process with the formation of useless political parties without a base, just
targeting to get tax payers’ money for participating in elections.
The Guardian Post holds that parliament can bring
some decency in the political arena by amending the law on creation of
political parties to keep political swashbucklers on the fringe of politicking
in the name of political party leaders.
No comments:
Post a Comment