Christina Murray

Constitutional Design in Africa: Is Mix and Match OK?

Constitutions and conflict management in Africa (2015) is an engaging mix of description, analysis, and prescription. The complexity of the determinants of political stability in Africa is apparent in the case studies, which also remind us how much the success of constitutional arrangements depends on context. The real challenge, of course, lies in drawing conclusions. Kuperman takes on this challenge, boldly concluding with a recommendation that runs counter to the dominant academic trend. He argues that foreign advisers should not press African countries to move from their predominantly ‘integrative’ systems with executive power concentrated in the centre to ‘accommodative’ constitutional systems. Instead, those integrative systems should be reformed by the introduction of marginal liberal reform (p. 227). The recommendation is based, first, on evidence in the case studies that neither ‘integrative’ nor ‘accommodative’ constitutional design necessarily does the trick, ensuring political stability. The real issue in every case, Kuperman suggests, lies in whether the constitutional design is properly implemented and institutionalised to provide good governance, which he reminds us is possible under either model. In response to those who argue that strongly integrative systems are unlikely candidates for political stability and good governance, especially in multi-ethnic countries, he points to Ghana. Secondly, Kuperman argues that the case studies demonstrate that imperfect change from integrative to accommodative systems, that is, change that introduces only partial accommodation, is dangerous. Witness, he says, Burundi in the 1990s, or Sudan in the wake of its inaptly named Comprehensive Peace Agreement (CPA) of 2005. The upshot is that international actors should promote ‘liberal reforms of Africa’s existing integrative constitutional designs’ (p. 23), because such evolutionary reform can promote stability without the risks arising from the attempted revolutionary reform of full accommodation (p. 2). Here I take up just two questions about this provocative conclusion. First, is it correct that accommodation must be treated as a package and that partial implementation is so Ethnopolitics, 2016 Vol. 15, No. 5, 528–532, http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/17449057.2016.1144417