... IN THE 'POSTCOLONIAL ' : Rampant nepotism inhibits dispensation of justice in Africa

Tanzanian spoken word artist cum musician, Mrisho Mpoto in his celebrated song, “Nikipata Nauli” (When I get fare), focuses on Tanzanian politicians serving their own interests and those of their extended family members as a way to create security for their years out of employment.

The song also talks about the passivity of political leaders in exacting justice for the marginalised citizens. And while joining the forces of graft on the one hand, by their actions and using their positions, they instil the sense of fear among the people by employing brute force, on the other.

From a broader perspective, this song bemoans how the nepotistic network system within the Tanzanian governance structures jeopardises decision-making processes, which would result in distributive justice.

Since the emergence of the SAPs (1970s), through to the Washington Consensus (1989) and the development project (1990s), Tanzania has attempted to ensure that it ‘judiciously’ follows the development frameworks set by the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund (IMF).

Yet through such proposed efforts aimed at fostering political reforms and equity participation and sustainable growth, development remains within political parties and family lines.

Even if Tanzania is lauded by the international business community as making progress towards consummation into the neoliberal capitalist society, Death (2012), “the evil triumvirate of patronage, corruption and [nepotistic trends appear to reassert] their retrograde influence”, Berman (1998). The result is evident: the country is progressively pulled back into the archaic and imperialistic culture of domination.

While there were exerted efforts during the African liberation to do away with kinship and ethnopolitics, the latter cannot be done away with as they are part and parcel of African society Wunsch (2000), Ake (1993).

Because of household, ethnic and partisan politics, it is difficult for members of such groups to disown one of theirs in pursuit of equity and distributive justice. The latter can only be realised by having a free and untied hand to social strata allegiances which, at best, creates societal schisms, socio-political and economic woes in the national context.

Most political scientists still hold that the underdevelopment of African States results from such State apparatus’ lack of “capacity to design and implement policies, make credible commitments, run an efficient bureaucracy and provide constraints to opportunistic behaviour”, Englebert (2000).

This assumption is widely accepted not only in the imperial global north, but also among nation-state players in the global south. Such acceptance is visible in the manner which countries in the global north are capitally run which leads to create scenarios of want in the global south.

Such created psychological and physical environments of want in the ‘postcolonial environments, in turn, create social and political irresponsibility among political ‘aristocrats’ in the global north, including Tanzania.

In other words, the acceptance of lack of capacity in the global south, even after 50+ years of claimed ‘independence’, creates mental/intellectual poverty among the colonised elite in our society as material poverty deepens among the citizenry. As well, it promotes and strengthens the saviour mentality in the capitalist global north. Only that, the capitalist global north only have one purpose: to pillage resources from the global south and make life easy for their people.

There are other perspectives as well. Government figures, scholars, and the civil society claim that African States are underdeveloped as a result of “ethnic diversity [which has] led to social polarisation and entrenched interest groups,” Englebert (2000). Such weakness as seen in the African institutions, are said, to result from residual artificial colonial polities and resorting to “neo-patrimonial strategies” as a way to protect the interests of the ‘developed’ peasants Fanon (2004), Mbembe (2001).

Analytically, the above is correct. But just as theories. Such arguments cannot be taken as conclusive on the topic. Modern day leaders in Africa, including those in Tanzania, have more education and are able to make their policy-based decisions on the direction of governance structures. Yet, selfish ambitions and lack of patriotism is rife.

This has led to power dynamics in the ‘postcolonial’ environments in Africa without exception. In turn, this promotes the silencing of voices of the masses and from within the ‘postcolonial’ Tanzanian State actors who attempt to support and advocate for the welfare and interests of the people of the citizenry as opposed to foreign interests.