1
Palaver as a regime: study of
an African traditional form of
democracy
Universiteit van Amsterdam
Juliette Dubost
Master thesis Political Science, Track Political Theory
Supervisor: Michael Onyebuchi Eze
Second Reader: Enzo Rossi
June 2020
2 Abstract
The following thesis Palaver as a Regime: Study of an African Traditional Form of
Democracy describes, analyses, and discuss an African traditional political organization based on
popular deliberation and the practice of councils. The main argument of the thesis is that, in spite of what is generally thought and pervaded in studies about Africa, democracy in Africa existed way before colonization, and before the importation of the multi-party system from the West. Parallelly, the thesis aims to question the claim that the liberal multi-party democracy is the best regime for African countries, and to explore the possibility of a democratic regime based on the traditional political organization that is palaver.
The thesis mainly consists in a literature study. The literature existing about palaver has been widely and carefully summarized, analyzed, and critiqued. I first argue that palaver may be called a regime by defining the three dimensions of palaver: palaver as a way of life regulating everyday-life, palaver as a political practice supporting the social fabric of the given community, and palaver as a democratic regime based on the practice of councils. Then, I will debate the extent to which founding a modern regime on palaver is possible. First, I will examine actual and potential critiques and objections to palaver. Then, I will evaluate whether a palaver-based political system would be sustainable the current modern political paradigm.
The results of the research are the following: palaver is indeed an African traditional democratic system. While it does not seem to be compatible with the current global political paradigm, like for example moral modernity, or economic competitiveness, what appears very clearly is that a palaver-inspired deliberative political system could be a great alternative to the current failing multi-party system in Africa. Embryonic forms of mixed governance between palaver and the modern State already exist, and a deeper analysis of such phenomena would be the logical following step for a better understanding of what democracy means in Africa.
3 Table of content
1. Introduction………3
2. Theoretical framework and method: challenging the Western ambient reading of democracy.……....5
3. What is palaver? ... 6
3.1. Palaver, a way of life... 6
3.1.1. Communal metaphysical, epistemological, and social philosophy of palaver ... 7
3.1.2. Regulating daily social interactions in traditional African societies ... 11
3.2. Palaver is also a political practice ... 13
3.2.1. Judicial palaver ... 14
3.2.2. Social restoration through reconciliation ... 18
3.3. Palaver, a democratic regime ... 19
3.3.1. Discussing the notion of democratic regime. ... 20
3.3.2. Analyzing Palaver as a democratic regime ... 22
4. Possibility of a “palaveric” Modern State ... 32
4.1. Possible critiques to palaver ... 32
4.1.1. Intellectual tribalism ... 32
4.1.2. Tradition in politics ... 33
4.1.3. A size issue? governability of palaver ... 34
4.2. Sustainability of a palaver-based political system ... 34
4.2.1. Palaver and liberalism ... 35
4.2.2. Palaver and the State: incompatibility or mixed governance? ... 38
5. Conclusion………...………45
6. Bibliography……….46
7. Additional consulted sources……….…….….49
8. Appendices……….…….….50
1. Introduction
African countries are the “bad students” of democracy. Be it in the media, in books, in documentaries, in universities, African regimes are systematically put forward as the worst possible: at once unstable, destroyed by civil conflicts, authoritarian and illiberal, they are pictured as desperately dependent on Western institutions for regulation and reorganization. In terms of
4 representation, African societies are caught and defined by a perpetual opposition: that of the North against the South, of the West against the rest of the world, of civilized and sophisticated societies against uncivilized, primitive, dangerous or passive peoples. Hence, it is only natural for organizations and institutions at the head of the world to help Africa “democratizing”.
However, this push to democratize has been done without any questioning regarding what “democratize” even means in Africa (Butler, 1998). Either modelled on the multi-party state-centric systems of the West, or on economic liberal principles that have opened Africa to the ravages of an unbridled capitalism, the African democracy is always from somewhere else, thought by someone else (Boele Van Hensbroek, 2011). Not only the word, but the very process of democratization has become devoid of all substance. From the philosophical and emancipative ideal of a participative political system whereby each individual would be recognized as a viable political agent, democracy in Africa now appears as a capitalist move that aims to annihilate any political obstacle to its stranglehold of the contemporary globalized society (Wamba, 1992).
Africa is not halfway out of the claws of imperialism and neocolonialism. Hence, it is more than important that the representations of African cultures and African societies do not fall into the pitfalls of Orientalism – at least in academia. Thus, the claim that this thesis will try to debunk is the foreign character of democracy in Africa. It will be argued that there actually is an African traditional way to democratize, meaning an African democratic organization that is not modelled on Western political structures. Incidentally, I will also show that this way to democratize avoids the pitfalls of Western democracy by promoting popular agency. This way to democratize is the palaver.
Palaver is a political practice that has occurrences throughout most African regions (see appendix 1). Sometimes described as a philosophy according to which every individual has something valuable to say, it is also a largely codified political practice that is used in some communities to take decisions, or to resolve conflicts. From a theoretical perspective, palaver escapes from the canonical theoretical framework of political science by questioning the vision according to which politics necessarily imply the existence of the State. Indeed, one major unchallenged presupposition in the field of political science is that a regime exists first and foremost through a State. Arguing for the possibility of palaver as a regime is also arguing for the possibility of a regime without a State, and for the possibility of a regime existing first and foremost
5 though its people. Thus, the concepts of politics, regime, and State, and their relationships will be thoroughly analyzed and evaluated.
Hence the following questions: can palaver be defined and analyzed as a democratic regime? If so, what are the theoretical ties between palaver and the State? Does palaver eliminate, supersede, or reinforce the State? Finally, I want to evaluate the very possibility of the application of the palaver political principles in the paradigm of globalization and political modernity. In that sense, I will address and answer to possible critiques of the idea of palaver as a democratic regime, and issue its main limits.
2. Theoretical framework and method: challenging the Western ambient reading of democracy
The aim of this thesis is to put forward a political thought that challenges what could be called a parochialism, i.e. a depiction of Africa as inherently undemocratic. It will be argued that underlying the ambient discourse about democracy in Africa is a “[hierarchical] notion of difference” (Blau, 2017, p.271) inasmuch as these discourses imply that African democracies are failing compared to Western democracies. Moreover, it will be shown that underlying this discourse are some “false universalisms” (Blau, 2017, p.271): the conception of political pluralism as necessarily implying multi-partyism, and the conception of politics as necessarily implying a State-centric organization.
Through the analysis of palaver, a traditional African form of democracy, new conceptions of politics and democracy will be put forward, with the notion of political agency at the core of these conceptions. Critical reflections on the causes of failure of democracy in Africa will also be put forward.
2.1.The choice of the bibliography
The thesis aims to focus on thoughts that challenge Euro-centrist theories of democracy. However, this does not mean that the bibliography of this thesis ought to be defined solely with regards to the nationality of the authors. The intent here is to question the Western political thought’s tradition with recourse to other and less-known political theories. While palaver is a rather unknown topic when it comes to the Western ambient academic discourse, however a few thinkers have produced rich and profound reflections about palaver and its virtues. Additionally, a number of these sources, that are sometimes old of several decades, already called for the
6 theoretical revalorization of palaver as a potential source of democratization in Africa. This present work will modestly try to continue this enterprise, and to bring more light on the nature and the potential of palaver for the African political future.
2.2.Interpretative methods at use
Empirical and philosophical interpretations will be at the core of the texts study. Both interpretations will be used combined. As Blau (2017, p.251) points out, any interpretation implies to some extent a reconstruction to resolve ambiguities or fill gaps. In any case, all types of evidence found will be triangulated to test any reconstructive hypothesis.
2.3.Main methodological limits and difficulties
As palaver is a traditional form of organization, the main primary sources about palaver come from African traditional knowledge. Such material is uneasy to find and to exploit, as most communities are ruled by oral tradition. Moreover, because the traditional languages of such communities are unknown to the writer, and because few, if any, translative tools are available, the concepts at use to describe the organization of these communities might not be translatable in the language at use in these communities. For these reasons, secondary sources appeared as a valuable source of data. Some proverbs are transcribed in their original language and translated, and some authors with close cultural links to these communities offer precise descriptions of the communities. However, the impossibility to be in direct contact with the evoked phenomena did limit the scope of the analysis.
3. What is palaver?
This chapter aims to provide a complete description and analysis of what palaver is. First, palaver will be analyzed as a way of life, then a political practice, and finally, a democratic regime.
3.1.Palaver, a way of life
Palaver is a cultural and social practice that has been observed in various parts of the African continent (see appendix 1). It is rooted in a communal social, epistemological, and metaphysical philosophy that resonates throughout African cultures. But palaver is not only a philosophy; it also regulates daily social interactions in numerous traditional communities.
7 3.1.1. Communal metaphysical, epistemological, and social philosophy of palaver
African philosophies and cultures are plural and diverse. Arguing for the existence of one African culture, or one African philosophy would be guilty of oversimplification. However, like in every continent, different societies and peoples are linked by historical events and processes, and unity may be found among diversity. In that sense, one may say that there is such thing as an “African way-of-being-in-the world” (Boele Van Hensbroek, 1998, p.77).
The African traditional mode of existence is characterized by the valorization of speech on every level of life. According to some thinkers of palaver, underlying the very African civilization is the transcending desire to build the Man and the world with words (Atangana, 1966). The privileged place of speech goes hand in hand with a communal vision of the natural and supernatural world, of knowledge, and of society.
3.1.1.1.Metaphysical holism
Consensus-based societies are reminiscent of Ancient Greece societies in several aspects. In the polis, the religious and the cultural are not distinct from politics. This means that the agora is not only the site of political deliberation, it is also the site of religious events (like sacrifices, or the Dionysian festivals). Similarly, in the Bamileke chieftaincies, during challenging trials, supernatural forces are summoned in the search for truth (Tchoupie, 2009). The social, the political, and the religious are at all time intertwined; this is why understanding the beliefs and the religious practices of consensus-based societies is necessary in order to understand their social and political practices.
To consensus-based societies, the dead are present among the living, and the human universe is but an extension of the supernatural world. Indeed, the universe is regarded as a whole, a totality, in which all beings are connected to each other by sharing the same “living energy”. The continuity between living beings is not modalized by time and space: we, human of today, have the same living energy (or vital force) as the first humans. “You are not of today; you are nor of yesterday. … You are the living divine energy that exists from the beginning of our time” (Kia Bunseki Fu-Kiau, [n.d.]). Individuals themselves are out of time and space, because their true nature is the living energy that essentially composes the universe. When someone dies, what dies is not the person, but the body, the “box” that was containing the living energy. That is why ancestors are not separated from the living: because they are of the same energy as them, they live among them, and may be called to share their knowledge and experience when needed. To the
8 Bantu people, the oldest ancestor is the divine creator (Kia Bunseki Fu-Kiau, [n.d.]). That is why ancestors are the main actors of the supernatural world in a number of traditional African societies.
According to Kian Bunseki Fu-Kiau ([n.d.]), to the Kongo people, the ancestors are not the dead ones. When old members of the community die, especially if they were leaders, they go through a process of “ancestralization” (Kia Bunseki Fu-Kiau, [n.d.]). This means that their past deeds are evaluated to see if their life had been balanced, and to see whether, ultimately, this ancestor is fit to be called upon when knowledge is needed. This process takes place during a palaver, i.e. an open assembly, during which everyone can talk to make amend for debts owed to the deceased, or that the deceased had. Once the balance is restored, and if the result is deemed positive by the community, the deceased becomes an ancestor. Ancestors are called to resolve issues, like sickness or difficult trials (Kia Bunseki Fu-Kiau, [n.d.]). The community continues to count on the knowledge and experience the ancestors have accumulated after they passed. In that sense, political responsibility does not stop to the visible world, but implies natural and invisible ones to.
The intangible but unbreakable link of vital force is present during palaver events. The tree under which palaver often takes place, is not just a cool place where minds are calmer, it is also a sacred tree, sheltering gods and ancestors, to whom members of the society are united through vital force (Tchoupie, 2009). In that respect, under the palaver tree, the ancestors’ knowledge is accessible when needed. The sacred dimension of palaver plays an important part in the process of its institutionalization as a political practice, because the involvement of ancestors and of their wisdom is an important guarantee for the objectivity and legitimacy of the final decision (Tchoupie, 2009).
3.1.1.2.Dialogical epistemology
Knowledge is at the core of the traditional African mode of existence. For example, to the Aari people (in current Ethiopia), Gebre and al (2017), writes, knowledge essential for choosing one’s future. Because it is the result of experience, knowledge enables to cultivate one’s agency, and, ultimately, to live a better life (Gebre and al., 2017). In that sense, in some traditional African communities, the quest for knowledge is inseparable from the quest for good life.
However, the traditional African conception of knowledge must be specified, as it is relatively opposite to the Western one. Contrary to the Cartesian conception of knowledge, according to which knowledge comes from introspection, knowledge here has a dialogical nature.
9 The following Gandan proverbs that Wamala ( [Anon.] in Wamala, 2004, p.437-438) quotes and comments illustrate this conception of knowledge as shared:
Knowledge is like firewood in the hearth, if you have none you fetch it from your neighbor. …
I am wise, only if others have informed you. …
Magambo, a blind man, failed to reach home because of his arrogance and unwillingness to consult others.
Each proverb lays the emphasis on the dialogical nature of knowledge. Knowledge is not something that someone monopolizes, nor a source of authority or superiority, but a common resource that must be shared in order to find true wisdom (Wamala, 2004). One needs the others to find his true wisdom. Through vital force, knowledge is never lost: the ancestors, when deemed fit by the community, are often called upon, and come back to guide the living with their own knowledge and experience.
From this communal conception of knowledge - and consequently, of agency, comes the principle of solidarity, or, more precisely, of collective social responsibility. Indeed, if life is governed by knowledge, and if knowledge results from a common search for truth through the sharing of individual experiences, then individuals necessarily depend on each other to lead their lives. In the traditional communities following such principles, cooperation is more valued than competitivity, and materializes through the search for consensus in everyday social interactions.
3.1.1.3.Communal social philosophy
The communal vision of the universe of consensus-based traditional societies fosters the communal (or communalist) conception of society at work in traditional communities. Indeed, in traditional Africa, society is basically a direct extension of kinship (Nyerere, 1973). Thus, strong social ties link the community members, because just like a child is born in, and depends on, a family, individuals fully depends on the community to survive and to live good lives. In that sense, Gyekye (1997, p.4) writes:
Community life is not optional for the individual. … The fundamentally relational character of the person and the interdependence of human individuals arising out of their natural sociality are thus clear. … Human beings have needs and goals that cannot be fulfilled
10
natural relationality—provides the buttress indispensable to the actualization of the possibilities of the individual.
The upper quote shows that the epistemological and metaphysical communalist views that characterize the intellectual and cultural paradigm of traditional Africa lead to a strong sense of social solidarity. Indeed, one needs to live among others, with others, and by actively participating to common everyday activities, to develop and flourish as a human being. The life of the individual is organized around that of his family on the one hand, and of the whole community on the other hand. One cannot but see that the African communal human ontology as evoked by Gyekye (1997) concurs with Aristotle’s claim that the very nature of Man is to be a social animal, meaning that individuals need to live in groups to survive and prosper.
However, it is crucial not to take any shortcut. Although the communal social paradigm seems to be the norm in African traditional communities, it does not mean that the individual, its interests, and its agency, are put aside. Indeed, as argued by Gyekye (1997), communitarianism is
moderate in many African communities. The following Akan proverbs quoted by Gyekye (1997,
7) illustrate it:
The clan is like a cluster of trees which, when seen from afar, appear huddled together, but which would be seen to stand individually1 when closely
approached. …
Life is as you make it yourself. It is by individual effort that we can struggle for our heads. Life is war. …
The lizard does not eat pepper for the frog to sweat.
Here, the valorization of individual efforts and responsibility is apparent. While it is true that the community may appear to be superior in importance to the individual, the good life of the latter also depends on individual responsibility and efforts. It is in that sense that the communal paradigm of traditional African societies does not imply disregard for individualistic values (Gyekye, 1997). Even when in community, individuals have to personally grow and fight for their lives.
Finally, while the communalist social philosophy at work in consensus-based societies recognizes the existence and the dignity of the individual, the idea that his interests may differ
11 from the others’ is regarded as an illusion. One striking illustration of this is the Akan symbol of crossed crocodiles (see appendix 2). Often used as gold-weights, the crossed crocodiles symbolize the human illusion that individuals have competing interests. The following Akan proverb tells their story: “Two headed crocodiles fight over food that goes to a common stomach because each relishes the food in its throat” ([Anon.], [n.d.] ). The metaphor of nourishment seems to indicate that the community is truly what answers the needs of human life, as opposed to petty desires. In that respect, to the Akan, community really embodies the union of individual interests, and makes possible human fulfillment.
Traditional Africa is fundamentally communal. That means that every aspect of life derives from the intellectual paradigm according to which individuals are ultimately of the same essence, namely vital force, which composes the universe. Knowledge itself is obtained through sharing one’s experiences with others. Thus, the cornerstone of human life is solidarity.
The communal aspect of life in traditional Africa is the very reason underlying the importance of palaver. Indeed, as said earlier, palaver is a social and political practice based on speech. The reasoning here is not different from that that Aristotle puts forward after claiming that Man is a social animal. Because the very essence of Man is to live in groups, his higher, most important activity is the organization of the life in groups – i.e. politics (from the Greek polis, namely city), and his privileged tool for doing so is language. To Aristotle, the apparition of language in the human race is explained by its social condition. Similarly, because traditional African societies are communal, their civilization is based on language. Palaver appears as the codified and edified form of such language.
3.1.2. Regulating daily social interactions in traditional African societies
In traditional Africa, palaver is present at every levels of society. Be it on the occasion of economic activities (sales), family events (marriages), or ordinary conflicts, meaning is brought through words (Bidima, 1997). Bidima (1997) distinguishes two types of everyday palaver: irenic palaver, which is held outside of any conflict, and agonistic palaver, which is held to resolve a conflict. Irenic palaver takes place during everyday events. Those include ordinary negotiations, private conversations to arrange a marriage, but also education and medicine. The educational and medicinal forms of palaver are as the most telling when it comes to the role of palaver in everyday life.
12 1.1.2.1 Education through dialogue
In consensus-based society, when a child shows inappropriate behavior, it is customary not to scold the child, but rather, to try to uncover the source of such behavior by asking various questions (Scheid, 2011).
This practice is reminiscent of both the metaphysical holism and the dialogical epistemology pervading the African traditional culture. First, because human beings are seen as the reincarnation of ancestors, the misbehavior of a child might cover more serious issues, like the anger of an ancestor that has been disrespected, or unresolved debts. Second, because knowledge is key to resolve conflicts on the one hand, and because knowledge is dialogical on the second hand, then conflicts can only be solved through oral exchanges of information. In that sense, while asking questions to a child when he misbehaves might seem trivial, however, in consensus-based societies, it becomes the cultural norm (Scheid, 2011) because it is rooted in the community's belief system.
1.1.2.2 When the words heal
When a member of the community is ill, the doctor will not only conduct a physiological examination, but he will also consult the patient about any information related to his sickness, and his opinions about it (Scheid, 2011).
Indeed, according to the communal worldview, physical sickness may be the symptom of unresolved conflicts, whether with the living or the dead. The resulting shame and guilt, sometimes unconscious, becomes a sickness when not treated. The sickness may also be a punishment from the ancestors. Indeed, ancestors can interact with the physical world by punishing a member that has transgressed morals. In that sense, they are also recognized as guardians of morality, like gods in many religions (Wiredu, 1998). Kia Bunseki Fu-Kiau ([n.d.]) compares human life with a rope. Each conflict creates a knot. Unresolved conflicts lead to the creation of more knots, which ultimately impedes the individual to live a good life. Because humans are one within (and with) the universe, one have the obligation to untie the knots of one’s rope, not only to personally live a better life, but to enable the whole human community to live better lives.
In the medicinal context, palaver creates a “safe psychological space” for the patient to express his feelings, and to accept responsibility for his offense (Scheid, 2011, p.21). The community can then collectively accept and assimilate the patient’s past deeds to relieve him from
13 his negative feelings. By doing so, medicinal palaver allows reconciliation between the individual, the collectivity, and the ancestors, and restores the social order (Scheid, 2011).
1.1.2.3 Agonistic Palaver
Agonistic palaver consists in reducing conflict with words (Bidima, 1997). In a sense, one could say that medicinal palaver is agonistic. Indeed, its function is to heal a sickness that is often viewed as the consequence of conflict. In that sense, the frontier that Bidima (1997) makes between irenic and agonistic palaver is not clear-cut, and rather conceptual than substantial. Even in the context of education, the misbehavior of a child is regarded as a conflict – even a minor one – in the restricted community that is family. Thus, even in medicine and education, palaver heals conflict through the use of words, and restores the social link.
A more consistent typology of palaver is thus needed. What is apparent, is that the types of palaver at work in everyday events like medicine or education are not codified. Palaver then appears as a simple exchange of words, and mostly implies the primary actors of the conflict. However, in consensus-based societies, when a conflict does not resolve by itself, palaver becomes highly codified, and even ritualized, in the form of an arbitration by the chief and the community between the two parties. In this case, palaver has every aspect of judiciary court, and thus becomes a political practice.
3.2.Palaver is also a political practice
Social practices become political practices when they involve an interaction between two or more individuals, with a consequent respect for norms, submission to a hierarchy, and the regulation of complementary or conflicting interests (Sindjoun, 2007). In that sense, one can say that palaver becomes political - and not only social - when it becomes codified, when a hierarchy is instituted between its actors, and when the question of the interests of the opposing parties is seriously considered.
Because palaver falls within a canonical domain of political analysis, and because non-institutional forms of governance are often overlooked by the Western conceptual artillery, the notion of practices is useful to characterize political palaver. Practices are defined as follows: practices are “patterned actions that are embedded in particular organized contexts” (Adler and
14 Pouliot in Glasius, 2018, p.523). The analysis of palaver through the notion of practices allows a reading of politics that is not centered on institutions.
Thus, palaver appears as a political practice regulating the judiciary system in consensus-based societies. Here, palaver is mainly characterized by its aim, which is not merely justice or social peace, but reconciliation, and the restoration of the social fabric.
3.2.1. Judicial palaver
The legislative function of palaver may be described through the concept of customary law. Before colonialism, customary law was the main governance practice in Africa (Gebre and al., 2017). Judicial palaver has survived colonization and the instauration of the State in a significant number of traditional communities. In those communities, palaver regulates the judicial system through a set of codes, customs, and norms. These consist in the politization of space, and in the codification of speech.
3.2.1.1.Politicization through space
When a conflict between members of the same community cannot be resolved informally, then a deliberative assembly takes place to resolve it. The assembly is first codified through the space it is held in. Indeed, in such traditional societies, places are highly symbolic, and often sacred. For example, walking in the footsteps of an ancestor is a sacred action ((Kia Bunseki Fu-Kiau, [n.d.]). Places are witnesses of the lives of the ancestors, so the choice of the place in which palaver is held is highly significant.
According to Bidima (1992), places are the first way through which the relationship between nature and culture, between the human world and the universe, is expressed. Palaver must be established in a place where the whole community, whether visible or not, is present and can participate. In that sense, palaver sometimes takes place in the home of a respected member of the community, whom relationship with the ancestors is privileged. It may be the chief’s home, who, as descendant of the town founders, has a special link with the ancestors. For the same reasons, palaver may also take place at the eldest’s home. Among the Beti and the Fang, palaver takes place in the abââ, which is also the praetorium (Bidima, 1997). As in ancient Greece, religion is omnipresent in politics, because decisions are based on knowledge, of which the ancestors are sacred sources. Another very common place in which palaver is held is under a tree. The tree, especially when old and big, incarnates the roots of the community on the one hand, namely the
15 gods and ancestors, and its ‘togetherness’ at the top (Bidima, 1997). In that sense, the palaver tree overhangs conflict by incarnating the community unity.
Thus, the word of palaver becomes law when it is expressed in a place of power. These places take their power from the fact that they channel the entire community, and not only because they are the chief’s or the eldest’s home. Even when palaver is held in the chief’s home, what is expressed is not his authority, but the fact that in this place, everyone in the community, dead or alive, is present and able to participate. The place of palaver then de facto places the arbitration in a context of unity and solidarity: what is here to be done, is to overcome the given conflict in the name of the entire community, past, present, and future. Both parties, whether guilty or not, are part of the said community. The aim of palaver is not to stigmatize, nor even to punish in the name of a justice, but to reconcile.
3.2.1.2.Speech codification
The second and most visible way through which palaver becomes a political practice is the codification of speech. The palaver, by its playful, theatrical, and rhetorical aspect, is akin to a court of law, Bidima (1997) writes. The following analysis of the judiciary practices of the Beti people, based on Bidima’s (1997) description of the process, shows that palaver is complex enough to be called a judiciary system altogether. Within palaver, the word is codified, and so is the organization around it. In that sense, palaver as a judiciary practice is comparable to the Western court.
3.2.1.2.1. The pre-palaver phase
Bidima (1997) describes the moments preceding the actual palaver. Pre-palaver sessions are held, during which the aggrieved persons open themselves up to a third party, whom influence is recognized by both the accuser and the defendant. Then, during the warning (mbémé) and the adjuration (évui sòn), the complaints are repeated, and the stakes of the trial are enunciated. Through a discreet inquiry, experienced mediators are able to gather information by interviewing both parties in order to verify the facts of the complaint. The pre-palaver, common in cases of land disputes and witchcraft, is not necessary in cases of flagrante delicto (Bidima, 1997)
The pre-palaver phase appears to have two functions. First, and most evident, it is used to collect and to examine the facts underlying the conflict. This is why the process does not take place when the guilt of the accused party is already established. Second, and maybe more interestingly,
16 pre-palaver seems to be a phase of ‘conflict defusing’. Indeed, the floor is given to both parties several times, which enables violence and frustration to be taken out with words. This is why mediators have central roles in the palaver process: their role is to mediate, i.e. to create a neutral space between both parties in which rational dialogue may be restored.
3.2.1.2.2. Turn taking
According to Bidima (1997), turn taking manifests the notion of order during the palaver. It materializes the hierarchy between actors. Each person must speak in order, and in accordance with the degree of verbal violence that his status permits. Turn taking regulates the extent to which one can mobilize the affective capital of the audience through his rhetoric (Bidima, 1997).
While it is absolutely prohibited to monopolize the speaking space (Bidima, 1997), the codes of judiciary palaver are less rigid than those of Western court. Indeed, they are more reminiscent of the rules of a game rather than of laws. In La palabre sterile, Guy Menga (1968) tells the history of a member of a traditional African community accused of religious transgression. During the palaver, a member of his family who does not have the floor interrupts the turn to speak in order to specify some information about the matter at trial. Bidima (1997) consequently describes the palaver as follow: “The taking of turns transforms palabre into a game, in the double sense of “game” (observance of the rule) and “play” (being cunning with the rules and inventing new rules)” (Bidima, 1997, p.23). In the context of palaver, hierarchy is never definitive, and authority is always challenged, because what matters in the end is for the community to find truth and peace, and not for the chief to unanimously take a decision.
3.2.1.2.3. Challenging the authority of the judge
Nevertheless, the judge is the one who leads the palaver process. He is first and last to speak, as he pronounces the sentence after the deliberation of the jury. But because he is higher in the hierarchy, does not mean that he dominates the palaver. Indeed, judges may at all time discredit themselves, as their status is based on their supposed superiority in wisdom and word mastery. Indeed, during the trials, as the parties expose the facts, a great deal of verbal violence is practiced in front of everyone. Riddles and proverbs are asked by the accused, and the judge has to guess the implicit truth for the jury to be able to rule. His authority is above all based on knowledge. Should he stay silent before a riddle of the accused party, his authority would be immediately
17 undermined, because the judge is the one that is must know, while the accused is the only one that actually knows (Bakomba quoting Jolies quoted by Bidima, 1997).
The judiciary palaver is thus a place that questions the social order. The judge is subjected to a power relationship, and must prove himself worthy of his special status by demonstrating his wisdom to restore social peace and cohesion. In that sense, Bidima (1997) calls the jury that embodies authority is "servant of the word", in the double sense of one who helps it by its mastery of the verb (it must show skill at the risk of discrediting itself). Ultimately, the judiciary palaver does not only adjudicate on the guilt of conflicting parties, but also on the order of the whole community2.
3.2.1.2.4. General participation
During the judiciary palaver, the whole crowd has a voice. There is no passive spectator: except for the slaves, anyone that assists to the palaver may speak and express his thoughts on the case. Moreover, everyone who is a member of the community is welcomed to the assembly. More, going to such assembly is a sign of respect to the chief and the community. Here, the republican aspect of the palaver system is already apparent. The performativity of the word, what makes it law, does not come from the authority of the judge, as he only presides the assembly. The effectivity of the ruling much rather comes from the fact that everyone from the community is – or could be – present, and that anyone that has something to say, that disagrees with some statement, may speak up. To some extent, it also comes from the jury, as they make the final decision, but as we will see later, such councils are chosen by the whole community with regards to their wisdom and competences, and their decision simply cannot go against the general will of the community.
To conclude, judiciary palaver is a complex and codified process that regulates the social life of the community. In that sense, palaver may be called a jurisdiction, comparable in complexity and efficacity to the Western court.
However, unlike the Western court, the aim of Palaver is not merely to resolve conflicts in the name of social peace, or of an abstract sense of justice. Fairness is the main concern all the participants of Palaver. As underlined before, the judge does not unilaterally settle the dispute. The
18 sentence is pronounced after a long deliberation by a jury, which is often composed of elders unanimously chosen by the entire village for their wisdom and their virtues (Gyekye, 1992). In case of more complex dispute where conflicts of interest would limit the jury’s acuity, the sentence can also be pronounced by a member of a secret society, or by a "mother-village" which plays the role of judge between two villages (Bidima, 1997). Finally, one cannot but notice the central role that mediators play at every step of the palaver. Thus, fairness and equity in trials appear as an absolute requirement in consensus-based societies. Ultimately, the goal of Palaver is the reconciliation of opposed parties and the restoration of the community social fabric.
3.2.2. Social restoration through reconciliation
Palaver essentially aims at the reconciliation between the opposed parties. First, palaver enables the neutralization of violence through words. Then, palaver make reconciliation and reintegration possible through self-sacrifice.
Atangana characterizes palaver as the reduction of a conflict through language. Palaver humanizes violence and conflict by displacing it into the sphere of discussion, and by rationalizing it through words (Atangana, 1966). To both parties, words enable the (literal) expression, and thus, the release from, frustration – whether from a past deed, or from the accusation itself. In that sense, words neutralize violence by limiting its consequences to the psychological field, and by opening the conflict to rational discussion.
The palaver usually ends with the sacrifice of a head of cattle from the accuser’s family, often a goat. Then, the victims offer a meal, with dances and songs. Through this sacrificial act, each person symbolizes the sacrifice of oneself (Atangana, 1966). Underlying this sacrifice, lies the awareness of individual and collective guilt. He who was wrong, as well as he who was right, are both wrong for having disturbed the community. On the other hand, all the members of the community are aware that they have not safeguarded harmony and collaboration, that they have allowed the causes of violence to develop within society. It is therefore not enough to condemn an individual; what is required is a true purification of the whole society (Atangana, 1966).
In accordance with their cosmological holism, members of consensus-based society are solidary to the point of guilt. The palaver judiciary system is diametrically opposed to the Benthamian penal system, in which those who diminish the general well-being have to be heavily punished in order for them not to do it again. In that case, the interests of the community are overwhelmingly superior to that of individuals. Among consensus-based African communities, the
19 community is a guarantor of the individual, because him and his acts both originate from the community. The relationship between the individual and the community is reciprocal.
In that sense, judiciary palaver transcends the modern process of justice. It goes beyond the law of retaliation and justice. It is the structure of any exchange requiring mutual sacrifices between partners, between equals or even between superior and inferior. The community unloads its ingrained hatreds, restores balance, and strengthens itself (Atangana, 1966). Palaver ultimately aims at social cohesion. Its action is twofold: on the judiciary level, the wrong party pays a fine, and justice has been done through a complex and codified deliberative process, and on the level of social cohesion, the community avoids latent hatred or conflicts, and long-lasting and aggregating tensions. In consensus-based societies, conflict is not only what separates, it is also what unites. Indeed, the very reason for the necessity of life in community is the constant battle between life and death, between the exceptional human life force – as wrote by Albert Shweitzer, “I am life that wants to live, in the midst of life that wants to live” – and its correlated fragility.
However, while palaver definitely appears as a jurisdiction, there is no need to circumscribe its analysis to the judicial sphere. Underlying the political practice aiming at reconciliation that is palaver, often lies an equally complex political system governing a sometimes-large society. In other words, this thesis argues that palaver is not only a cultural paradigm, a way of life, or a political practice, but also the consistent ruling of an organized and institutionalized society. As noted by Boele Van Hensbroek (2011), there is such a thing as an African mode of existence, and this mode of existence is democratic.
3.3.Palaver, a democratic regime
Most African traditional societies that rely on palaver as judicial system often are structured based on the exercise of councils. The political system of the Akan society, located in the actual Ghana and Côte d’Ivoire, is a rich and telling example of the level of political organization complexity that consensus-based society can attain. Moreover, it will be argued that this political system may be defined as democratic.
First, a reflection upon the very notion of democratic regime is necessary. The concept of regime, when applied to democracy, is a rather unquestioned notion within the field of social sciences. Such careless use can be harmful, as it may discriminate again unusual forms of political organization that are de facto regarded as inefficient or undemocratic because they are not
20 reminiscent of Western forms of governance. Then, palaver will be analyzed as a democratic regime through the study of the Akan mode of political organization, based on Gyekye’s (1992) observations. Finally, the virtues of such organization as compared to the multi-party electoral democratic system in Africa will be put forward.
3.3.1. Discussing the notion of democratic regime.
First, we will question the modern procedural conception of democracy. According to some relevant critiques of modern democracy, democracy cannot only be defined by its procedures, like elections or multi-partyism. Democracy needs to be substantive in its politics. Reciprocally, a government cannot be said to be democratic merely because its politics promote moral and social liberalism: what matters is the goals of a society, and the chosen mode of politics to reach these goals. Then, the analysis will address the role of sites in democracy. It will be shown that the exercise of democracy goes hand in hand with its materialization in the public space.
3.3.1.1.Democracy as a mode of politics
To Wamba (1992), the democratic value of a society must be defined accordingly to the actual socio-political processes of the given society, rather on political procedures. In that respect, Wamba understands democratization as the improvement of ‘the people’s treatment of differences among themselves in society’ (Wamba, 1992, p.30). The notion of regime as a form of government is obsolete when it comes to democratization in Africa, as it does not enable the resolution of the issue that often fails popular governance in Africa, namely indissoluble social conflicts, and disunion. Thus, State power and its corelative notion of regime – regime being canonically understood as a government in power, are not at the core of political emancipation and governance when it comes to democracy in Africa (Wamba, 1992). This explains the current political crisis that pervades Africa: after the mono-party scheme that has degenerated into dictatorship, multi-party is consistently failing and becomes oppressive and corrupted.
This “State-centric” conception of politics appears to be harmful to popular sovereignty as it reflects of the structures of power rather than the power in itself. The question of the common goal and values of the nation is eluded. Thus, the idea of a West-modelled democratic regime in Africa is uneasy, as what will bring democracy about is not a certain structure or the instauration of procedures, but a move towards social dialogue and social unity restoration.
21 Ultimately, to Wamba (1992, p.36), the essence of democracy in Africa lies in emancipative politics. He writes:
In Africa emancipative politics will be without Parties and will function by means of political organizations. … Our starting point must be: in Africa too, people think and this is the
sole material basis of thought. … We must take note of what people think under free circumstances and we must investigate the internal content of these thoughts. It is through an analysis of those forms of consciousness that forms of political consciousness, characterizing the
antagonism within the existing overall socio-political order will be grasped.
The passage is key to understand the humanist proposition of the thinkers of a new democracy in Africa such as Wamba (1992). Moving away from an imposed, rigid system, taking into account the particular context of every society in Africa, and revalorizing individual dignity and agency by giving people a voice are the real stakes of democratization in Africa. Democracy must be redefined through its real and substantive goals and content, not through abstract procedures and administrative stratification.
These substantive goals that define political organization, Wamba (1992, p.30) calls them ‘mode of politics’. A mode of politics is the way in which a particular form of politics (a prescriptive relationship with reality) functions as a system of decision-making practices and thought (Wamba, 1992). Redefining the notion of regime through that of mode of politics instead of that of state power enables to do away with an institution-centric conception. The analysis thus opens to political organizations that lie on particular normative perspectives, and that function through complex and efficient decision-making systems, without being strongly institutionalized, such as the palaver-based political system of consensus-based societies.
3.3.1.2.Politics through sites
Sites are central to politics, and especially to democratic modes of politics. They refer to places where political agents can unite, discuss, and decide. For example, one can mention the
agora in Ancient Greek, which first designated the city council, and then the physical place in
which the city council was held (Glotz). As Wamba writes, the existence of sites are the necessary condition for the very existence of politics (Wamba, 1992, p.35). In Le droit à la ville, Henri Lefebvre (1968) places sites at the core of politics as well. Informal events such as markets or fairs are the occasion for the whole community to meet and to exchange opinions and idea about their
22 shared life. Underlying the modern general tendency to depoliticize is the fact that that, in the urban paradigm, some are excluded from these places of meetings and discussions. Modernity does not only challenge popular agency through high centralization and administrative stratification, but also by leaving politics out of the reach of a great number of people through urbanization.
Not only sites are necessary to politics, but sites determine politics. Indeed, when a group exercise power, this group needs a place to meet. The more open the group, the more open the place must be. In other words, a deliberative mode of politics aiming at the emancipation of the people – i.e. a democratic regime - necessarily implies the creation of places – material and immaterial – in which community members may be called upon to ‘discuss the affairs of the community’ (Wamba, 1992, p.35).
Thus, for a mode of politics to enable popular emancipation, the very structure of the political system must be emancipative. It must rehabilitate popular agency by giving the people the possibility to actively participate to the affairs of the community, whether in discussion or in decision. Among traditional African communities, palaver serves such purpose by instituting a multitude of councils – places of deliberation – and by inviting the whole community to participate. As a mode of politics establishing open political sites and aiming at popular emancipation through the valorization of popular agency, palaver is a democratic regime.
3.3.2. Analyzing Palaver as a democratic regime
For Wiredu (1998) and other “particularists”, it is necessary to reconceptualize democracy with regards to every particular African cultures (Kasanda, 2015). This approach is called particularistic. It consist in the refusal to regard Africa as a unit about which general truths may be said, and in the focus on a particular African community, or a particular African culture. Palaver understood as a democratic regime answers to those criteria inasmuch as it is culturally grounded in a number of African traditional communities. First, the political principles of palaver as a regime will be uncovered. Then, the palaver political system will be described through the analysis of the Akan political council-based organization.
3.3.2.1.Substantial representation
Palaver is a form of radical democracy in the sense that it put conflict at the core of the political process. The people take part to political deliberations and decisions. However, as pointed
23 out by many critiques of radical democracy, one main challenges of radical democracy is efficiency. How could the decisional political process be efficient if millions of people were to take de decision? In that respect, the principle of representation is key to the exercise of palaver.
Representation in palaver differs from representation in the West. Politics are not legitimized through the vote for political notables like in most Western democracies. Palaver implies that every decision – and not merely its structures - must be accepted by the members of the community. Every decision is subjected to the approval of the people, and during the deliberative process, everyone can make a point and is minded by those stating the result of the deliberation (Boele Van Hensbroek, 1998). In that sense, representation in the context of palaver is substantial, and not formal. Every single view, even when it is not shared by the majority, is taken into account. Substantial representation is “on the Ashanti view … a matter of fundamental human right” (Wiredu in Boele Van Hensbroek, 1998).
3.3.2.2.Democratic value of the traditional palaver regime
The following descriptive part is intended to be at the core of our argumentation. Indeed, the political structure of the Akan people is very visibly democratic, in that its hierarchy structure is very horizontal. This is why multiple schemes, composed from Gyekye’s (1992) description of the Akan political sphere, will be at use.
Gyekye (1992) studies the Akan, a large traditional African people composed of many sub-people present in West Africa (mainly Ghana and Côte d’Ivoire). The Akan are also the largest ethnic group in Ghana, and have a population of approximately 20 million in Africa (Anon.a.). They are organized in a complex stratified political system that rests on the practice of open councils. Like other consensus-based societies in Africa, the Akan is a warlike community. According to Tchoupie (2009), this paradoxical correlation is explained by the fact that, while palaver galvanizes and generates enthusiasm when it comes to war with neighboring communities, the palaver political system is barely coercive because of the communal aspect of political deliberation and decision.
The Akan political organization is very resembling to that of the Bantu people, an even larger group spread across Central Africa . Their political organization is based on the Mbongi, which can be translated as “council” or “assembly”. Before being a powerful political institution, it is an ordinary building found in most town and villages, especially in the Kongo region (Kia Bunseki Fu-Kiau, [n.d.]).
24 Although several instances of communities organized in a palaver regime exist, the present analysis exclusively focuses on the Akan organization for the sake of conciseness. Then, the monarchical dimension of the Akan people will be analyzed to see whether it is compatible with democracy.
3.3.2.2.1. The Akan political organization
Gyekye (1992) thoroughly describes the Akan political organization. The following illustrations are based on Gyekye’s description, and illustrate the Akan political order.
First, Gyekye (1992) describes the organization of an Akan State.
The Akan State thus appears as the union of towns and villages, which are themselves unions of clans, which are formed by the union of lineages. Here (fig.1), one cannot but notice the high stratification between the State level, which is the highest, and the lineages, which are basically families.
The following illustration (fig.2) depicts the Akan organization at the clan level: Figure 1- The Akan State Organization (Source: Dubost J.)
25 Figure 2 – The Akan Political Unit Organization (Source: Dubost J.)
Figure 2 shows that, as said by Nyerere (1973), consensus-based traditional communities are but the extension of family units. Moreover, one can see that both elders and royalty have a privileged role in the palaver order. Indeed, the chief of town is necessarily of royal descent, and elders can be chosen as head of their lineage. As we will see later, this can raise some issues when it comes to the adaptability of the palaver political system to the modern paradigm.
The next and last scheme (fig.3) illustrates the decisional processes at work in the Akan consensus-based system.
26 Figure 3 shows two things about the palaver-based political system. First, the palaver-based system is a complex organization, in which the efficiency of the political process is a key-concern. Indeed, heads of clans, chiefs of towns, up to the Omanhene (paramount chief in English) (Gyekye, 1992) are not strictly speaking figures of authority. None of them is supposed to impose his decision. Much rather, as noted by Teffo (2004), they appear are representatives of the people, and are chosen by the citizen – which are really their kin - on grounds such as wisdom and respectability (Teffo, 2004). Hence, citizens are always welcomed to councils to speak up, whether about the affairs of the community, or the election of a chief. In that sense – it is the second point -, in spite of an apparent hierarchy, political power is very horizontal (see fig. 3), because both the status of chiefs and the validity of decisions depends on the active and renewed consent of the people.
3.3.2.2.2. Monarchical democracy
The chieftaincy system at work in the Akan society makes its political system monarchical. However, it may be argued that the monarchical aspect of the Akan system does not impede on its democratic dimension.
Indeed, the power of the Akan king is the antithesis of the classic absolute monarchical power. His legitimacy entirely lies on the active consent of the people. The proverb “Kgosi ke kgosi ka batho” (meaning ‘a chief is a chief through the people’) ([Anon.] in Teffo, Teffo, 2004, p.446) shows that kingship must be conceived just like the way the term of minister was originally regarded: a servant of the people. Among the Akan, a candidate to the throne cannot become king against the will of the people (Ramose, 1992). In that sense, Ramose writes: “To be a king is to accede to that position because of the consent of the people and to remain so for as long as the people have not withdrawn their consent” (1992, p.79). Among the Akan people, the power of the king is not established by religion, nor by majority vote. Like that of the judge in the judiciary palaver, his authority may be questioned at all times by unsatisfied members of the community, and discontent may be followed by his eviction from the throne. In that respect, the monarchical aspect of the palaver regime is greatly attenuated by the fact that, while the king is not elected by the people, the people is constantly choosing to let him on the throne or not (Teffo, 2004).
Moreover, the function of kingship is entirely delimitated to the interests of the community. The king rarely takes part into deliberations, and cannot go against consensus. The nature of his power is mostly executive, as he states the decisions of the council (Wamala, 2004). To Teffo
27 (2004), the king’s function is not to give order or to dominate and decide of the future of the community, but to unite by personifying the community and its convergent interests. Although the king is a symbol, his role is not only symbolic, as he must also support the social fabric by facilitating the continuity between the members (Teffo, 2004). Among consensus-based society, authority figures like priests, doctors, or kings, are always mere mediators, mediating between the past (the ancestors) and the present, between nature and the human world, between the community and itself.
Ultimately, the monarchy at work in palaver societies appears to be an “associational monarchy”. Bradley (2005, p.417) defines this political organization as follows: an associational monarchy is a “ federalist system in which nonroyal clan and other ethnic groups had a degree of autonomy from the central authority”. As upper seen, royalty is not a polarizing body under whose sphere of influence the community finds itself. Rather, it is a unifying body that enables the pooling of the interests of the various towns, villages, and clans.
3.3.3. Comparing the palaver regime with the multi-party electoralist system
Matolino (2018) asks the question whether the social and political institutions designed under a consensual dispensation meet the requirements of democracy better than the majority system. Indeed, one can wonder if the palaver political system would have better results than the electoralist multi-party system when it comes to democracy in Africa. While it is important to note that palaver as a regime should be regarded as a Weberian “ideal type”, that is, a political phenomenon rarely encountered in history (Diangitukwa, 2014), still, to various thinkers of democracy in Africa, palaver appears as the ultimate democratic political organization. A palaver political-based system appears at a great alternative to the failing majoritarian democracy, and a valuable solution to revalorize the political agency of African individuals.
3.3.3.1.Blind Westernization
Some political thinkers of Africa like Wamba are puzzled by the failure of multi-party democracy in Africa. He writes: “No satisfactory explanation has been given as to why the African experiences with multi-partyism in the early sixties led to authoritarian regimes, rather than social and political self-emancipation of the people” (Wamba, 1992, p.29). To a number of critiques, the fact that these institutions were not contextually and culturally grounded in Africa is key to understand this failure.
28 In that sense, Kia Bunseki Fu-Kiau vigorously critiques the African tendency to adopt structures and institutions that come from abroad. In a diatribe speaking about the economic struggles African countries are faced with, the scholar denounces these “African leaders who have never sat inside an African ‘Mbongi3’” (Fu-Kiau in Nii Ashaley, 2019, [n.k.]). This critique
illustrates the frustration of those rooting for Africa to emancipate from its struggles and flourish: blind Westernization – as much in economics than in politics, appears as a remain of the colonial past, and a weight pulling Africa down. By putting on a pedestal the Western political system, it is as if the rich and fertile African political traditions were overshadowed.
Gyekye (1992) concurs with Kia Bunseki Fu-Kiau ([n.d.]). To him, “political instability, uncertainty and confusion”, that weight political life in Africa, are the direct and necessary consequences of the adoption of a foreign democratic system (Gyekye, 1992, p.241). The urge to democratize according to a Westernizing scheme in Africa comes from a universalistic approach to democracy. This approach regards democracy as a self-sufficient system that any society could adopt as it is. The universalistic approach omits cultural particularisms, and their impact on the viability of a given political system. Like culture, democratization is an organic, timewise process, and the European democracies went through a lot of stages before reaching a political system that allows social emancipation (which still is an ongoing process).
The theorization of a palaver-based democracy rests on a particularistic approach of democracy, as the system put forward is rooted in an African political tradition. Such approach directly comes from the consideration for African cultural particularisms. As opposed to “the party system [that] destroys consensus by deemphasizing the role of the individual in political action” (Wamala, 2004), a consensus-based political system that works through councils – in which deliberations go on until a consensus is reached - creates a cooperative, and not adversarial, political paradigm that revalorizes personal agency (Teffo, 2004).
3.3.3.2.Reconstructing individual political agency
Palaver goes against a centralized and elitist political system. Indeed, as Wamba (1992) writes, everyone is on the same level of importance during council. The chief, judges, and jury are merely mediators , and do not monopolize the deliberative space. The base of society is never forgotten, be it in judiciary councils or in the elaboration of the law. The masterstroke of palaver
29 lies in the fact that this apparently fragile moment of mediation is never put aside (Bidima, 1997). In that sense, the individual can never be overshadowed because someone of higher rank choose to speak for everyone.
Moreover, palaver enables every great societal question in Africa, like national identity, imperial domination, or social differences, to be debated (Wamba, 1992). Because the council – and even the chief’s house – is always open, there is not one moment to talk about a particular issue. In spite of its codified dimension, palaver enables political life to be spontaneous and accessible to the greater number. In that sense, individual wills and opinions are valued, and one’s voice actually means something when it comes to the future of one’s community. To Bidima (1997), during palaver, the individual becomes a “subject of the law”, in that he is given the floor, and this “journey to the word" through palaver is one of the first steps towards the constitution of the subject of law in Africa.
Palaver thus appears as the remedy political dullness that comes with Modernity; politics is no longer said in terms of State, laws, and legislature, but of action through speech (Bidima, 1997). Every speaking agent becomes a political agent, and social emancipation becomes within reach.
3.3.3.3.Popular emancipation
As earlier said, the democratic value of a political system rests on whether one of its core aims is popular emancipation. Palaver enables popular emancipation through political pluralism, and the exercise of a type of individual agency based on civic republicanism.
3.3.3.3.1. Political pluralism
If we use Wamba’s conceptual tools, palaver appears as a democratic regime because it is a mode of politics that enables popular emancipation. Indeed, the palaver political system, he writes, is characterized by the fact that it enables the existence of a multiplicity of political sites (Wamba, 1992). In the palaver organization, there is a significant number of councils, on various scales (see 2.2.1). Moreover, the system of palaver makes is possible to processes of political deliberation to spontaneously flourish . The fact that politics is not a special and separated discipline, but is infused in everyday life though ordinary events, religion, and culture, allows a new form of political pluralism, not through a multiplicity of parties, but through a multiplicity of
30 political processes, and a multiplicity of individual voices. Because in palaver, political power is absolutely decentralized, authoritarianism is impossible (Wamba, 1992).
3.3.3.3.2. Civic republicanism
The type of individual political agency that is at work in palaver may be defined as ‘civic republicanism’. In that sense, palaver is part of the republican tradition. Spicker (2019, p.115) defines civic republicanism as ‘a set of collectivist approaches based on active engagement in a political community’. Civic republicanism answers to five criteria, that Jordan enumerates (Jordan in Spicker, 2019). I will show here that palaver checks all these criteria.
The first key element to civic republicanism is that ‘a political community is a shared project …[, and] every polis (or state) is a species of association’ (Jordan in Spicker, 2019, p.7). As shown by the description of the Akan political system, the State includes towns and villages that include clans that include families and individuals. In that sense, the ‘palaveric State’ is by essence associative, and is not the mere government of scattered individuals administratively connected. The strong religious and culture background of consensus-based traditional societies that is at the core of their political organization defined their shared project: to live together in a community, to live well, to acquire knowledge and wisdom, and, doing so, to honor the ancestors and the whole universe. Here, it is important to note that the fact that those communities were often warlike does not necessarily invalidate the above. On explanation might be that, as in a lot of traditional societies, the foreigner in dehumanize. For example, ‘Bantu’ originally means ‘humans’ or ‘people’ according to some interpretations (Silverstein, 1968). Moreover, as said earlier, a communalist view of the universe does not imply the rejection of all conflict in consensus-based societies. Much rather, it supposes the active acceptation of the fact that conflict is at the very core of life, but also the possibility to transcend conflict through discussion, consensus, and reconciliation.
The second criterion is the following: ‘the people who join together to form a political community have a bond to each other’ (Jordan in Spicker, 2019, p.7). This one is pretty straightforward when it comes to palaver. Indeed, the organization of the palaver state is very
organic, and society is basically the extension of the family clan (Nyerere, 1973). Thus, what
unites the people is blood ties. In Akan towns and villages, individuals usually are of the same descent. Daughters are married to men from other villages, which creates alliances between the
