Why Mo would rather invest in poor Africans

By Alex Kiprotich

Tomorrow, the world will know this year’s recipient of Mo Ibrahim’s Africa’s leadership prize. And as the world waits with bated breath, I can bet no African retired president is dusting his coat tonight or will re-enact Immigration minister’s antics of watching from the bedroom the announcement from Tottenham, London.

For those who retired in the last three years none is eligible, not after the committee for the prize failed to get a winner last year among the three short listed candidates. Even for those who are in power, few if any, will have time and courage to follow the news because in one way or the other they have fallen short of the standards for short listing.

The Ibrahim Prize celebrates excellence in African leadership and is awarded to a democratically elected former African Executive Head of State or Government who has served their term in office within the limits set by the country’s constitution and has left office in the last three years.

The prize money is worth $5 million and an annual salary of $200,000, and a further grant of $200,000 per year for 10 years to support any good cause the winners chooses.

But it is not the former African presidents and current presidents whom I pity for losing such a grand prize. It is Ibrahim and his selection panel that I feel for. The agony of casting its fishing net in 47 Africa nations and still can’t net a worthy winner. That’s akin to the kind of frustration that a fisherman goes through when one fails to make any catch.

The genesis of what might lead to the revision of the benchmarks was last year’s decisions by the selection committee headed by former UN Secretary Kofi Annan to announce that of the three shortlisted candidates none was worth the honour.

The finalists were Ghana’s John Kufuor, South Africa’s Thabo Mbeki and Nigeria’s Olesugun Obasanjo.

To many, the surprise decision was hailed as establishing a standard of credibility and authoritativeness for the Prize because it underscored the crisis of leadership and democratisation in Africa. Far from that, however, it seems the committee’s decision will be its undoing for nothing has changed between then and now to warrant a worthy recipient.

And to go two years in a row without a winner after former presidents Joaquim Chissano (Mozambique) and Festus Mogae (Botswana) won defeats the very existence of the award, as it will confirm the benchmarks are too high and unrealistic.For a start, the three former presidents who failed to meet the standards last year are not eligible for this year’s award.

Leaders’ greed

In the last one year since the committee red-carded African leadership, nothing has changed despite the more than 10 elections that have been held between then and now.

In a continent where greed for money is the order for leaders, it can either mean Ibrahim’s prize is so little for the African president — though it is the largest paid out beating the prestigious Nobel Peace Prize — or that African presidents hang on to power for reasons other than money.

That aside, maybe it is time the foundation to expand its horizons and not limit its net to former presidents who retired in the last three years. The basic question, which the founders should have asked, is how many presidents retired within that time frame in Africa?

Presidency is a matter of life and death to most of them and will fight tooth and nail to keep for life. Even in death, if it were possible, some of them would silently wish to be presidents posthumous.

The future of the award is worrying if one takes a close look at the serving presidents and realises that it will be difficult to even have a winner in the next two years.

Either presidents are working hard to amend constitutions to allow for extension of their terms or are grooming their sons and cronies to take over. Others are presiding over corruption in their countries.

Though the initiative by the founder is noble, there is need to rethink a better way to promote democracy and good governance in Africa. Bribing leaders out of leadership won’t help because with grand corruption, some have in their offshore accounts much more than what Ibrahim is offering.

So why not use the foundation money in improving infrastructure, improving health care and education in parts of the continent rather than having money lie in bank accounts with no one eager to claim.