The Mo Ibrahim Foundation - Coursework Example

What conclusions can be drawn from the results of the Mo Ibrahim prize? The Mo Ibrahim Foundation is a non-governmental organization, which is out to promote African development through promoting good governance in sub Saharan Africa. The organization runs an award known as Mo Ibrahim Prize meant for retired heads of states and government. The prize is in terms of monetary value (Nsehe 2). However, there are debates to this prize. Some of the pros and cons made from the conclusion of the results regarding Mo Ibrahim prize are discussed below. List of pros and cons Pros Shows that African leadership is still way below the expected level since no one has been awarded for two consecutive years Helps in turning positive role models to African people Exposes the unsung African heroes and heroines Stir conversation about good governance Money helps the retired head of states to build a foundation Giving credit where due Promoting transparency Cons Narrow judging criteria which locks other contributors Bribing leaders to ensure good governance Deception of African leadership due to opportunist Questioned criteria of choosing Promoting political interests Contradicting approach Biased committee component Ineffective measurement of good governance Discussion of pros and cons of the prize Pros Exposing unsung heroes and heroines Most African leaders are not recognized in the international arena on their developmental records. They leave office unnoticed and nobody recommends their achievements. Mo Ibrahim Foundation exposes the unsung African leaders who have made tremendous achievements. Winning this award brings them into the limelight and the international arena for recognition. Similarly, winning this award gives them good exposure and puts them in an advantageous position of competing for other competitive awards for their achievements have been recognized (Nsehe 3). There are cases where their contributions are not recognized, and their good work perishes as soon as they leave the office. Therefore, the award is of benefit in exposing the deserving African leaders. Giving credit where due Africans head of states and governments have been reluctant in leaving offices for the past years. They have deployed various tactics to delay their terms in office through driving political coup, committing crimes against humanity and manipulating institutions. Some of these characteristics have been witnessed in the reign of Mugabe, Kabila, and Museveni among others. They have sustained bad governance in their countries, which puts the lives of citizens at risk. The prize is given to leaders who have made tremendous contributions in their nations by promoting good governance and putting structures for prosperity, which eliminates such characters. The prize award is also distributed to nations that have shown potential of improvements. It makes political institutions to reinforce a good working system, which allows for prosperity (Nsehe 6). This makes it discourage bad governance as every head of state wants to get the money, hence strives in meeting the criteria. Similarly, the money encourages the controlled use of money, which is transferred to African countries because it indicates that nations are awarded money based on their merits and accomplishments. Because of this, the prize encourages African head of states to establish good institutions that promote prosperity of their nations. Focusing on leaders of good governance Previous winners of the Mo Ibrahim prize have been great leaders who have made tremendous achievements. For instance, Nelson Mandela and Pedro Pires made important changes in their countries; these changes were worth recognition. They ended apartheid and promoted social development respectively. They also provided equality and democracy in the countries they led. They acted as examples and role models to be formulated (Nsehe 5). Through their achievements, they went to the books of history with positive remarks. Similarly, their examples and achievements are still celebrated to date. Giving prizes in monetary values as in the case of Mo Ibrahim serves as examples, which inspires other leaders. Small countries such as Swaziland, Djibouti among others gets inspiration since they come to believe that they equally stand a chance of acting as role models for Africa and its leaders. The prize helps in bringing equality since other small states also stand a chance (Nsehe 9). Without the prize, role models will come from big states that have higher influence and profiles. The money is awarded for excellence and this makes it different from pension where one receives the money continuously. Moreover, the money helps in motivating other people serving under the president or head of state. It awards the top and high standards of good governance that are replicated and maintained by leaders. The prize focuses on top government, which encourages top to down implementation of good governance. When the leader achieves, the same achievement is replicated in those below the ladder through motivation. Therefore, a small amount of money can be effective in influencing others to follow what their leaders do. Transparency The award is effective in raising awareness among citizens. It helps them in evaluating between good and bad governance that occurs in the states. Giving the prize award creates and shows awareness to citizens on what their leaders have done right. Similarly, publication of the index helps the citizens shows them what leaders have done right and areas, which needs improvements (Nsehe 13). Because of this, it forces transparency between the government and the society. Giving information about how government is fairing gives the citizens the mandate of taking the action against the government in case it does not meet their expectations. The prize is also challenging Africans citizen to develop the leadership they deserve, desire, and which gives them right. The strict standard and measures taken in awarding the deserving African head of state shows the realistic picture of good governance in Africa. It indicates the continuous need of developing good governance in Africa, which does not give the international community and citizens an illusion of good governance while it is not. Cons Ineffective measure of good governance It is not clear on how to classify and define good governance as well as recognize using the Mo Ibrahim Prize Award. The organization has created an index, assesses the Africa leader’s activities over time, and does the calculation. The foundations show that governance in Africa has improved with Liberia and Mauritius showing great improvements as per 2013 index (Ray 4). Questions are raised if the index has the proper weighing because where good governance is found depends on how the facts were evaluated or weighed. Similarly, the foundation does not use the index in awarding the prize even when it indicates positive results; it has a committee that awards the prize (Ray 4). Because of this, the methodology used in awarding the African leaders is not sound. It does not promote good governance, but instead awards the leaders in terms of their influence to the committee. This sets a dangerous precedence for African leaders bearing in mind that African states are still developing and have not reached a point required. Biased committee component It is not possible to know or judge the direction, which the African governance is going, right, or wrong. The prize committee is made of six people who decide among themselves who is best to take the prize and decides if it is to be granted. The panels are comprised of leading African figures with not all of them having served in elected positions like Mohamed ElBarandei. Similarly, not all the panel members are Africans as in the case of Martti Ahtisari and Mary Robinson (Ray 18). Among the people serving on the award panel, there is no African voice. A good governance evaluation should comprise of common citizens who feels the impact of government. Lack of public voice leads to lack of transparency in the constituting committees and making decisions. Governance prize should be inclusive other than a component aimed at maintaining the status quo at the expense of the citizens. Contradictory approach The prizes are taking a contradictory approach making it fail to deliver the right purpose. It is not possible to promote good governance by awarding former leaders. Awarding predecessors do not imply that the successor will also follow suit as they have personal preferences, which determines the goals and achievements. It is pointless awarding former leaders while there should be more concentration on current leaders to make them perform. Similarly, it is pointless to reward someone when he or she is no longer able to perform. Because of this, the prize is taking a contradictory approach in awarding leaders who do not deserve. More so, awarding someone who has already finished his or her term in office makes no difference in the current leadership. Everyone has his or her own style of leadership and government agenda varies. This makes the awards to be off the track as it contradicts what is to do in promoting good governance. Bribing good governance The Mo Ibrahim prize is a way of bribing African leaders to shift gears towards good governance. The financial reward that is in a lump sum is an incentive to make African leaders focus on good governance models and approaches. There are no questions asked about what next after the money is given to the leader, nobody bothers asking where it goes and how it is used. Giving out money to retired leaders is breeding corruption and bribery, as there are no clear ways and outlined means on how the money is spent. It could have been better if the retired leaders are given the money to campaign for good governance. The absence of clear structures and reasons of giving such money is seen as a way of bribing African leaders to accept good governance. The people have a say on the type of government that they want, which cannot be bought by money. Deception of African leadership due to opportunist The Mo Ibrahim prize is a deception to the whole African continent (Ray 14). Africa is still struggling to accommodate democracy in its system. Many African countries do not guarantee a rule of law and bad governance characterizes them. There is no point of awarding deserving leaders today if the citizens cannot feel the effects. Africans still have problems and challenges they are still struggling to overcome caused by their colonial powers. The prize is meant to deceive Africans to shift their focus that they have achieved democracy. Africa has nothing to celebrate if most of the countries are still poor and families are sleeping and dying of hunger. Few opportunists who want to deceive Africans and benefit use the prize. Therefore, the prize is not worth for individuals since African countries still have challenges, which their leaders are not able to tackle. Political interest Since the foundation started giving out the award, there has been little result on the current African leadership. Most leaders still don not follow the rule of law. Although some African countries have managed to bring changes and recorded growth, many African states are still lagging behind. The award prize has not been able to promote positive governance among African states. Because of this, the award scheme is not of benefit, but serving the political interest of the founder. For three consecutive years, no African leader has won the prize award. This is a clear indication that nobody has influenced the panel to deserve the award. Only three African leaders had been given and this was so to popularize the foundation. Since it came to the limelight, no African leader has ever won the prize hence raising more question. Additionally, most African states are still in the development stage of their constitution to promote democracy. They are still using the old constitutions left by their colonial masters which gave the executive much power and decides what is best for them. Because of this, they dictate for themselves when they will leave power. Most African presidents are not leaving power soon. Only a few nations with established systems change their presidency. Therefore, the award will be rotating to a few nations within Africa, which have established working systems. Other nations will be excluded. The exclusion may not be in terms of their governance but because of their state of the economy, which is beyond the head of state. Limited scope The scope of the award is very limited as there are many people not serving as head of states but has contributed. For instance, there are individuals outside the government who are working at promoting good governance, putting structures for prosperity and alleviating poverty. Activist and non-governmental organizations are responsible for promoting democracy because they put the government in check. They are also responsible for putting structures for prosperity through private sponsored bills for legislations. They aim at adjusting existing policies so that they can accommodate the dynamics of the society. Narrowing the scope of the award to only serving head of states is a bias trend of awarding prizes. Some leaders may take the advantage and get credit of other people outside the government. Where I support Results from Mo Ibrahim award conclusion are that the award is not good for Africa. It has several cons, which needs addressing before it can continue awarding African leaders. First, there are no outlined criteria for selecting the candidates for the award. The foundation has established countries index which it does not use in awarding the leaders. Instead, the committee has powers to decide who gets the prize. The committee itself does not have the representation of common citizens who feels the impact of governance, but instead it is made of professionals from outside countries. Similarly, the foundation is deceiving Africans and shifting their attention from the target. African leaders have not achieved much to worth recognition and award. More so, the prize looks like a bribe to African leaders to embrace good governance which is not acceptable. Works cited Nsehe, Mfonobong. African Telecom Billionaire Mo Ibrahim on why The Mo Ibrahim Prize is still important. 2014. Forbes. 2014. Ray, Kiran. Is the Mo Ibrahim prize worth it? 2012. Think Africa press. 2014. Read More