The 2007 Session: Governing the African
Security Sector
The wave
of popular pressures for political reform that spread across Africa in the
period stretching from the late 1980s to the mid-1990s culminated in the
restoration of electoral pluralism in most of the countries of the
continent. This development went hand-in-hand with the adoption of
constitutional frames that, nominally at least, guaranteed wide-ranging
freedoms for the peoples of the continent. In most countries where
transitions to elected government occurred, the most visible sign of the
changes that took place was the withdrawal of the military from a direct
role in the political arena and its adoption of a more low profile position
in public policy discussions. Indeed, one of the stated aims of the
political reform effort was to ensure that the military was brought (fully)
under elected civilian governmental control. Thus, during the course of the
1990s, a considerable amount of discussion took place on the theory and
practice of civilian control over the military in a democratic or
democratising context; not a few African countries concluded bilateral
agreements with the United States and the European Union purportedly for the
attainment of this goal. Various academic and policy studies were produced
with a primary focus on how to achieve the twin project of the
depoliticisation of the military and the demilitarisation of the polity. But
few recognised that this twin project was also an ideal that required a
close and constant attention to the very foundation on which the modern
state system is built, including especially the modes of political
domination that inform its structuring. Fewer still were those who addressed
themselves to distortions that arise when the security logic on which the
state is founded is eroded for whatever reason. Also, there was insufficient
attention to the fact that the attainment of the objectives built into the
twin project had the potentiality to become a policy proxy for big power
hegemonic advantage in the international system. Furthermore, the conflation
of the military services with the entire security sector led to a
disproportionate focus of attention on the armed forces to the exclusion of
other components of the state and non-state security systems which, for
better or for worse, play a critical role in the polity.
The
extensive and expansive writ given to the formal security sector, of which
the military is a crucial but not the sole component, and the fact that many
operations central to the overall direction of a polity can and are shielded
from public scrutiny for the very reason of security underscores the need
for a closer attention to its governance. While this is a development that
is true worldwide, its consequences are probably more keenly felt in Africa
where struggles are still going on to consolidate fragile democratic
processes and structures. Indeed, in the case of the continent, recent
efforts at democratisation have gone hand in hand with an expansion in the
security sector even as the military withdrew from a direct controlling role
in political governance. The reasons for the expansion that has occurred in
the security sector are legion, comprising domestic and external factors
that need not detain us for now. The important point to note is that
although various policy programmes were pursued in the period from the 1990s
onwards to reform the African security sector, these have hardly resulted in
a system of governance of the sector that is either democratic internally or
open to popular democratic scrutiny. Apart from the military which still
functions in most countries with a considerable amount of latitude, the
police services have continued to relate to the bulk of the populace on the
basis of extortionary and predatory practices, abridging citizenship rights
with impunity, undermining democratic processes at the same time, and
enforcing the bureaucratic fiat of the ruling political elite. The secret
services have also undergone a generalised expansion in mandate and powers
with no shortage of issues around which their intervention in the political
system is justified. Finally, private formal and informal security services,
structured as commercial or neighbourhood vigilante operations, have also
expanded considerably, exercising powers over the citizenry without either
an effective public regulatory system in place or a framework for the
exaction of accountability to the local community. In sum, at the same time
as African countries have been immersed in the rituals of formal democratic
politics, they have experienced an expansion in their security sectors
without a commensurate investment in mechanisms for exacting democratic
accountability. And yet, few will disagree that, in the final analysis, the
mode of functioning of the sector both mirrors and summarises the entire
record of the politics of the democratic process itself, serving as a
platform by which its quality might be usefully measured.
Through the
2007 Governance Institute, the Council proposes to focus scholarly attention
primarily on the workings of the security sector as an expression of and an
arena for the joining of issues around the contradictory quests for popular
democratic governance on the one hand and, on the other hand, the
imperatives of local and global political domination as mediated by the
security logic underpinning the modern state system. In this struggle, it
would seem to matter little – or amount only to a question of details -
whether the project of domination is personalised or more broad-based.
Prospective participants will be encouraged to review existing debates on
the pre-colonial/historical antecedents of the modern security
establishment; the ways in which the structuring of the security system
shape the form of the modern state; the role and place of the security
services in contemporary African politics, economy and society; the factors
that underpin the emergence and expansion of informal security arrangements
and the interfaces which these informal arrangements might have with the
formal sector; strategies that have been pursued for the legitimation of the
formal and informal security systems, including the ideologies that have
been generated to this end; and the moral universe within which the
personnel of the security services function. Participants will be supported
to produce fresh empirical and analytic insights into the ways in which
processes of political domination are secured – and challenged - through the
modus operandi of the security services, engage in a comparative
analysis of their findings and reflect on the challenges posed by their own
work to inherited/dominant conceptual frames on the security sector and its
reform. The formal security services as integral elements of the state
generate and deploy information – and disinformation- on the different
trends, tendencies and struggles in any country as part of their bid to
master the national-territorial space; laureates of the 2007 Governance
institute will be encouraged to read the politics of democratisation in
contemporary Africa as captured by the extent of submission of the security
sector to democratic governance. But they will also be challenged to
identify the pressures for change that may be in evidence in the public
debates that are taking place on the need for a root-and-branch programme of
security sector reform.
Objectives:
The main
objectives of the Governance Institute are to:
-
encourage the sharing of experiences among researchers, activists and
policy makers from different disciplines, methodological and conceptual
orientations, and geographical/linguistic zones on a common theme over
an extended period of time;
-
promote and enhance a culture of democratic values that allows Africans
effectively to identify and tackle the governance issues confronting
their continent; and
-
foster the participation of scholars in discussions and debates about
the processes of democratisation taking place in Africa.