There're still good African leaders despite lack of Mo Ibrahim Prize winner

Dr Salim Ahmed Salim. ILLUSTRATION | JOHN NYAGAH  NATION MEDIA GROUP

By Salim Ahmed Salim

In Summary

• The absence of mature well-functioning institutions or a strong democratic culture makes leadership much harder and the achievements of those who rise above the challenges are all the more remarkable.
• We expect candidates, through their leadership, to have left a very strong legacy with their country, including its democratic culture, in a far better state than when they took office.

In every country and every continent, the quality and contribution of leadership in government is critical. It is presidents and prime ministers who have the responsibility of assessing the risks, choosing the correct priorities for their country and focusing national efforts to ensure they are delivered.

Get these decisions right and a country and its people can move forward no matter what obstacles are in their way. Get it wrong and, despite commitment and hard work, progress will stall or go into reverse.  

But the importance and contribution of executive leadership is, in many ways, far greater in Africa. The continent’s problems are, after all, so much more severe and complex. Even a global challenge such as climate change is already having a more damaging impact on Africa than other regions.

The continent’s leaders have to meet these problems with far fewer resources than their counterparts in wealthier countries have at their disposal. They also lack the institutional support on which their counterparts elsewhere can rely.

The absence of mature well-functioning institutions or a strong democratic culture makes leadership much harder and the achievements of those who rise above the challenges are all the more remarkable.

This was the background against which the Mo Ibrahim Prize for Achievement in Leadership in Africa was established in 2007. By highlighting exceptional leadership, our aim was to provide role models for the qualities needed at all levels of African societies.

The award itself was also intended to provide the means for those honoured to continue their contribution to their continent once they had left national political office.

Retired leaders outside of Europe and North America rarely have the generous pensions or well-paid directorships that give them the freedom to subsidise public duties.

Having funded the prize through his foundation, Mo left the decision of whether, and to whom, the prize should be awarded each year, to an independent committee on which he does not sit nor attempts to influence.

The committee, which I now have the honour to chair, meets regularly during the year as we did again last week to consider potential candidates tor the 2015 award.

It was, in fact, our 10th conclusive meeting, which is a good time to take stock of what’s been achieved in the past decade. What is clear is that the prize has been successful in focusing attention on and stimulating debate about the importance of leadership in Africa. It has also provided the platform, as was hoped, for outstanding individuals to continue their invaluable work in public life.

President Pedro Pires of Cape Verde, the 2011 Laureate, has used the prize to set up an Institute for Leadership to give young leaders the capability to drive development in Cape Verde and across Africa.

The 2008 laureate, then president Festus Mogae of Botswana has brought high-profile African figures including the 2007 laureate former Mozambique president Joachim Chissano and the 2014 Laureate former Namibian president Hifikepunye Pohamba together in Champions for an HIV-Free Generation to press for effective solutions to the disease.

Both presidents Chissano and Mogae have also been active in mediating conflicts and disputes, notably in Madagascar, northern Uganda and South Sudan. All are involved in promoting strong governance in Africa. 

But any reflection on the past decade also reveals confusion over how the committee comes to its decision and the criteria we use. An indication of this is how on those occasions when the committee decides not to award the prize, as happened last week, our decision is seized on as indictment of the poor standards of leadership on the continent. This is a misunderstanding of the scope and purpose of the Ibrahim Prize.