The Single Party State in Africa and Asia: Comparative Accountability

Abstract

How does the accountability of multi-party systems in our four case studies compare with experience under ‘single-party politics’? The criteria posed in Chapter 1 to test accountability of governance under multi-party systems are still relevant, but are refocused here for states which proscribe free association outside the single party. The main issue is whether real political competition and debate are allowed and encouraged within this different political framework — not only within the party itself, but also through members of the Legislature, interest groups, local authorities and other avenues of popular participation, the media and the bureaucracy. In discussing this subject we must proceed with caution, for in order to test the extent of accountability of a one-party state, different questions have to be asked from the case of a country where two or more parties are allowed to operate. Taking political competition as a central issue in any single-party system, these questions include: how much political competition is judged legitimate; where, and within what limits, is competition encouraged; how far is it real or nominal? These questions are addressed fairly fully in relation to Tanzania, Ghana, Zambia and Taiwan; for purposes of comparison, and more briefly and selectively, reference is made to the experience of a number of other African and Asian states — one-party, no-party, and multi-party.KeywordsDemocratic Liberal PartyParliamentary ElectionSingle PartyPolitical AccountabilitySenior Civil ServantThese keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.