It involves very expensive campaigns, which is a strain to the poor economies.

Multiparty politics may endanger national unity as most parties are based on religious and ethnic affiliations.

Leads to violent campaigns to the extent of killing people and destruction of property.

Waste of human resources as educated people of ability are left unutilized because they belong to the opposition.

Hand over of power to another party is always difficult due to the nature of the African politics which is personalized for example when the late Mashood Abiola won elections in Nigeria in 1993, he was not allowed to form the government by the ruling class of the late Sani Abacha.

YOWERI MUSEVENI, credited for stabilizing Uganda politically and economically since he came to power in a 1986 coup. He adopted a no party system of governance until 2006 reasoning that multi party is confusing to a politically immature and illiterate African population.

Promotion on the army follows no other criteria other than support for the party.

Multiparty is foreign in origin. It is borrowed from western democracies yet the social economic systems in Africa are not identical to European societies.

People such as school head teachers, nurses, managers, messengers in offices and parastatals are fired on the basis of not being party supporters.

Despite the above advantages mentioned, multiparty practice has not been different from one party in Africa. They are equally producing aging leaders, creating a state of emergency and no change in governments.

The ruling party tries to maintain itself in power through the following fraudulent methods of winning elections: rigging elections.
Multiparty system promotes intimidation of opposition members who wish to stand.

There is also the culture of gerrymandering the constituencies ie demarcating electoral areas to depending on the population in order to favour the ruling party.

Multiple registration in order to vote several times, increasing number of nominated MPs. This is a culture rigging elections that has come up in Africa under multi party.

Multiparty system encourages using government money to buy supporters as well as denying opposition parties, campaigning facilities.

Because of periodical elections, a party may not have ample time to implement its programmes. It has just four or five years to do everything.

Multiparty system promotes a culture of discrimination based on tribe, race, colour, ethnicity, origin, region, religion and political affiliation.

It has led to the involvement of the army in politics in order to silence the members of the opposition

Multiparty system promotes neo-colonialism. This is because the foreigners fund some parties and when they come to power, the interests of their supporters are promoted.

Account for the weakness of multi party democracy in Africa
Approach: Definition of multiparty democracy. Give and explain reasons/or the weakness of multiparty democracy.

Multiparty democracy (Pluralism) is a political system whereby either or political party or more than one in an alliance are in leadership while other parties are in constructive opposition. At the dawn of independence, proviso was made for multiparty systems, which in the opinion of the then colonial powers would guarantee democracy. For them, free opposition was the guarantee of democracy. However, there is abundant evidence to show that this Western form of government has either been overthrown or has not operated as envisaged by its authors on the account of the following factors.

DANIEL ARAP MOI led Kenya to multi party democracy in 1992.

The origin of multi-partism is suffice to note. Multiparty democracy originated from Western Europe; hence, it was not native to Africa. Therefore, its authors ignored the fact that the ideology had developed over the century in a historic context that was different from African conditions. Hence, to the majority Africans it had little meaning. The collectivity of decision-making process that existed in Africa before the colonial invasion often supervised by kings or chiefs was abused by colonialists and at best was reduced to a secondary instrument of governance. Hence in Somaliland the adoption of multi-partism in a place of a system where clan leaders kept peace is seen as a potential risk and it appears that traditional leaders will continue to play an important role in politics.
 
The operation of Multi-partism is influenced by the donor community, ie IMF, World Bank, Britain, Sweden, USA, etc. This is neo colonialism. A look at the adoption of multi-partism in the 1990s shows that foreign influence was decisive. In most countries, it was fear of loss of aid that forced most regimes to "democratise”. Parties like Civic United Front (CUF) and Tanzania Labour Party (TLP) etc in Tanzania now view donor involvement in internal politics as enabling fair play during elections and that with fair play, the ruling party CCM will lose elections, but the donors are already singing praises for CCM (The East African August 4th-10th 2003). Donors have got involved in financing opposition parties against the ruling party they do not like; the ruling government Zimbabwe had to check on the issue of donor involvement when in 2001 it passed legislation making it illegal for parties to receive financing from abroad.

Ethnicity has failed the operation of multiparty politics in Africa. Ethnic conflicts in many countries have threatened the geo-political bases of the new states. Several factors have created a fertile base for recourse to ethnicity as an area for struggle for both economic and political power. Accordingly, the parties that were/have been formed on ethnic lines have ended up practicing divisive politics. For example, in Rwanda, the Hutu dominated political party MDR of Twagiramungu was banned on grounds of ethnicity; when Twagiramungu, in 2003, began campaigning and appealed for the release of ex-president Pasteur Bizimungu, it was alleged that he was inciting the Bahutu to destroy the Tutsi. Eventually he was called for interrogation before the National Electoral Commission (NEC). In Burundi, the first multiparty polls took place in June 1993 leading to the rise of the first Hutu head of state in what came as the "Burundi syndrome'- the tendency of voters to pick a candidate from own ethnic group. The Tutsi dominated army later assassinated him.

Dictatorship has undermined the existence of multiparty democracy in Africa. Multipartism has failed to operate in dictatorial regimes where the ruling governments do not tolerate the opposition. Several African leaders (though not all), eager to maintain themselves and their parties in office proceeded to dismantle the multiparty system by ensuring that no competitor emerged to challenge their 'divine right to rule. In the quest for power they employed all instruments of state coercion, intimidation, detention or imprisonment. For example, in Chad, Parti Progressiste Tchadien (PPT) remained the only political party after Tombalbaye abolished all the other political parties in 1962. A year later, a special PPT congress at Fort Archambault formalized the one party system. Political opponents that emerged in Chad after 1962 were arrested.

In a related development, Obote's government passed a bill in 1966 that ended the legal existence of KY and when on 19th Dec 1969 an attempt was made on this life at Lugogo stadium, the event was made an occasion to ban all other political organisations hence UPC legalised its monopoly of Uganda's political life. Furthermore, since he came into power in 1986, after a 5 year bush war, Museveni argued that Uganda wasn't ready for Multipartism; the 1995 constitution allows parties to exist but with restrictions. It only came as a surprise when at the end of March 2003, delegates at the Movement Delegates' National Conference backed the move to restore pluralism.

The absence of democratic structures in place that can allow the opposition to effectively participate in national affairs has weakened the operation of multiparty politics in Africa. Ironically, in several of the African countries, the parliamentary system itself has been employed to suppress the opposition.

Accordingly, multi partism has been imported but does not represent participatory democracy. This has given way, in many cases, to military regimes and one party states. For example, in Cameroon, after 11 years of multipartism, Cameroon today runs the risk of slipping back into a one party dominance. By January 2003, Paul Biya's Cameroon Peoples Democratic Movement (CPDM - ruling party) controlled 149 out of the 180 seats in parliament and the National Union for Democracy and Progress (NUDP), which had won 68 seats in 1992 and became the largest opposition, controlled only one seat. The social Democratic Front which had taken over as main parliamentary opposition in 1997 with 43 seats had then been cut down to only 21 seats.

Inadequate financial resources necessary to inject in the party and Electoral Commission (EC) activities weaken mulitipatysm. Previously, there was an increasing tendency to adopt single partism on grounds of lack of resources and in effect the need to mobilize all available resources in the name of rapid national development.

According to this view, opposition parties were a luxury that African countries could not afford. In the 2003 Rwanda presidential elections, the EC was faced with a deep financial crisis and had to appeal to the international community and the Rwandese themselves for assistance.

Candidates weren't allowed to receive any penny from the state so "they had to rely on their ever shrinking pockets".
Struggle for power cannot leave safe the multiparty democracy to operate smoothly. Opposition parties are usually interested in breaking power monopoly of the ruling party and sometimes through bloodshed e.g in Angola, UNITA vs MPLA. In Zimbabwe MDC vs ZANU, in Kenya NARC vs KANU etc. For many years now in Uganda, opposition groups are against the NRM's rule. Even if the ruling party was doing a good job, still the struggle for power by the opposition parties would not stop. It is like the animals in a zoo with everything like food, security, water but they will never stop their struggle to et out. Thus cases of election rigging are alleged every time.

The inter-party wrangles strongly affect the operation of multiparty politics in Africa. Quite often, conflicts have erupted between different political parties and within the membership of others, which has weakened their effectiveness* Taking an example of Kenya, NARC took over power from KANU in 2003 because the Kikuyu (supporting Kibaki), the Luo (Odinga) and the Luhya (Wamalwa) came together. But Kibaki found himself facing a revolt on January 5th barely 3 days after he named his cabinet when 26 MPs allied to LDP protested against the cabinet structures, they threatened to pull out of the coalition if Kibaki failed to respect their demands,

The low level of consciousness of the broad masses of the population also affects the operation of the pluralism in Africa. In very few African countries have efforts been made by the political elite to mobilise the masses and ensure their effective contribution to various levels of decision-making. Politics has become the private property of the politicians, the language employed by the politicians in parliament is invariably/always not understood by the governed and consequently, except in cases where political decisions affect their subsistence, they are content to leave politics to the politicians. This has militated against popular participation in the political process hence leaving the struggle for power between factions of the elite.

Military coups in many African states have not given good operational environment. Africa has been bedevilled by military coups since the 1960s. Such coups, which hardly waited for the dust of political independence to settle, have been experienced in several African countries hence giving birth to the predominance of military regimes. In some countries, coups have replaced parliamentary elections as the normal process of regime change; but this is illegal power takeover that militates against multiparty democracy. Look at coups in Ghana, Nigeria, Uganda, etc.

The weakness of the Electoral Commission is also blamed for the weakness of the multiparty politics in Africa. The role of the Electoral Commission is to organize national elections and to ensure that they are free and fair. However, experience in some African countries especially in socialist states had proved that military rule and one-party states could be more democratic than multipartism based on periodic elections that are always manipulated by the elite who control both political and economic power. In Uganda, leaders in the EC are chosen by the incumbent president hence a likelihood that they play cards in favour of the incumbent. Looking at Nigeria in 2003, the press reported that at some voting centres, one would find that all the EC officials were members of Peoples Democratic Party (PDP - the ruling party). Critics of RPF in Rwanda alleged that EC chief, Karangwa, was the Front's campaigning agent in the 2003 presidential elections; their argument came to hold water when he told a press conference to parade a man who claimed to have defected from Twagiramungu. It was from this that Journalists challenged him whether his role as the EC chairperson doubles as RPF agent.

Failure of African countries to emulate other countries' party politics like USA has made party politics in Africa to be insular. Whatever the shortcomings of the American presidential nomination process, the American model has positive elements that African parties should emulate or adopt. The system enables an individual, who is not even a party national leader, to seek his party's nomination to run for presidency. Each aspiring candidate chooses his or her own message. The process brings new faces with new ideas. In Uganda, for example, to the contrary, the tradition has been that the party leader is the automatic party's presidential candidate. Also top party leaders dictate who runs as the party's parliamentary candidate in each constituency. This is undemocratic. (New Vision February 18 2004).

The individual merit principle has been cited in undermining multiparty politics in Africa. This is a system of elections where every individual is free to contest for any political office. The system was introduced in Uganda by the NRM government in 1986. Accordingly, candidates under the system stand not under party umbrella but as individuals hence undermining party politics.

Religious differences that are heavily evident in Africa are a source of misunderstanding in the operation of multiparty democracy. Some parties are formed on religious lines thus failing to co-operate e.g in Uganda, DP was a party for Catholics while UPC for Protestants the legacy of which is still evident

Political parties being urban based adversely affects the effectiveness of multipartism. Most political parties are urban based; they only have limited support in rural areas because their activities do not appeal to rural people. This is what is taking place in Uganda presently, although the present government has also undermined pluralism.

Organize national elections and to ensure that they are free and fair. However, experience in some African countries especially in socialist states had proved that military rule and one-party states could be more democratic than multipartism based on periodic elections that are always manipulated by the elite who control both political and economic power. In Uganda, leaders in the EC are chosen by the incumbent president hence a likelihood that they play cards in favour of the incumbent. Looking at Nigeria in 2003, the press reported that at some voting centres, one would find that all the EC officials were members of Peoples Democratic Party (PDP - the ruling party).

Critics of RPF in Rwanda alleged that EC chief. Karangwa, was the Front's campaigning agent in the 2003 presidential elections; their argument came to hold water when he told a press conference to parade a man who claimed to have defected from Twagiramungu. It was from this that journalists challenged him whether his role as the EC chairperson doubles as RPF agent.

Failure of African countries to emulate other countries' party politics like USA has made party politics in Africa to be insular. Whatever the shortcomings of the American presidential nomination process, the American model has positive elements that African parties should emulate or adopt. The system enables an individual, who is not even a party national leader, to seek his party's nomination to run for presidency. Each aspiring candidate chooses his or her own message.

The process brings new faces with new ideas. In Uganda, for example, to the contrary, the tradition has been that the party leader is the automatic party's presidential candidate. Also top party leaders dictate who runs as the party's parliamentary candidate in each constituency. This is undemocratic. (New Vision February 18 2004).

The individual merit principle has been cited in undermining multiparty politics in Africa. This is a system of elections where every individual is 'free' to contest for any political office. The system was introduced in Uganda by the NRM government in 1986. Accordingly, candidates under the system stand not under party umbrella but as individuals hence undermining party politics.

Religious differences that are heavily evident in Africa are a source of misunderstanding in the operation of multiparty democracy. Some parties are formed on religious lines thus failing to co-operate e.g in Uganda, DP was a party for Catholics while UPC for Protestants the legacy of which is still evident

Political parties being urban based adversely affects the effectiveness of multipartism. Most political parties are urban based; they only have limited support in rural areas because their activities do not appeal to rural people. This is what is taking place in Uganda presently, although the present government has also undermined pluralism.

Account for the increased agitation for multi party democracy in Africa since the 1990s.

• Identification of multi party democracy
• Demand for multi party democracy has been common in Kenya, Tanzania, Uganda, Malawi, Zambia etc
• The factors are pressure from the Western powers
• End of cold war politics in 1989.
• Fall of the Soviet Union in 1991
• The superiority of Western civilization over Communist ideology.
• Failure of military regimes in countries like Uganda and Nigeria
• Failure of single party to deliver good results in countries like Tanzania under Nyerere, Malawi under Kamuzu Banda, Uganda under Obote and Zambia during Kaunda’s regime.
• Single party rule is not in line with the principles of human rights. Freedom of association is condemned. There is too much pressure from human rights organizations eg human rights watch and Amnesty International
• Ethnic rivalries eg Kenya.
• Increase in the level of education
• Pressure from religious organizations
• Need for smooth transfer of power
• Freedom to choose better leaders.
• The influence of capitalism
• Multi party is a solution to the increasing civil wars.