Some few weeks back, he presented an intellectually stimulating paper on cults of personalities that are very dominant in African politics. It is true that African leaders who hold power indefinitely often employ cults of personality to consolidate power, demand personal fealty, and systematically undermine independent governance institutions.
When long-serving, neo-patrimonial leaders in Burkina Faso, Gambia, Zimbabwe, and Sudan were forced to step down because of popular and youthful protests in recent years, the era of “presidents for life” in Africa seemed to be ending. Yet, for every such leader who has been forced from power, new ones emerge on the scene. In many cases, as Seegle has observed, African leaders who retain power indefinitely are characterised by pervasive cults of personality, demonstrating the enduring potency of this instrument of power. Seegle decries the fact that cults of personality create an idealised and heroic image of a leader as being above and, in some cases, synonymous with the law, state, and country. Hence, the fate of the nation is tied to that of the leader who is promoted as its father or even grandfather. The nation’s wellbeing and safety depend on respect for the wisdom, patronage, and vigilance of the revered leader.
Seegle is right when he says that the longer a leader clings to power the more likely a cult of personality will develop and sadly this is consistent with the observation that African leaders who evade term limits. They often have declining levels of popularity and legitimacy and, therefore, must increasingly rely on nondemocratic tools for maintaining authority. Such leaders do not govern by consent but through coercion, inhibiting political competition, and controlling rewards and punishments. This deviation from the rule of law often leads to human rights violations, the undermining of investor confidence, and the increased likelihood of conflict. He points out many of Africa’s longest serving leaders, Equatorial Guinea’s Teodoro Obiang Nguema Mbasogo, who has ruled for 44 years, Cameroon’s Paul Biya (41 years), Uganda’s Yoweri Museveni (37 years), Eritrea’s Isaias Afewerki (30 years), and the Republic of the Congo’s Denis Sassou Nguesso (26 years), have fostered cults of personality of one form or another.
Even when such leaders are ousted, their systemic erosion of independent governance institutions means that their legacies persist and democratic transitions stall. Former long time rulers who cultivated cults of personality that continue to cast a long shadow over their countries include Algeria’s Abdelaziz Bouteflika, Burundi’s Pierre Nkurunziza, Chad’s Idriss Déby, Egypt’s Hosni Mubarak, Libya’s Muammar Gaddafi, and Zimbabwe’s Robert Mugabe. Making the president the singular focus of the nation has long-term damaging effects on governance institutions, sovereign decision-making, an apolitical civil service, and military professionalism. Some tools used to develop cults of personality include touting the indispensable attributes of the “paramount” leader via propaganda, patriotism training, state-organised demonstrations and rallies, monuments, the arts, sports events, and printing of the leader’s image on coins, banknotes, and other ubiquitous items. To demonstrate this point, Seegle gives a case of Cameroon, where football has been used to perpetuate the omnipresence of President Paul Biya. This tool resonated with many, given Cameroon’s craze for the sport. When its national side, the “Indomitable Lions,” reached the World Cup quarterfinal in 1990, a first for Africa, Biya basked in the glory of this achievement by adopting the sobriquet, “Lion Man”. Biya’s desire to associate himself with the Indomitable Lions included having a lion and lioness named after himself and his wife at the national zoo in the capital Yaoundé. Such intense self-promotion seeks to counter perceptions of Biya’s serial absences. He reportedly spends most of the time abroad, mostly at a high-end Geneva hotel.
A common justification leader gives for hanging onto power and embracing semi-divine status is that only they can preserve the nation’s independence and deliver stability, security, and economic development. This is the argument used by octogenarian Mbasogo, Africa’s and the world’s longest serving president, whom state media describes as “the God of Equatorial Guinea who has all power over men and things and can kill anyone without going to hell.”
Leaders such as Obiang use the pretext of preserving stability to crush opponents and concentrate executive, judicial, and legislative power. His Democratic Party of Equatorial Guinea is run largely by family members and protégés. Most government buildings have a presidential lodge attached to them. All towns have streets commemorating the coup that brought him to power in 1979 when he executed his uncle and predecessor, Macias Nguema. His face is printed on the clothing worn by party supporters and followers. Power is expected to remain firmly in family hands with the appointment of Obiang’s son, Teodoro Nguema Obiang Mangue, as Vice President in 2012.
Former Togolese President Gnassingbé Eyadéma, Africa’s longest serving ruler before his death in 2005, employed a similarly brazen cult of personality. He had an entourage of 1,000 dancing women who sang in praise of him, portraits that adorned all buildings and stores, a bronze statue in Lomé, wrist watches with his portrait that appeared and disappeared every 15 seconds, and a comic book depicting him as a superhero with special powers.
In Uganda, Museveni’s followers and staff call him “Mzee” or “respected elder”, a title of endearment and reverence. Museveni, for his part, refers to Ugandans, particularly the youth, as “bazukulu” or “grandchildren,” in all his addresses and official communications. Many young people in turn call him “Jajja” or “Grandpa.” These seemingly normal expressions of affection belie a cult of personality that has taken root, particularly in the military, which is Museveni’s primary constituency.
While regimes with cult of personality leaders may appear durable, frequently deploying “anti-imperialist” and “anti-colonialist” rhetoric to appeal to African sympathies while also positioning themselves as key Western partners on counterterrorism and regional stability, they are inherently fragile. Security services in such contexts are often used to suppress opponents. Moreover, their obedience is tied to the leader and bound up in the cult of personality, rather than the constitution. Personal loyalty is prized above professionalism. Cults of personality are enabled by the assumed association between autocracy and stability.
Instead, prolonged rule is linked to higher levels of instability, as well as stunted democratic and institutional development. Institutionalising democratic checks and balances on power, especially the strengthening of term limits, are guardrails against perpetual presidential tenures and the cults of personality that go along with them.
