this question is rightly directed to african leaders in the area of taking decisions in policy formulations for better governance and development of their rules.many have ignored the wishes of people that brought them into power,and it is quite absurd that they turn themselves to gods who no one can querry for mismanagement and misappropriation of public funds.and carry out projects that cannot see the light of day talkless of having dramatic effect on the majority of the people.there are many instances to brace my point i'm emphasizing on this critical issue.\nthe case of serving president who wants to pertuate himself to power by arranging and setting up various commission of inquiries on economic and financial crimes targeted at the opponents who are anti-conservative to his agenda and his porgrammnes being intimidated,arressted and prosecuted without no cause of due process of law to prevail.\nthe sudden procees of constitution amnedment without allowing public to say their views.
211798
correction:\n1-people didn't even brought them .... they forced thier selves on people.\n2-not only african leaders but leaders allover the world\n\nwhy?\nbecause they thought that they r the new prophets and all they says shall be right and to be done\nand because they know that if they give people the right to negotiate they will lose thier power and illegal benefits
137227
That question, presumably a first year college question in politics, is seriously flawed ... 'To what extent' implies a causual relationship and that would certainly be a contentious proposition. \n\nSecondly, what arrangements are you talking about, and what developments? It could be said, for arguments sake, that last month's elections is the only development in the last 20 years that could logically be ascribed the colonial era - after all, the Britons invented democracy and gave it away to its colonies. \n\nMuseveni being a dictator is a result of Museveni being a dictator and not colonial administration ...
676304
Expectations lead to misery.  When a government is fearful in any way of loss of power, that government will exercise restrictive tactics as long as it can get away with doing it.  Take for example the fiasco in the USA about monitoring private telephone usage.\n\nIt is up to the people to hold government officials to function in the best interests of the people.  Sometimes it takes outrage to tumble an over-reaching, oppressive government.\n\nSometimes officials think they are doing best for the people, when it fact they are doing what is best for themselves and forgetting about how it affects people.
356340
i agree\n\nhe was able to persuade the public quite easily..\n\nhonestly, we need people in the government like him to GET THINGS DONE! not necessarily genocide, but with the power to do things for the better of the country!\n\nour government is a bureaucracy, and has been for over twenty years.. its time to clean out the house and put in people who represent those of us who make up the country, not the top 5% of the rich.. when was the last time you saw a neighborhood nobody become president? those days seem over now..
119481
Yes they can make any law they want. They often do. We vote them in we can vote them out, but this doesn't appear to do the trick either in many instances. It it my opinion that the corrupt corrupt others, so it is a never ending cycle. Many people have given up, so it mekes their ability to "do what they want" easier.
353570
Don't forget Nelson Mandela.  It shows that the person takes the law seriously and respects authority, and at the same time wants to demonstrate an injustice in our society.  It forces people to question whether they think their laws are fair since innocent people are suffering.  There is an underlying assumption that people are basically good and your cause is fundamentally just.
190827
Of course it matters!  The leaders of the people should have good and high morals.  The people are constantly watching him and should have the access to any screw ups he may have committed.
262148
As an African, I dont like the idea of getting funds from the west but since the western countries are taking all the children of the africa who have the brains to work for them leaving their home countries poor.  How can these countries develop yet we still get the so called investors who end up employing mainly their statemens in good positions yet with good pay, working conditions. And when we talk of good pay, these guys are paid in dollars, pounds, euros irrespective of the countries they are working in.. This money is sent back to their home countries... \n\nIts still these developed western countries who are designing and producing dangerous weapons which are in most cases being used by African dictators to kill innocent children, women. These very good learned western friends always have hidden agendas as you will find two different countries supporting say 1 supports the rebels with guns, medicine, education and the other supports the government.\n\nI have alot I could say but you  western countries need to visit care.org such that you can start supporting the africans,  healing the sick with AIDs, and many other problems caused by many of our brothers, sisters who have hidden agendas in conflicts in Africa and the World at large.
315095
i disagree with chilling_charlie cause developed countries could simply consume poor countries natural resources, process them and sell to other developed countries therefore making billions, i wouldn't call it a conspiracy though it's obvious that the rich gets richer and the poor gets poorer nothing hidden to that, but i also say developing countries don't prosper because their populations are to cowardly to face their rulers, i live in one and i know how it works, until a mojor and organized movement happens there will be no hope, people have to do something if they want things to change
311894
Perhaps that's because we don't typically refer to South Africa as SA or RSA and people didn't bother to take the time to provide an answer to a question they couldn't even completely understand. Also, most Americans don't (and I'd say shouldn't) have an understanding of the basic elements of South Africa's legal system. It's not exactly something that comes up to anyone but a legal scholar.\n\nThe basic setup of the courts is very similar - an independent branch of government with one constitutional court and a series of lower courts of appeals and lower courts of first impression. As for legal rights, they are much the same. Both have the right to a public trial and one cannot be held without trial, both have what we call "Miranda rights" and require an accused to be arraigned in a reasonable amount of time, so on and so forth. Both assume the defendent is innocent until proven guilty. I can find no substantial differences between the two.
248880
one might be made to think so. democracy itself, is not all what others might want to adopt.for example, democracy exited long time ago in Africa before the west adopted it. democracy in Africa, was through the kings and chiefs. today in some parts of Africa, it still exits. African governments have adopted the western way of democracy, but does not work for them. so I personally, does not think so.\nit does not improve economical performances, but rather make people in power or in high offices to become more corrupt.
457116
Unfortunately, you completely misunderstand the problem.  Why is there corruption in all governments?  Because those in the governments have power!  The less power a government has, the less it will attract those who are power hungry.  Conversely, the more power a government has, the more it will attract those who are power hungry, and it is the most power hungry that are the most corrupt.  That is why the founding fathers, wisely, limited the power of our federal government severely.  Unfortunately, people have been more and more willing to give the government a bigger and bigger budget and more and more power, which attracts the very people we least need in such a position.  People continue, though I can't imagine why, to think that it is only a matter of "cleaning it up" to get a better situation.  The truth is that if the government was limited again to what it was supposed to be in 1790, there would be little motivation for the power hungry to take it over.  And, even if they did, it wouldn't matter anyway because of the severely limited power!  Talk about a win-win situation.   I think we are in for more of the same, unless the people finally say 'enough is enough,' and take away the unconstitutional powers of the government and the enormous budget they have.  Unfortunately people look at government as a benevolent big brother instead of the necessary evil our wise founders did.  Too bad, things will only get worse.
402433
I'm surprised to read people saying that there are more important things to do.  What's more important than at least investigating an executive who broke US and international law?  If we ignore that it sets a very dangerous precedent in my opinion.
377114
Try this website for information on the obstacles African nations face in achieving political stability and economic prosperity:\n\nhttp://web.africa.ufl.edu/asq/v2/v2i3a3.htm
450023
I do think some people have a point here. Politicians may start out with the best intentions and I think once they are bedded-in, they are called into some sort of secret government society underground as such and told what the "REAL" agenda is and either promised riches to carry them out or told that they will have their nuts chopped off if they don't.
46642
You can look it up in the Bible. There are many laws said by God but perhaps nobody can comply all of them. If a country leader committed himself to the laws of Bible, there would not be so many wars as we do now. Well, I study law but I personally think there is no perfect legal system in this world, everything has its infirmity. It is because human has limited intelligence. A criminal won't think he should be prosecuted; a country leader think he has the right to embark a war, etc. As a Christian, I think the Universal Law has been stated in the Bible and the Lord is the only judge. The "constitutional law" in Bible are "Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy mind." Matthew 22:37 and the second is "Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself." Matthew 22:39. Certainly these are not the only laws in Bible, and many to be discovered if we read through it. Well, I dun mind if you disagree with me and I would like to hear more voices out there.
363373
Most african countries are artificial and dont follow historic tribal lines. Just look at Iraq now, you have sunnis, shias and kurds, and darfur, muslims and christians  when the government gets out of hand. Tin pot dictators often took power in most African countries, they sold out to the wests bribes for their minerals.  Took massive bribes, stuck all their family members in seats of power and corrupted the system beyond repair, persecuted other minorites to marginlisation. \n\nMalaysia and Ghana were both made independant in  1957 - compare their fortunes now.