The global humanitarian campaigner and board member of the Mo Ibrahim Foundation Graca Machel spoke with Trevor Analo on whether the organisation’s prize award, put in place to promote good governance in Africa, is achieving its purpose, as well as her work on gender-based violence.

------------------------------------------

The Mo Ibrahim Prize — the biggest individual prize in the world — is now in its eighth year, and there have been four winners so far. Is the prize achieving the goal of promoting good governance in Africa as its founders intended to do?

The prize doesn’t work in isolation. We have to look at it side by side with the Mo Ibrahim Governance Index. We have to scrutinise how the governance Index in a given country has been performing over a given period of time as well as the politics of the leader and his personal contribution.

So first, the index has been positive in terms of countries looking at themselves in the mirror and benchmarking themselves according to the pillars of governance stipulated in the index. This has given business, civil society and the media the necessary tools to hold governments to account and measure the extent to which the country is progressing.

The prize gives us a reference to acknowledge, value and honour good leadership. Although there is no excellence in totality in all the countries, for those that are doing well, it builds self confidence and gives hope that they can do better.

Africans are still struggling with the challenge of disconnecting from colonial influences; when we compare ourselves with Western countries, we see that there are good things happening on our continent, done by Africans. It is important that we have those benchmarks so that we celebrate ourselves as Africans.

African leaders are very wealthy individuals. Many critics have argued that $5 million may not be much of an incentive for such presidents. What is your take on that?

We should focus on the fact that all the four laureates of the Mo Ibrahim Prize are humble and I can tell you they are not rich as some people have suggested. They are not in that category and this sends a message — that there are leaders who are humble, simple and know how to serve. All the others will have to measure themselves against such benchmarks and we have tools to question why they don’t make the cut.

How about if an incredibly wealthy president meets all your criteria? Would they be considered for the Prize?

We have not come across that case and I cannot predict what would happen. But the committee looks at each case on merit.

One of the ideas behind the Mo Ibrahim Prize is to change the long-held view that contemporary African leaders are still the Mobutus and Idi Amins of this world in Mo Ibrahim’s words. Is that changing?

Take the example of Joachim Chissano, who was awarded the prize, (in the context of a continent ravaged by conflict). At the time, we had many countries in conflict and we were struggling to find solutions. Chissano came out as a leader who listened to all voices in the society, reached out to opposition leaders, humbled himself to negotiate for the sake of peace and led a constitutional process that brought everybody together.

Another example is Festus Mogae, who led Botswana to economic development with social cohesion, and now the country is among the most stable and prosperous in Africa. These are examples of good leaders on this continent; and there are countries that are models on how we can overcome the numerous challenges we face.

Across Africa, sitting leaders have attempted to extend their rule beyond constitutional limits. What is your message to them?

The Mo Ibrahim Foundation stands for absolute respect for the constitution and the constitution doesn’t fit persons; it fits a whole framework that allows a society, which consists of different agencies, work together in an inclusive way to prosper.

When a head of state is sworn in, they say they will respect and protect the constitution. We strictly stand for constitutionalism.

Over the past few years, there has been a lot of optimism about the future prospects of Africa. Economies are booming, new infrastructure and energy projects are being undertaken. More people are educated, but there seems to be no corresponding change on the political realm. What seems to be the problem?

I think there has been change and it is good to recognise that. One, more countries are now holding elections even though one can sometimes question the quality of these elections. Leaders are now given the mandate to rule by the people.

This is a major change. There was a time when the most common route to power was through the barrel of a gun. The African Union now says that whoever comes to power through unconstitutional means, will have their membership suspended. Many countries are now abiding by this principle.

It is not by chance that this economic growth is taking place. When you have democratic institutions in place then the conditions for growth are also created. What we are confronted with is whether this growth, is trickling down to the average African to give them a life of dignity.

We are very clear about that at the foundation. It’s not enough just to have economic growth it must be inclusive and not leave millions behind. What is important is to see how this new wealth is trickling down and many governments are now taking steps to create safety nets that provide support to the elderly, the poor and children who are heading families.

It is not enough but there are significant efforts being made to have more inclusive growth. Let us not fall into the trap of not acknowledging the small steps we have made.

You have also fought hard to get the African Union to recognise the problem of women and children affected by conflict, especially in the DRC, where gender-based violence is extremely high. Why is it that this issue cannot be found on the agenda of the AU?

We have made some steps together with other civil society organisations.  We told the African Commission for Human Rights that this is an issue of national security. It is no longer gender-based violence as such it is the security of a society, of a whole continent and so we need to take the discussion to the Security Council.

But they said that they cannot do that without coming up with their own fact-finding mission because the information they get is from the media. So we provided them with resources and offered training so that they could document what is happening in the DRC according to their own criteria.

The issue is being discussed within the Security Council of the AU. However, we have not succeeded in holding the perpetrators to account because in some cases the government or UN forces, and in others non-state armed groups are not accountable to anyone.

So what we are pushing for now is first, in case its government forces who are the perpetrators the government should take responsibility to punish its own people.

Second, we are working with other global civil society organisations to remove the immunity of peacekeeping forces on the issue of gender violence because perpetrators have been hiding behind the blue helmet, and we are saying no. Peacekeepers must be trained in human rights specifically women and children’s rights so that they know that they have to protect the people and not just separating warring armies.

We are lobbying to remove this immunity as long as there is sufficient evidence linking them to crimes against women. However, It is still a long process.