À partir de XXᵉ siècle
Africa
Traduction non disponible · Original (anglais) · français indisponible
The constitutional inheritance of African independence varied according to the form of decolonisation, the leaders who assumed power, and the character of nationalist movements. The extract distinguishes representative-parliamentary settlements, radical-revolutionary regimes, and conservative-monarchical arrangements. It also describes the rapid emergence of single-party systems, executive dominance, and contrasting efforts to preserve electoral participation, especially in Tanzania.
Poursuivre l’exploration
Le récit
African states entered independence with markedly different constitutional inheritances. These differences reflected the manner in which colonial rule ended, the political leadership to which power was transferred, and the structure of nationalist movements at independence. Three broad types are distinguished: representative-parliamentary institutions, radical-revolutionary regimes, and conservative-monarchical settlements.
Representative-parliamentary institutions were especially associated with anglophone and francophone East, West, and Central Africa. In francophone territories, the presidential parliamentarianism of the Fifth French Republic was often transferred; anglophone states generally inherited the Westminster model. Yet constitutional forms were soon altered as ruling parties sought to monopolise political power through electoral manipulation, coercion, imprisonment, or prohibition of opposition parties.
The resulting political order frequently became a de jure or de facto single-party state. Presidential power expanded, legislatures were subordinated to executives, judiciaries were made to serve executive interests, and security forces became para-political extensions of ruling parties. Ghana, Guinea, and Mali illustrate this tendency, while Tanzania retained more electoral choice and pursued participatory-democratic ideals despite its formal one-party structure.
À partir de XXᵉ siècle
Africa
Traduction non disponible · Original (anglais) · français indisponible
The constitutional inheritance of African independence varied according to the form of decolonisation, the leaders who assumed power, and the character of nationalist movements. The extract distinguishes representative-parliamentary settlements, radical-revolutionary regimes, and conservative-monarchical arrangements. It also describes the rapid emergence of single-party systems, executive dominance, and contrasting efforts to preserve electoral participation, especially in Tanzania.
Poursuivre l’exploration
Le récit
African states entered independence with markedly different constitutional inheritances. These differences reflected the manner in which colonial rule ended, the political leadership to which power was transferred, and the structure of nationalist movements at independence. Three broad types are distinguished: representative-parliamentary institutions, radical-revolutionary regimes, and conservative-monarchical settlements.
Representative-parliamentary institutions were especially associated with anglophone and francophone East, West, and Central Africa. In francophone territories, the presidential parliamentarianism of the Fifth French Republic was often transferred; anglophone states generally inherited the Westminster model. Yet constitutional forms were soon altered as ruling parties sought to monopolise political power through electoral manipulation, coercion, imprisonment, or prohibition of opposition parties.
The resulting political order frequently became a de jure or de facto single-party state. Presidential power expanded, legislatures were subordinated to executives, judiciaries were made to serve executive interests, and security forces became para-political extensions of ruling parties. Ghana, Guinea, and Mali illustrate this tendency, while Tanzania retained more electoral choice and pursued participatory-democratic ideals despite its formal one-party structure.