Category: Features

By Paul Ejime

In less than two years, (2025), the Economic Community of West African States (ECOWAS) will mark its Golden Jubilee Anniversary. Given the high rate of turnover of similar regional organisations vis-a-vis its achievements, especially in the domain of preventive diplomacy, conflict management and resolution since its establishment in May 1975, even hardline critics will not deny ECOWAS its due credit.

However, faced with a combination of factors in recent years, particularly bad governance, poverty, and corruption, compounded by the crisis of globalising liberal democracy, the collapse of multilateralism and the rise of multipolarities and asymmetric threat vectors, such as terrorism, cyber warfare and social media, the West African regional bloc has found itself struggling to even meet its own standards.

Leadership deficit at the national and regional levels is only part of the problem. Most telling and unresolved is the chronic lack of institutional capacity, which features prominently in the reports of external stakeholders and ECOWAS development partners.

With an estimated staff strength of under 2,000, including less than 70 Directors servicing the organisation’s 14 Specialised Agencies and six Institutions, including the Commission, ECOWAS is grossly understaffed in quality and quantity of hands-on technocrats.

This translates to a lack of absorptive capacity, which limits its ability to fully utilise available resources or attract more funding for the coordination and implementation of critical and strategic programmes and policies to deepen cohesion and progressively eliminate identified barriers to the full integration of the more than 400 million Community.

To compound matters, the organisation only returned recently to a seven-Commissioner structure made up of the Offices of the President, Vice-President, and five Commissioners overseeing more than 26 Directorates, Divisions, and administrative Units.

Until last year, the regional leaders had in their wisdom, expanded the organisation to a 15-Commissioner structure with the attendant drain on human and financial resources.

The lack of dynamic and visionary technocrats means that ECOWAS, once applauded for its forward-looking and proactive policies and engagements, has become increasingly ineffective and on the verge of losing relevance.

The tragic consequences of leadership failure coincided with the lack of independent-mindedness and the required ‘supranationalism’ of actions/decisions at the level of the Commission, coupled with an accelerated retreat of democracy in the region.

Four of the 15-nation regional bloc are now under military dictatorships from 2020, with three – Mali, Burkina Faso, and Niger, forming a Cooperation and Defence Alliance, short of withdrawal from ECOWAS.

The gap in critical thinking at the Commission has left the Heads of State with a field day without stabilising and nuanced inputs from skilled technocrats.

In a bid to address the manpower shortfall, previous managements had resorted to ad-hoc recruitments, following the embargo placed on wholesale employment.

But the problem has persisted with some staff members complaining about unfairness, lack of transparency or alleged bias in favour of either of the ECOWAS three language groups – French, English, and Portuguese.

Consequently, the President Omar Alieu Touray-led ECOWAS Commission Management, which assumed office in July 2022, is in the process of conducting a new recruitment exercise.

But even before its commencement, the exercise has generated an unnecessary controversy as a result of Management’s position that new recruitment at the Commission would be limited to internal staff, such that vacant positions would not be advertised.

The Civil Society Network Against Corruption (CSNAC) is among NGOs and independent observers that have faulted this decision.

The CSNAC in a widely publicised petition to the Commission has threatened to challenge the decision, which it described as violating ECOWAS Revised Treaty and Staff Regulations, at the ECOWAS Court of Justice.

In particular, the Network drew the Commission’s attention to Article 18(5) of the ECOWAS Revised Treaty of 1993, which stipulates that “in appointing professional staff for the Community, due regard shall be subject to ensuring the highest standards of efficiency and technical competence, to maintaining equitable geographical distribution of posts and gender balance among nationals of all Member States (pgs. 64-65:1993).”

It also argues that the decision contravenes Article 9(2b) of the ECOWAS Staff Regulations, which stipulates that “all permanent professional positions declared vacant shall be advertised. Applicants shall be notified of the receipt of application for the positions advertised. The deadline for receipt of applications shall be forty-five (45) calendar days after the date of publication.”

Furthermore, the Network quoted Article 9(c) of the Staff Regulations, which “states that (vacant) positions shall be filled through a competitive recruitment process in which all shortlisted candidates shall appear before the relevant Committee (pg. 14).”

It reminded the Commission President, “that as primary custodian of all ECOWAS regulations, laws and policies, he should not be perceived to be condoning any forms of illegality.”

The Network, therefore, demands “rescindment of the illegal position of denying qualified community citizens, including the current staff of the ECOWAS Commission, the right to apply and be considered for professional positions at the ECOWAS Commission.”

“Failure to do this will compel us to approach the …ECOWAS Community Court of Justice, in order to compel the ECOWAS Commission to do what is fair and just to all,” it added.

Sources at the Commission have explained that the recruitment could be opened to external candidates in cases where internal candidates did not fit the skill set.

However, independent analysts and sources at the ECOWAS Court of Justice all agree that the standard practice, which is consistent with ECOWAS instrumentalities is to advertise vacant positions, with a proviso that due consideration would be accorded internal candidates under specific circumstances.

The Commission President probably meant well, as part of efforts to boost waning staff morale, even so, recruitments take unnecessarily long periods and cost money in the ECOWAS system. A controversial decision involving splitting the process into phases will not only cost more but will defeat the purpose of urgently filling critical positions.

Furthermore, any recruitment exercise that is perceived as discriminatory will be against the principles of natural justice, equity, and fairness.

Another counterargument is that the present “internal staff,” could not have gained employment in ECOWAS if recruitment had not been externalised.

ECOWAS has to inject fresh blood into its foundering system, and for its personnel to perform at optimum, they must be of the highest calibre of competencies and proficiency. This is the only way to retool and reposition the regional bloc to address emerging challenges effectively.

This position is consistent with the Touray-led management’s “4×4 Strategic Objectives – Enhanced Peace and Security, Deepening Regional Integration, Good Governance and, Inclusive and Sustainable Development” – as well as ECOWAS Fundamental Principles of “Equality and inter-dependence of Member States,” and “Equitable and just distribution of the costs and benefits of economic co-operation and integration.”

It is also in tandem with the new Vision of moving from an ECOWAS of States to an “ECOWAS of the People: “…a borderless region where the population has access to its abundant resources … (and is) governed in accordance with the principles of democracy, the rule of law and good governance.”

Proceeding with a controversial recruitment process will only open the floodgate for costly and unnecessary lawsuits against the Commission, at this critical juncture of ECOWAS’ history. (Flowerbudnews)

*Paul Ejime is a Global Affairs Analyst and Consultant on Peace & Security and Governance Communications

By Paul Ejime

ECOWAS leaders have resolved to set up a committee of three Heads of State to negotiate a “short” transition programme to democracy with the Niger Junta having failed to carry through with its threat to use military force to restore constitutional order in the country following the 26 July military coup.

In another climb down, the Authority of ECOWAS Heads of State and Government directed Member States “to exempt the Transition Presidents, Prime Ministers, and Foreign Ministers of the Member States in Transition (Mali, Guinea, and Burkina Faso), from the travel ban and other targeted individual sanctions imposed on them.” The three countries and Niger are under military dictatorships.

These were some of the major decisions contained in the Communique of the regional leaders’ one-day Summit held on Sunday, in the Nigerian capital Abuja, which is most eloquent in its equivocation and ambiguity in response to the growing unconstitutional moves by some governments, with potential threats to peace and security in the politically restive region.

The 11-page, 54-point Communique said the Presidents of Togo, Sierra Leone, and Benin should engage with Niger’s National Council for the Safeguard of Homeland, “CNSP (the French acronym) and other stakeholders with a view to agreeing a short transition roadmap, establishing transition organs as well as facilitating the setting up of a transition monitoring and evaluation mechanism towards this speedy restoration of constitutional order.”

“Based on the outcomes of the engagement by the committee of Heads of State with the CNSP, the (ECOWAS) Authority will progressively ease the sanctions imposed on Niger,” it said, adding: “In the event of failure by the CNSP to comply with the outcomes of the engagement with the Committee, ECOWAS shall maintain all sanctions, including the use of force, and shall request the African Union and all other partners to enforce the targeted sanctions on members of the CNSP and their associates.

“The Authority further deplores the lack of commitment on the part of the CNSP to restore constitutional order. Consequently, the Authority calls on the CNSP to release (ousted) President Mohammed Bazoum, his family, and associates immediately and without precondition,” the Communique affirmed.

The Summit also directed the ECOWAS Commission “to embark on deep reflection and explore the possibility of convening (an) Extraordinary Summit on unconstitutional changes of government aimed at promoting peace, security, and democracy in the region.”

Many had expected the Abuja Summit to come down hard on the unconstitutional decisions by some regional leaders.

For instance, in utter violation of Article 64 of Guinea Bissau’s Constitution, President Umaro Sissoco Embalo has dissolved the opposition-controlled parliament, following clashes between the National Guard members and the nation’s armed forces, which the government called a coup attempt.

The Summit only expressed “deep preoccupation with the recent developments in Guinea-Bissau and the threats they pose to constitutional order” and “therefore calls for the full respect of the national constitution and a transparent investigation into the various events in accordance with the law and, with a view to ensuring the quick restoration of all national institutions.”

The Authority also decided “to extend the mandate of the ECOWAS Stabilisation Support Mission in Guinea Bissau (SSMGB) for one year,” in what many observers consider as a “reward for authoritarianism.”

Regarding Senegal, where President Macky Sall recently proscribed an opposition party and sacked members of the national electoral Commission with a few months to a crucial presidential election, the Communique said: “The Authority takes note of preparations towards the 25th of February 2024 presidential election and urges the Government and stakeholders in the electoral process to continue to prioritize inclusivity and transparency towards the conduct of the poll.”

Sierra Leone is another Member State under palpable political tension following the government’s two reported coup attempts within the past three months in the aftermath of the disputed June presidential election amid allegations by the government linking the opposition APC and figures to the coup.

The Elections Commission for Sierra Leone declared President Julius Maada Bio re-elected with 56% of the vote, but his rival Dr Samura Kamara and his opposition party have vehemently rejected the results claiming that the election was marred by fraud.

By the weekend of the Abuja Summit, Sierra Leone’s former President Ernest Bai Koroma, an opposition leader, was reportedly put under “house arrest,” after security agencies interrogation him for several hours over the reported coup that killed more than 20 people. Many arrests have been made and more than a dozen inmates reportedly escaped from prison in the nation’s capital, Freetown.

President Bio of Sierra Leone is now named on the Committee of three Heads of State to negotiate the restoration of constitutional order in Niger, and perhaps, to prop his government, ECOWAS leaders at the Abuja summit “directed the Commission to continue supporting Sierra Leone and facilitate the deployment of an ECOWAS Standby security Mission for stabilization.”

Similarly, on The Gambia, while urging “the Government and stakeholders to expedite the adoption of a new Constitution, ahead of the 2026 general elections, as well as the implementation of the White Paper on the recommendations of the Truth, Reconciliation and Reparation Commission,” the Summit “decides to extend the mandate of the ECOWAS Mission in The Gambia (ECOMIG) for one year, and instructs the Mission to continue to support The Gambia in the implementation of the White Paper and needed Defence and Security Sector Reforms.”

With four of 15 ECOWAS member States under military rule, and the governments of three other member States being propped up by military forces, it is an understatement that democratic governance is on an accelerated decline in the region.

Experience has shown that some leaders of beneficiary governments of regional military forces, tend to use/misuse the forces to further their selfish political interests and ambitions.

Analysts have continuously pointed out that bad governance, corruption and “political, unconstitutional and ballot box coups,” by the political class are mainly responsible for the resurgence of military coups in West Africa. But while ECOWAS is quick to condemn the former, it either ignores or romanticises the latter, hence the growing criticisms of the regional bloc for inconsistency and poor leadership.

Meanwhile, the regional leaders at the Abuja Summit also reiterated their commitment to the “eradication of terrorism and other threats to peace, security, and stability in the region,” and therefore resolved “to urgently review efforts to activate a standby force for counterterrorism operations in areas infested by terrorist groups.”

“The Authority takes note of the commencement of assignment by the (ECOWAS) Special Envoy on Counterterrorism, Ambassador Baba Kamara, and directs the Commission to facilitate his mission.

“The Authority directs the Commission to intensify collaboration with sub-regional counterterrorism initiatives such as the Accra initiative and MTJN and urges member states to increase funding for joint maritime operations and exercises in the region and to improve coordination and collaboration among various ministries, departments, and agencies responsible for maritime security,” said the Communique.

Dr Omar Alieu Touray, President of the ECOWAS Commission, read the Communique of the summit, which was attended by seven Heads of State of the 15-nation Organization, while others were represented, except Mali, Guinea, and Burkina Faso, which are suspended.

Prime Minister Ouhoumoudou Mahamadou, in President Bazoum’s toppled administration, represented Niger.

Presided over by Nigeria’s President Bola Tinubu, the current Charman of the Authority of ECOWAS Heads of State and Government, who called for engagement with the military juntas for the peaceful restoration of constitutional order and good governance, the Summit was also attended by the African Union and UN representatives.

The fact that ECOWAS, once acclaimed as a forward-looking Regional Economic Community with a good track record in conflict prevention, management, and resolution, now appears to be foundering beggars belief.

Granted that the global socio-economic and political environment has evolved; unless there is a drastic change in the dispositions of leaders at national, institutional, and regional levels, the perennial security and governance challenges facing the ECOWAS region will likely worsen with dire consequences on the regional integration agenda set by the organisation’s founding fathers.

Most of the achievements chalked by ECOWAS in the past were traced to the independent-mindedness and supranational orientation of the Commission, which is charged with the coordination and implementation of critical and strategic programmes and policies that will deepen cohesion and progressively eliminate identified barriers to full integration.

For instance, in 2009, the ECOWAS Commission was able to make former President Mohamadou Tandja’s to reverse his unconstitutional dissolution of Niger’s parliament.

Also, the Commission based on a damning report by its fact-finding Mission refused to send an election Observation Mission to the 2011 election in The Gambia and subsequently withheld recognition of the results of that election, in which then authoritarian President Yahya Jammeh claimed victory.

ECOWAS requires an urgent change of tact guided by principled stance and tough decisions against undemocratic behaviours to restore its past glory and save its waning reputation.(Flowerbudnews)

*Paul Ejime is a Global Affairs Analyst and Consultant on Peace & Security and Governance Communications

*By Paul Ejime

ECOWAS leaders converge in Abuja, the Nigerian capital on Sunday for their end-of-year ordinary summit with a plethora of unresolved socio-economic, security and governance issues, especially perennial insecurity, and a resurgence of military coups with four members of the 15-nation regional bloc under military dictatorships.

Little or no progress has been reported in regional efforts to restore constitutional order in Guinea, Mali, Burkina Faso, and Niger, where the military has seized power with the last three recently forming a mutual Defence Alliance, against an attack on any of them, short of their withdrawing from ECOWAS.

This was in apparent response to ECOWAS’ failure to make good on its recent widely publicised threat to deploy a military force to restore constitutional order in Niger, after the military coup in July.

Also, following its disputed elections in June, Sierra Leone is under political tension after witnessing two deadly shootings, which the government called coup attempts, with more than 20 persons reported killed and many inmates let out of jails in Freetown, the nation’s capital

The country’s former President Ernest Bai Koroma was questioned by police this week after the government accused his opposition party of involvement in the alleged coup attempt.

In Guinea Bissau, President Umaro Sissoco Embalo has unconstitutionally dissolved the opposition-controlled parliament after reporting a coup attempt last week, the second within two years in the country.

An uneasy calm equally prevails in Senegal, where President Macky Sall’s government has proscribed an opposition party and sacked members of the national electoral commission with only a few months to the presidential election in February 2024.

The developments in Guinea Bissau and Senegal are nothing short of “political and constitutional coups,” which are potential triggers or drivers of military putsches.

Socio-economic hardships are also biting hard, coupled with sporadic deadly attacks by terrorists, Islamic extremists, or separatist insurgents in the region.

All “coups” constitute a threat to democracy and a endanger to peace and security in the region. But the fact that ECOWAS appears more enthusiastic at condemning only military coups is not lost on critics, who accuse the organisation of inconsistency or hypocrisy.

Another troubling irony is that ECOWAS, which enjoyed international acclaim decades ago for achievements in conflict prevention, management, and resolution, appears to have lost direction, by exhibiting an embarrassing lack of will or inability to rise to its own standards.

Set up in May 1975 to foster regional integration, ECOWAS was considered a trailblazer among Africa’s Regional Economic Communities (RECs).

Indeed, at a stage, all the 15 ECOWAS member States operated one form of democratic system of government or another.

But for keen followers of the regional organisation, “the rain,” like Nigeria’s world-renowned novelist Chinua Achebe said in his iconic Things Fall Apart, “started beating” ECOWAS about a decade ago.

After embracing multiparty democracy in the late 1999s to early 2000s, and doing away with dictatorships and authoritarian regimes, the ever-ingenious political class found ways of circumventing the democratic processes and principles.

As with most politicians, their West African counterparts found ways of exploiting loopholes in national constitutions and electoral legal frameworks.

After the initial celebration of a relatively peaceful transfer of political power with examples of ruling parties/governments losing in elections and handing power to the opposition, the refrain changed.

Elections were held regularly but with questionable integrity. Money became the deciding factor in most elections.

ECOWAS Chairman, President Tinubu

Democracy, a process for registered voters to choose their leaders became a personalised, do-or-die affair, in which the powerful and wealthy politicians with deep pockets prevailed.

Election became an investment, for politicians to put in money and recoup abnormal profits, and a source of ill-gotten wealth to be deployed into winning the next election, and the vicious circle continued.

Deploying their large war chest, the rich and powerful rigged elections without consequences.

The line between the three arms of government – the executive, the legislature, and the judiciary – became blurred, with separation of powers thrown out of the window. The result is the effective capture of the State and its institutions.

Having “seized” power in rigged elections, the executive arm of government usually pockets the parliament, to change the national constitution, with the judiciary also compromised to enable the politicians to obtain or retain power through unconstitutional means.

The dysfunctional administrations have weaponized poverty through bad governance and anti-people policies, ensuring that the so-called benefits of democracy accrue only to public officeholders, their family members, and a limited number of others through political patronage.

Political opposition becomes anathema, with opposition figures brutalised, imprisoned, or exiled.

Alternative view is not tolerated, the democratic space shrinks with press freedom and human rights under stricture.

The election management bodies, with independent or autonomous nomenclature, are only so in name, and always under pressure to do the bidding of those in government, who also control the power of coercion, the security ‘apparatchiks.

Civil society is not spared, and neither is the media, and development partners, some of which influence the outcome of elections on behalf of foreign governments under the guise of helping the developing countries.

The cumulative effect is that democracy has been forced into retreat in the ECOWAS region.

While all hope is not lost, the management of the ECOWAS Commission and regional leaders must engage in a serious introspection on how to reposition the regional bloc on the path to the realisation of the dreams of its founding fathers.

Certainly, the Abuja end-of-year summit would not provide all the answers, but it could be the starting point to end the drift and allow ECOWAS to rediscover its glorious past for the benefit of the community’s estimated 400 million citizens, who must be wondering what befell their once admired organisation.

ECOWAS does not lack the instruments or protocols to get back on track once the leadership at the national and regional levels can muster the requisite political will. (Flowerbudnews)

*Paul Ejime is a Global Affairs Analyst and Consultant on Peace & Security and Governance Communications

By Paul Ejime

The failure of the Economic Community of West African States (ECOWAS) to follow through with its recent threat of military intervention to restore constitutional order in Niger, the fourth of its member States to have descended into a military dictatorship within the last four years is embarrassing enough. But the regional organisation faces even greater reputational damage from its lethargic response to disturbing “political and constitutional coups” in the region.

Until a decade ago, ECOWAS boasted a good track record in political conflict/crisis prevention, management, and resolution, including international acclaim for ending the civil wars in Liberia and Sierra Leone, followed by the restoration of peace in other member States such as Cote d’Ivoire, Guinea, Guinea Bissau, and Niger.

These successes were achieved through a combination of sanctions and preventive diplomacy relying on regional instruments and protocols, which have been adopted by other organisations, such as the African Union.

For instance, the 1999 ECOWAS Protocol Relating to the Mechanism for Conflict Prevention, Management, Resolution, Peacekeeping (the Mechanism), and the 2001 Supplementary Protocol on Democracy and Good Governance have been used to stabilise the region progressively and incrementally and promote democratic governance, especially by applying the policy of ‘Zero Tolerance’ to power obtained or maintained by unconstitutional means.

Between 2009 and 2010, three member States – Guinea, Niger and Cote d’Ivoire were suspended for violating the 2001 Protocol. Specifically, in 2009, the tenure elongation plan of the then Niger President Mamadou Tandja, was halted and he was forced to reverse his dissolution of the country’s parliament.

Also, the post-election crisis in 2010 and subsequent civil war 2011-2012 in Cote d’Ivoire were eventually resolved with ECOWAS inputs to international efforts.

The regional organisation also bluntly refused to deploy observers to the 2011 ‘sham’ elections conducted by the then Gambian dictator Yahya Jammeh. Citing the absence of a conducive democratic environment and level-playing field reported by its fact-finding Mission to the Gambia, ECOWAS refused to recognise the results of that election.

Jammeh went ahead with another election in 2016, but the post-election violence eventually resulted in his forced exile in Equatorial Guinea in 2017, through an ECOWAS-led international intervention. That crisis could have been avoided if the international community had supported ECOWAS’ principled stance in 2011.

Set up in 1975 primarily to foster economic development and regional integration, peace and security were injected into the ECOWAS regional agenda because of the myriad political conflicts and governance challenges, including civil wars that followed the formation of the regional organisation.

To their credit, ECOWAS leaders of that time responded promptly and with urgency, often militarily, to halt the slide of the region into anarchy, and to salvage the organisation’s credibility, through the rigorous application of normative and institutional frameworks to support the aspirations of the peoples based on shared values of democracy, the rule of law, human rights, and market economy.

Unfortunately, those aspirations and ECOWAS’ glory appear to have receded into the distant past, no thanks to leadership failures at national and regional levels.

Granted that the political environment has since evolved charactered by different hues of insecurity, especially terrorism, religious extremism, asymmetric warfare, and global economic recession, but it also behoved ECOWAS leaders to think outside the box.

Instead, the regional organisation has become largely ineffective because its leaders have allowed the lack of principle to gain foothold over time, due to their pursuit of personal ambitions, greed, corruption, authoritarian tendencies, and insensitivity, with regional protocols completely ignored on observed in breach.

Four ECOWAS member States – Mali, Guinea, Burkina Faso, and Niger, are presently under military dictatorships after several coups, with three of the countries Mali, Burkina Faso, and Niger, forging a coalition and Defence Alliance, that falls short of their withdrawal from ECOWAS.

The collaboration by the four suspended member States, that are also enduring ECOWAS-imposed sanctions, could be part of their “survival strategy.”

Even so, ECOWAS cannot dismiss such unwholesome developments or the resurgence of coups in the region, with two attempts each reported in Guinea Bissau and Sierra Leone, resulting in simmering political tensions in both countries following post-election disputes.

The opposition in Sierra Leone has rejected the results of the June presidential election after the national electoral Commission declared sitting President Julius Maada Bio re-election with 56.17% over his opposition party rival Samura Kamara.

Also troubling is President Umaro Sissoco Embalo’s decision to dissolve Guinea Bissau’s opposition-controlled parliament. This followed violence that greeted last week’s gunbattle which the government called an ‘attempted military coup’ after the legislature condemned the clashes between the National Guard and the State armed forces.

Meanwhile, the Bissau government has remained silent on the casualty figure and the number of arrests, adding to the dozens that were rounded up after the February 2022 reported coup attempt in that country.

Many analysts consider some of the foiled coup reports as a ploy by the governments involved to silence the opposition.

More importantly, Embalo’s dissolution of the parliament is in blatant violation of Article 64 of Guinea Bissau’s Constitution and therefore, “a constitutional coup.”

The former Portuguese colony operates a semi-presidential system, which emphasises separation of powers with the majority party or coalition, in this case, the opposition PAIGC in control of parliament, government and the National Guard, while the National armed forces report to the President.

Announcing the latest parliament dissolution in a presidential decree, the second time in two years after the reported coup attempt in February 2022, Embalo, who is also accused of operating a private army, said a new election would be held on an unspecified date. However, the country’s constitution forbids the dissolution of parliament 12 months before an election.

Guinea Bissau is one of the countries where ECOWAS has invested large human and financial resources over the years in peacekeeping and stabilisation.

An ECOWAS military Mission is in place in the country. It was only sent back in February 2022 following the withdrawal in 2020 of a larger Mission, ECOMIB, deployed in 2012.

Also, recently in Senegal, which will hold a crucial presidential election in February 2024, President Macky Sall, has gone on “political rampage,” by proscribing an opposition party and sacking members of the national electoral Commission, a move considered “a political coup.”

It is not only ironic but inconsistent that ECOWAS, which is usually quick to condemn military coups has remained silent on the political and constitutional coups threatening peace and security in Guinea Bissau and Senegal, and by extension, the region.

ECOWAS’ response has equally been timid to the developments in Sierra Leone, where the government is reportedly targeting opposition members in the aftermath of two reported coup attempts from September.

Military rule is an aberration in the Modern World, and military coups cannot be justified, neither should “political, constitutional, ballot box, or human rights coups.”

ECOWAS member States must realise that there is strength in unity, but individually, they will be preyed upon by foreign powers be they from Europe, the Americas, Russia, or China.

There is no doubt that ECOWAS and its present leaders have derailed on the dreams of the organisation’s founding fathers. They, therefore, owe themselves and more than 400 million citizens of the community a constitutional duty and responsibility to right the wrongs and guarantee good governance, based on democratic principles and international best practices.

The ECOWAS Commission management and regional leaders must not allow the sacrifices of past leaders to be in vain.

Nigeria, the regional powerhouse, current Chair of the ECOWAS Authority, and the organisation’s largest financial contributor has to step up and lead by example.

Democracy may not be a panacea, but through credible elections, it provides the necessary choice for transition to normalcy, particularly in West Africa’s fragile and politically restive environment.

As noted by the famous British Prime Minister Sir Winston Churchill in 1947:

“Many forms of government have been tried in this world of sin and woe. No one pretends that democracy is perfect or all-wise. Indeed, it has been said that democracy is the worst form of government except all those other forms that have been tried from time to time.”

A former ECOWAS Commission President Ambassador James Victor Gheho also affirmed during a presentation in Chatham House, London in 2011: “We made a conscious choice with the genuine belief that while even the most credible elections may not produce good leaders, at least they offer the electorate the opportunity to remove bad ones. ECOWAS, therefore, encouraged Member States to interrogate and refocus their style of governance.” (Flowerbudnews)

*Paul Ejime is a Global Affairs Analyst and Consultant on Peace & Security and Governance Communications