Keynote
Address: Challenges of Accountability in Young, Emerging, and
Post-War Democracies
Ambassador Daudi Ngelautwa Mwakawago, United Nations Special Representative
of the Secretary-General (SRSG) and Head of the UN Mission to
Sierra Leone (UNAMSIL)
Mr.
Chairman,
Your Excellencies,
Distinguished Ladies and Gentlemen,
I
would like to thank you and the organizers of this inaugural National
Accountability Dialogue Forum Series for inviting me as your keynote
speaker. I would like also to express my very sincere appreciation
to Mrs. Zainab Hawa Bangura and members of the National Accountability
Group for their initiative in starting the debate on this very
important subject. The topic of my speech is: the “Challenges
of Accountability in Young Emerging and Post-War Democracies”.
Introduction
-
Accountability has many related meanings in English, but it
could be defined as an authoritative relationship in which
one person is formally entitled to demand that another answer
for (i.e. provide an account of) his or her actions. Rewards
or punishments may be meted out to the latter depending on
whether those actions conform to the former’s wishes.
It is a relationship in which one party, the holder of accountability,
has the right to seek information about, to investigate and
to scrutinize the actions of another party, the giver of accountability.
The parties to an accountability relationship may be individuals,
groups or institutions and are sometimes identified as principals
and agents; (agents being accountable to principals). Accountability
is a situational concept in that it needs to be specified
in context: who is accountable to whom and for what?
-
The
general rationale for accountability is to prevent or reduce
the abuse of power by those who cannot otherwise be trusted
to do what they are obliged to do.
-
The
concept of accountability contains two irreducible dimensions,
those of enforcement and answerability; which do not imply
only information and explanation but the ability to punish
unsatisfactory behaviour. The capacity for sanction is, therefore,
essential to the concept of accountability. Exercises of accountability
that expose misdeeds but do not impose material consequences
will usually appear weak and diminish forms of accountability;
unless there is some consequence for demonstrated abuses of
authority, there is no rule of law and no accountability.
-
It
must be acknowledged that where individuals and communities
feel that their needs are not being met and no effective accountability
mechanisms are present, dissatisfaction and frustration are
often expressed through protest. But where accountability
mechanisms are effective, people are more likely to feel that
their needs and wishes are being taken into account. Greater
transparency of decision-making can assist in this, as it
will help to build trust in political processes. This trust
is increased where feedback loops are built into the decision-making
process so that decision-makers can learn from communities
affected by their decisions and in particular, learn from
their actions and mistakes in order not to repeat them. Even
more importantly take corrective action.
-
Accountability mechanisms which enable greater involvement
by the people who are most affected by the decisions fosters
greater ownership. A sense of ownership tends to lead to more
relevant decision-making and better implementation. Effective
accountability mechanisms are indeed important checks against
abuse of power. In the end accountability boils down to two
things: namely justice and trust. CONTINUED
ON PAGE 9...
| Continue
to Pages >> 1, 2,
3, 4,
5, 6,
7, 8, 9,
10, 11,
12 |
|
|
|