Since the wave of independence swept across Africa in the mid-20th century, one of the continent’s greatest setbacks has not been external forces, but internal leadership failure. From stolen elections and term extensions to grand corruption and state-sponsored violence, Africa has suffered deeply at the hands of its own leaders. Yet, there remains one powerful philosophy that, if fully embraced, could serve as the touchstone for political morality across Africa: Pan-Africanism.
Pan-Africanism, in its true form, is not just about cultural unity or continental trade—it is a moral and political doctrine that upholds the dignity of all Africans. It affirms that the wellbeing of citizens across the continent matters more than the self-interest of individual heads of state. As such, it can and must be used as a standard to call African leaders to order; even if it means initiating their removal when they betray the people.
Historically, Pan-African thinkers such as Kwame Nkrumah, Julius Nyerere, Amílcar Cabral, and Patrice Lumumba argued that liberation was meaningless without ethical leadership. They believed that freedom was not simply the absence of colonial rule but the presence of justice, equity, and people-centered governance. This foundation provides the African Union (AU) with a homegrown ethical framework to monitor and, where necessary, intervene in cases of bad leadership.
While the AU has often hesitated to confront sitting heads of state, claiming respect for sovereignty, Pan-Africanism redefines sovereignty not as the right of leaders to act without scrutiny, but as the collective responsibility of African states to protect their citizens from abuse of power.
For example, in countries like Zimbabwe under Mugabe, Sudan under al-Bashir, or Guinea under Condé, prolonged leadership marked by repression and disregard for democratic norms led to suffering and instability. Yet the AU was largely silent, often citing “non-interference.” If Pan-Africanism were at the core of AU policy, it would provide moral and ideological backing for proactive intervention; through diplomatic pressure, sanctions, or even regional consensus to demand resignation or free elections.
The African Charter on Democracy, Elections and Governance (2007) is an AU legal instrument that condemns unconstitutional changes of government and supports democratic principles. But it lacks enforcement. Pan-Africanism can breathe life into such documents by anchoring them not in bureaucratic procedure, but in continental solidarity and moral clarity.
The success of ECOWAS in pushing back against coups in West Africa, for example in The Gambia (2017), shows that regional action is possible when rooted in collective values. Pan-Africanism should be the philosophical and moral pillar that empowers AU bodies to replicate such action continent-wide, not in the interests of the West, but for African people.
It is not enough to condemn bad governance in words. If Pan-Africanism is to mean anything in the 21st century, it must be radical in its morality and firm in its action. It must remind every African leader that their legitimacy does not come from the barrel of a gun or the manipulation of votes, but from the trust of their people and the watchful eye of a united continent.
Pan-Africanism is not silence in the face of tyranny. It is the conscience of Africa. Let it be heard.
By Thabo Freethinker