Across the globe, the principle of separation of powers is seen as fundamental to building resilient democracies. In theory, it ensures that no single arm of government, executive, legislative, or judiciary, dominates the others, enabling institutional accountability and safeguarding the rights of citizens. In practice, however, the application of this principle varies widely, especially in regions where democratic norms are still evolving.
In Africa, the promise of separation of powers has been repeatedly tested since the wave of constitutional reforms that swept across the continent in the 1990s and early 2000s. As countries adopted multiparty systems and sought to redefine governance after decades of autocracy or military rule, expectations were high that democratic institutions would take root. Yet, today, the continent faces critical questions: Has the balance of power truly been achieved? Or have systems meant to ensure accountability been compromised by executive overreach, legislative inertia, or weakened judiciaries? The answers have global significance—not only for Africa’s future but for the credibility of democratic systems worldwide.
READ ALSO: Hashtag Democracy: Africa’s Youth Are Reclaiming Power, but Is it Sustainable?
According to the 2023 Democracy Index by the Economist Intelligence Unit, out of 50 African countries, only Mauritius is considered a “full democracy”. Fifteen countries are listed as “hybrid regimes”, and 24 are classified as “authoritarian”. This means that over 70% of African nations operate under democratic systems with significant deficiencies. The separation of powers in these countries often exists more on paper than in practice.
Transparency`International’s 2023 Corruption Perceptions Index further illustrates this reality. African countries with weaker institutional checks and balances tend to rank lower on governance and accountability. For example, Equatorial Guinea, Zimbabwe, and South Sudan remain among the lowest-ranked globally, largely due to executive dominance and judiciary compromise. In contrast, countries like Botswana and Ghana, which have more independent legislative and judicial systems, perform significantly better.
The Afrobarometer 2022 survey also reveals that while 68% of Africans support democratic governance, only 46% believe their leaders actually respect the rules that limit executive power. This gap between public expectation and political reality underscores a continent-wide concern: formal constitutions are not always matched by institutional behaviour.
Nigeria – A Balancing Act Teetering on the Edge
Nigeria’s 1999 Constitution clearly spells out the separation of powers. However, recent years have seen a steady encroachment by the executive on the legislative and judicial arms. Under both the Buhari and current Tinubu administrations, critics have accused the executive of manipulating judicial processes and stifling legislative independence through patronage and intimidation.
It is noted that the National Assembly had become increasingly compliant with executive directives, often passing bills without adequate scrutiny. Similarly, the Nigerian judiciary, although theoretically independent, has faced accusations of corruption and political interference, particularly in electoral dispute resolutions. Despite this, the country remains one of the more vibrant democracies on the continent, largely due to its active civil society and media.
Kenya – Constitutional Reform and the Quest for Balance
Kenya offers a more optimistic outlook, albeit with caveats. The 2010 Constitution was widely praised for its commitment to devolution and institutional independence. The judiciary, especially, has made bold rulings, including the annulment of the 2017 presidential election results, which signalled its willingness to challenge executive authority.
However, tensions remain. President William Ruto’s administration has faced criticism for alleged attempts to influence judicial appointments and budgetary allocations. In 2023, a public confrontation between the judiciary and executive over funding brought the separation of powers back into national discourse. According to the International Commission of Jurists (ICJ), sustaining this balance requires not only constitutional safeguards but also a political culture that respects them.
Uganda – Executive Consolidation as a Warning Sign
In Uganda, President Yoweri Museveni has been in power since 1986. Over the years, constitutional amendments have eroded term and age limits, allowing indefinite re-election. The Parliament, largely dominated by the ruling National Resistance Movement (NRM), has facilitated these changes with little resistance. Meanwhile, the judiciary, though occasionally vocal, has often failed to challenge controversial government policies.
The 2021 general elections saw mass arrests of opposition figures, and several judges who ruled against the government reportedly faced threats and intimidation. This trajectory underscores the danger of systemic imbalance, where the separation of powers is not just ignored but actively dismantled.
The Core Challenges Undermining Balance
One of the major challenges to the separation of powers in Africa is the personalisation of power. When leaders equate national interest with personal or party loyalty, institutions become extensions of executive will. Patronage politics also plays a key role. Legislators and judges who depend on the executive for career advancement or financial resources are unlikely to challenge presidential authority.
Another factor is weak institutional capacity. Many African parliaments lack the resources and expertise needed to provide effective oversight. Judicial independence is similarly compromised when courts are underfunded or judicial appointments are politicised.
Additionally, the role of security agencies and constitutional commissions has become increasingly politicised in some countries. These bodies, which should act as neutral enforcers of constitutional mandates, are often used to suppress dissent or protect elite interests.
What Must Change
Rebalancing the separation of powers in African democracies requires both structural reforms and a cultural shift in governance. Strengthening institutions begins with legal clarity, ensuring that laws governing the judiciary, legislature, and executive are not just theoretically sound but practically enforceable.
Donor agencies and international partners also have a role to play. However, support must be targeted at long-term capacity building rather than short-term political gains. Investing in parliamentary training, judicial infrastructure, and civic education can empower institutions and citizens alike.
Crucially, domestic civil society must be empowered to demand accountability. From legal watchdogs to investigative journalists, non-state actors play a vital role in monitoring abuses of power and ensuring institutional resilience. The fight for balance is not only a legal or political one but a societal commitment.
The Balance Must Be Earned
Africa’s democratic journey is far from linear, and the principle of separation of powers remains a contested ideal in many countries. Yet, the continent is not without hope. As shown by countries like Kenya and Ghana, reforms are possible when institutions are both empowered and respected.
In the final analysis, separation of powers in Africa cannot be a static blueprint imported from abroad. It must be an evolving principle, shaped by local realities, driven by public demand, and anchored in constitutional integrity. If African democracies are to move from procedural rituals to substantive governance, then the balance of power must not only be declared but diligently defended.
The question remains: will African leaders and institutions rise to the challenge, or will the scales continue to tip under the weight of executive dominance?
