African traditional governance and the western liberal democratic system, Iowa City, Iowa, September 10, 2004

[Joel Barkan]- Today's program has been made possible through the cooperation of International Programs of the University of Iowa and with the additional support from Lumas Construction Incorporated and Helen Lee Hensley and Howard Wegner. And to thank our sponsors for supporting this event. Today's topic, African Traditional Governments in the Western Liberal Democratic Systems is a particularly important timely one for those of you who have followed the process of Democratization over the last 10 to 15 years. Not only in Africa, but in other plural societies, such as in Central Asia. Where you have countries with indigenous groups that predated the formation of the Nation State. Where particularly the boundaries of the Nation State is a colonial creation. And a half century after the end of colonial rule, those boundaries remain in place and one of the thorniest issues for these countries is how do you create and establish and institutionalize a viable set of democratic institutions that are responsible and accountable to the populations of these societies but which also means accommodating people who speak different languages, who retain some attachment to different types of traditional institutions and the like. The industry of Democracy promotion, one about which you heard the president speak just last Thursday night. Is often one that focuses only at the top. That is to say, the holding of multi-party elections, the establishment of parliaments, et cetera, et cetera. Rarely is this issue of how does one establish institutions that speak appropriately to the polarity of groups in society is that systematically addressed. And I might add that is in any way the problem in Iraq and why the issue is not going so well there. It's not a military problem, it's a political and anthropological one. And today's speaker is particularly well qualified to explore that topic with us. Kofi Awoonor as you've seen from the announcements is presently at the University of Ghana, but he has really an illustrious and multi-faceted career. He's a renaissance man in the full sense of the word. He's a poet, he's a professor of comparative literature and particularly appealing to me, he's someone who has pursued a dual career. From 1963 to 1983, he was more or less strictly in the academic world. First as an assistant secretary of the Ghanaian Academy of Sciences, then as a research fellow in African Studies at the University of Ghana and moving onto a variety of positions at the University of Cape Coast in Ghana and also at the state University of New York at Stony Brook. Where for a time he was chairman of Comparative Literature Program. And then in the last 20 years, from 1983 largely to the present he's been someone in public life. As you noted from the announcement, he's been Ghana's ambassador to Brazil and accredited to adjacent countries, also to Cuba and then between 1990 and 94, the Ghana's permanent representative and ambassador to the United Nations. He was then an advisor to the president of Ghana, the former president Jerry Rawlings. And he's presently remains active in Ghanaian politics. So without further adieu, we welcome you here and please address us on this timely topic. [Kofi Nuidevo Awoonor]- Thank you very much Joel and let me say how thrilled I am to be here to share with you a few thoughts and I'd like to thank the people who have been responsible for this conspiracy to bring me here. Michael Magnaulty, Sunday Belken, and of course I found in my stay here up to date, not only a innkeeper but a nurse maid in Daisy Owen. I thank all of you for being here. Someone whispered to me that I noticed that there was no Ghanaian flag on the table. I don't think you were writing us out of the international community, but it was whispered by your executive director that somebody has borrowed it. I hope he brings it back the the next Ghanaian speaker. Professor Barkan had said the Democratization thrust has been on for some time now. Particularly after the collapse of the Soviet Union the past almost 18 to 20 years. There has been the need for Africa also to respond to the question of Democracy. But let me say, without any hesitation that Democracy is not essentially a European invention. That even in Africa, we have had Democratic institutions that have evolved at the base level in a small communities and societies, particularly where in some cases, where chiefdom have emerged and when I say that I'm talking specifically about my own community, the Ewe in West Africa. Where chiefs are both elected and selected and gotten rid of, if they play the fool. So, the tensions that are constructed at that base between the generations, between the leadership clans and families. Those who work the land and those who are herders and so on are part and parcel of the dynamics of Democratic relationships. Sometimes they breakdown, I've seen in every society. Yet ways and means are designed to reassemble these dynamics for the purpose of harmonious existence. Let me stress at the beginning that, the African polity, the African political organization is also deeply embedded in its spiritual organization. As I'm Ewe or a Zulu or Yorba means a certain spiritual relationships that are constructed around a number of ideas. Beginning with my ancestors. And I have a sneaking suspicion that every human being has an ancestor. And that reverential relationship which has been misinterpreted by some anthropologists as ancestral worship. Because we don't worship our ancestors. Provides us a line of communication in which the living design a viable functional method of dealing not only space and time but also resource sharing and more than anything else, community survival. And the principle upon which this is determined or it is based is the principle of harmony. When a society is in the state of upheaval it is believed that there is something wrong. Why are we in this state of disarmory? And so we seek the answer through the spiritual links that has already been designed for us. And so politics and religion and I don't like the word religion as such. And spirituality if you like to replace that with religion are intertwined as a functional system for social cohesion and social harmony and progress. When Europe came and Europe didn't come on the very benevolent circumstances. It came as a conquering force. It interrupted more maliciously than we have anticipated or than we have studied, this system, particularly with the position of the Christian ideology. The Christian ideology, if you permit me, is an individualistic ideology. All of us and in the Christian concept will go to heaven individually. I have a house man who goes to church every Sunday. And one day I asked him, what did the priest say? We have conversations about the sermon for the day, for the Sunday. And he said, oh the priest said, when Gabriel comes and he blows the trumpet and we are going to heaven and your brother who has not been going to church all the time and he wants to hang on your leg to go to heaven with you, you better kick him off. There you are, it's basic. While the original spiritual system, which I say has been doctorized, part of the political structure, is a communal system. If evil comes, we all share in it. We pay prices for the misbehavior, the misconduct of our relatives, our friends. Whoever is related to us in that broad line of blood relationship or spiritual relationship. We are all at risk, as a result of one person's misconduct. The European political system therefore, which had by its very nature, divided man up. Some people blame it on Aristotle. Where man, economic has nothing to do with man, religious. Except every Sunday, we go to church, but what we do for the rest of the week may not be very important. The idea therefore that political systems that would be designed to include all of us and also have the ritual thrust to it or foundation to it, has been removed. And this is why I think in some instances in modern times, we're getting back to some degree of fundamentalism. But, in the African concept, that situation has nothing to do with fundamentalism, but it's just the natural process of things. Britain for example, in 1844 signed a bond with the Gold Coast chiefs. Ghana used to be called the Gold Coast. We still have a lot of gold, even though many of us don't see it. In this bond, the cornerstone of British occupation was defined around the law. That British laws would be applied around the forts and castles which were used as not only in the seat of government but also as trading posts. It is these forts and castles which were the store houses of the slave trade itself. I mean the Transatlantic Slave Trade. Now let me quickly say, that the British, the Portuguese, the Dutch or the Danes who were all involved in the trade, and the French. Could not have seen successful if they didn't have an alliance with the chiefs. So the African chiefs were part and parcel of the trading relationship that resulted in the Transatlantic story. Right from there, for that point, the system had begun to go wobbly. Weakling under the impetus of this new force. Specifically, as money became the central ingredient of this new relationship, money and power. Instead of communities and where defining a hierarchical system from the base village, to the town, to the state. We have the imposition from above of the British Colonial System which was based on an English Lord, who was in Northern Nigeria called Lou Guard Who came upon the Ime or the muslim kingdoms of northern Nigeria and used that system which was a very feudalist system, as the sample with which to define the British Colonial agenda. So where we had control over our chiefs through various systems or patterns or mechanisms of relationships defined from the sub-chiefs and the family, clan structures. The British found it useful to employ these chiefs as their direct allies in their governance. This was expected because Britain itself, if you want to look at the contradiction, is supposed to be a democracy, but a democracy with a queen. A democracy with lords, dukes and such other unemployed and unemployable personalities. The African political or governor system takes on the responsibility in the regional system that we are talking about for justice, for morality, which is closely linked to the justice system. For social welfare, for the environment, for the observance of the spiritual demands and all other affairs pertaining to the well being of the community, including economic activities. Fishing in the streams or rivers. Farming on the land, cutting trees for use to build houses. These were all controlled within the structure of that original polity. And this polity insists on responsibility before rights. If you do not discharge your responsibilities, you have no rights. And therefore, in that same process, insist on the community taking precedence over the individual. British, or the British Colonial System was disruptive as I said. Of the entire original hierarchy of temporal and spiritual authority. The era of independence, the 50's, 1957 was when we became independent in the Gold Coast. And ofevolution managed entirely by British trained lawyers. Did not afford any opportunity to examine any aspect of traditional governance for consideration or for foraging a project of some kind of synchronic amalgamation and modality with an indigenous system which some how survived in the wake of the Lou Guardian agenda or program. The most serious differences between the two systems where the British stress, as I said on individuals as opposed to community and under the impetus of the missionaries, the banishing of the African gods from their affairs of men. I want to know where in the constitutional evolution of America. I'm sure you began with the god or the supreme deity. You still have it on your dollar bill, in God We Trust. We are operating Ghana, in Ghana our fifth constitution since 1957. In none of these constitutions was any part of our original political system or institutions brought remotely into focus as viable components of governance. With the exception of the 1969 constitution. They went back to chieftancy institution, the structure of kings and rulers and created a three tier houses of chiefs and kings. The traditional council and the locality, which is a base. Above it is the original house of chiefs and the national house of chiefs, where the chiefs are severely restricted to manage their own affairs as to the question of succession. And where the spirit moves them, they may judge on the lower level a few domestic fights, prevent the breakdown of law and order. What I would define as the African crisis, because there is crisis in Africa, can be traced partly to the state of dislocation. Which has been imposed on the continent, by the European convention. Some of you suggest that we can trace it back to that particular period of the trade, the slave trade. Where the Africans were inducted as allies and therefore institutions were destroyed. Even though remnants are there this was followed in most cases by a wholesale adoption of European political models, which have no organic relationship with the social cultural complexities of our original societies. To believe even in Britain, they are addressing ritualism. Suddenly the Scotts have a parliament. The Welsh have a parliament. The Irish are still working at it. Our original system dealt adequately with land disputes. With inter-ethnic rivalries. Basing itself on both a temporal and significant, as I said a spiritual amalgam and many issues have become the bane of our contemporary politics. We refer quickly to the Rwandese genocide, the so-called Tutsi and the Hutu situation which led to the murder and killing of more than a million people. The way forward is a serious engagement of African scholars and heads of traditional institutions with help from friends abroad, like Professor Barkan here who has made it a career to look at some of our institutional structures that we should begin to address the creation of governance systems which will reflect the general features with adequate modifications and create resilient and a viable political order. This will be our contribution to the governance discourse. As it is now, we're getting only instructions from London and Washington. The need for pragmatic redefinition of African original institutions which have survived for the purpose of inducting their most usable components into the national governance process. And a critical examination of each ethnic component of the New Nation States. Don't forget that our countries were carved out in 1886. At the Berlin Conference which was organized by King Leopold, an instigation or the other way around, it's organized by Otto von Bismarck, a instigation of King Leopold where they all sat down on their big table after a number of days of good wine and good pheasant. They drew, they took a ruler and divided Africa up. They called it the partition of Africa. In some, the social cultural metrics of health delivery for example, involving age old systems, how about practice and institutional arrangements that reflect the cosmological view of our people in the collective present prospects of an alternative or hybrid model for use. The Chinese have been very successful in this area. So, you can see when I talk of governance, I mean dealing with and handling every department of human life, including health. Africa's governors must cover every sector of the institutional responsibility for health, for education, guaranteeing of human rights for justice delivery. These must be reassessed within the scope of social and cultural conditions. We're neither are Christians nor Anglo-saxon. National institutions should undergo stringent reviews for the purpose of decentralization. Based on the incorporation of original political systems of each ethnic group into the grass-root governance system. In tandem, the amalgamation of element from each unit, into a harmonious whole on a national level. The need for us in Africa is to move away from the universalizing paradigm. Based essentially on the European experience is very crucial. So when we talk about governance or democracy, it has to be a European model. We got to move away from this. The persistence of the west on transference so-called democracy to African countries is constructed around some kind of enormous arrogance which proclaims that the phenomenon has succeeded in its country of origin. You'll answer that question for me, whether your democracy's really working. I was reading a little piece of paper which I think was published, which Daisy gave to me. Mr. George Wills in Newsweek called Karabo's Christian Vote. I think he's trying to do something... He thinks they're trying to do something hanky panky in Karabo. He says, the American constitutional system aims not nearly for the majority rule but by a certain kinds of majorities. It aims for majorities suited to moderate consensual governance of a heterogeneous continental nation with myriad original and other diversities. If he's talking about America as a heterogeneous continental nation with myriad and other diversities then I don't know what he will be saying about Africa. So he's defending your electoral college mechanism. We have not been able to do much in this direction in Africa. One of these things that bother me a lot and I will be done very soon. Is that the Greek model. We tend to forget that the liberal democratic model which traces its pedigree to Greek, the Greek city states, denied slaves and women any part in the governing system. They were disposable and inconsequential units. We must return to grass-root governance in Africa to deal with those issues that afflict us and their very negative forms. And the so-called democracy of Africa and other parts of the known European world. Including Afghanistan, including Iraq. Let's not forget being promoted amidst financial institutions. The World Bank is involved in a lot of this work, the IMF. They must fall upon the need to structure a fundamental work of addressing the organic needs of Africa's constitutions, instead of the rather foolish efforts to import Westminster, French or Washington constitutional models. In Ghana, we are running a constitution, a 1992 constitution which is a hybrid of Washington and London. And it's so much, it's a state of total chaos, confusion. There is a deep reluctance on the part of donor nations that those friends who we would love to call our developing partners to join us to seriously address this question. The case of Ghana is not unique, let me stress. Except in the peculiar sense that we have succeeded in crafting a constitution which is playing both sides of the aisle. The presidential constitution and the parliamentary constitution. The competition arises in multiple forms and one major and a deeppart of it that the people are the base who are supposed to be the beneficiaries of this constitution have nothing to do with it. And already, our constitutional process is being subjected to massive corruption. I just left Ghana when they were preparing. They were preparing the primaries for the parliament. And the going rate to bribe the electoral colleges of simple villages is $1000. In a country whose per capita is still around about $400. I know that you know more about these things than I do. The going rates for your congresses and your senates. And God help you for your presidents. Thank you very much. [Joel Barkan]- I'm going to take the prerogative of the chair. I have about 20 questions to ask our speaker. It was a marvelous talk, but I want to try to put you on the spot, quite frankly. You begin with this very interesting and important point about individual versus community in distinguishably western African community values. Now, voting in an election, particularly a democratic election. Is an inherently individual act of the most democratic elections are one person one vote. Inclusive and secret ballot, et cetera. And yet you spoke repeatedly in very warm terms about chiefs who that you noted at the outset were elected in a formal sense. They were selected and they in the course of your talk represented the entire community. So here are my questions. First of all, should voting be abolished in as a mechanism for representation in new African democracies? Or if not abolished, should it merely be supplemented by some form of traditional representation, but to put you on the spot, how would that take place beyond the prescription that you mentioned particularly in society's where the traditional institutions vary from one group to the next? In Uganda for example, more so than a place like Ghana or even Nigeria, next door. [Kofi Nuidevo Awoonor]- Thank you very much. I think we have to, when looking at Mr. Wills piece. We have to come to conclusion a, serious conclusion that the ballot box, per se does not democracy make. There are other considerations that are in there. Which I thought the ballot box surprise is the laziest way of running a democracy. How many people vote in the United States for example? 23%, 30% it varies, that lose lower ends. So the question over presentation. As the major ingredient of the democratic practice becomes very problematic. Particularly so, when you're dealing with societies that are still largely illiterate. The people know don't know what the issues are. Where vote buying is a very simple process. So you let the government, which has been able to marshal more money than anybody else. And therefore, it runs the country. I'm suggesting that perhaps we should look at other ways of selecting, appointing and nominating. Combinations are multiple of our presentative institutions. And of course, activate a degree of the elective process. It can not be either or. Yes, indeed the chiefs represent a very sad at times, dismal aspect of our past. But they also glad to say, there are positivities of some of the wonderful things that we have inherent in our culture. In some communities, they are the ones who control the land. We use the word, custodians. They don't own the land but they are the custodians of the land and so the economic activity in that area for example, if you want 100 acres to grow sugar cane, the chiefs will have to be involved. And then because he's the one who bring together the families who have the land and the necessary processes, the ritualization processes will have to be done before the land can be alienated somehow to you to do your sugar. Therefore, we can not wish them away. Andwe think of the British indirect rule system, even though we try to distort the institution by the same process have sustained them for us. Almost as if by accident. I do not know the answers Joel. This is why I'm here. I'm talking to people who have been practicing democracy more than we have been practicing. And even in your case, they are talking about the maintenance of the electoral college system. It is the most democratic structure that you have. Why is it a question of the simple majority? Are we also talking about the question of should we, how do we deal with the question of the winner takes over? So anybody who wins fix everything. And the other one goes into some kind of a huff and there is a battle going on for the next four years. You're seeing all of it here in this exciting time of your electoral process. The demonization of each party and maybe some scientists will agree that this is the dynamic progress who therefore is very dialectical. But for us as a developing or underdeveloped country, some of these luxuries are very expensive. Extremely expensive. [Joel Barkan]- Now here a question that relates back to something you said during your presentation. If your constitution, that is the constitution of Ghana is a hybrid of London and Washington, why did you not select the best from each? I might add, who drew up that constitution? [Kofi Nuidevo Awoonor]- The best from each. Yes, I'll explain to you what a constitution is. We have an executive president who is the head of the political party. That means the majority of the seats in parliament. At the same time, he's constrained by the constitution to a point 49% of his ministers from parliament it must be parliamentarians. And 51% from outside parliament. This is the mission of the British and the American I was telling you about. Your ministers are not appointed from parliament, but you have an executive president. He's the head of state and everything and this is the nature of the complexity. The constitution as written by Ghanaians. Some of us had a very distant hand in it and some of the things that we suggested were not accepted. 'Cause he went through the long process of gestation, debate, disagreement and so on. But one of the things that I insisted on is that perhaps the one constitution which fascinates us most is the American constitution, because it is an organic constitution which grows through the process of amendments. So you can amendment your constitution. You have mechanisms for amending and so on. And we haven't got that here. We have it in a very, fragile sort of way, because you'll see, once a group of gets into It says, no this conversation can't work. We have to change it. In 1992, three, the government which I serve was talking about changing the constitution. And the opposition said, not on your nelly. If you try we'll take to the streets. We'll organize a revolt. Now, they are now in par. And they said, oh my God this is such a terrible constitution. We're going to change it and we're saying, not on your nelly. So, we have an impasse which we need some kind of a round table, to talk about this. [Joel Barkan]- Might ask you to expand on that very point, because a number of African countries, as you know have had constitutional conferences or other countries begging for them. Here's a very provocative question. Do you propose redrawing of borders in certain regions of Africa to better reflect ethnic or tribal realities? I presume this means international and particular internal borders. And would this help in Sudan? [Kofi Nuidevo Awoonor]- Yes, that's a major question. I am an Ewe, I'm from the southeast corner of Ghana. The next country to be to the east is Togo and also contains Ewes. And the next country is Benin, also contains Ewes. Now flow into that you go into the four area who are then followed in Benin by the Yorubas So Yoruba land begins from Benin and you go straight into the heart of western Nigeria. And the story is the same all over the continent. One of the most difficult things that we have to deal with here and since the original organization that talked of African reunification said, we can not interfere with the boundaries left by the departing colonial powers. Because that would be a recipe for disaster. There was a recent problem between the Cameroon and Nigeria over an island called Bakassi Island, which was settled by Nigerians, but they found out that when the Germans and the British were struggling in that area the territory, when they drew the map the territory was actually assigned to the Cameroon. So they went to the Royal Court. And the Royal Court gave judgment to the Cameroon. Based on the colonial map. And Nigerians said no. But the people there are our people. And everybody moved troops. Nigerian troops were already on the island. Cameroon was also marched in, there's gonna be a nice little, perhaps untidy war. The reason where it is that oil has been found on that island. And so, that is also an aspect of it. Now the Chad, the Sudan debako that is going on now. Evidence exists that oil has been found in Dalfour. Oil has been found and so therefore, the Arab which is in power, who are in power. And also has a problem with land vis-à-vis degredation from the north have moved into Dalfour where the Africans, also muslims were living, very fertile area and launched upon them the most ferocious act which Mr. Colin Powell finally had to courage to refer to as a genocide yesterday. So, that question is a serious question. We think that we can encompass it through the process of regional unification, regional integration. For example, in West Africa we have something called the Economic Community of West Africa. Already it's made up of 16 countries. Suddenly up to this point we have now a common, we have a parliament which sits in Abuja, Nigeria. And each parliament in the region sends a delegation, which may sit there for about three months in a year. Dealing with international or interstate problems within the regional structure. The same this has happened in southern Africa with the SADC in Central Africa and East Africa. We can not say, like the Ewes we talked about, let's give them a new country. That would create new problems. That will create serious problems, all Yorubas. Let's take a piece of Benin, add it and take a piece from Western Nigeria and there they have a separate country. We are all together in one country now as a result of these colonial maps. And we are not unique in the world for this. Joel referred to the Iraqi situation. How do you craft a consortium that will respond to each of those components? And make them viable and intelligent, but of a nation. That can't be done in one day. The Irish are still fighting. And the Basques in Spain are still fighting. The Corsicans are still fighting. The Chechnyans are still fighting. So, the methodology that we can design as African peoples will reflect our ability to give, to live and let live and give and take in terms of all this multiple ethnic combinations that constitute by the fact of history our new Nation States which are, which were created by the British and Ghana since 1844 and therefore which became independent under a flag which has been borrowed by somebody. That we need to address that question, by some cumulative process, the best way is to handle them within the original organizations that are emerging. [Joel Barkan]- We have time running out and we have many good questions here and I encourage you. Those who asked questions that are not included in the last one come up and speak to our guest afterwards. So we close with the following. Do you see any current historical examples of African governance in the decade since the 1960's that have addressed your perspective? That is in the case sighted here is the perspective of Moïse Tshombe and his brothers and cousins in the Congo. Mainly the perspective of federalism and decentralization which you mentioned briefly in your talk. [Kofi Nuidevo Awoonor]- Yes, let me answer that question by referring back to one of my heroes, my African heroes, Kwame Nkrumah. I am unashamed to I think he was a marvelous man. He made a few errors, everybody is allowed a couple of errors. When he came on the scene in Africa, he opposed very vehemently the center African Federation. Because it was a fruition which was being crafted at that time by characters like Sir Roy Welensky from southern Rhodesia which later became Zimbabwe. Which was picked up by Ian Smith and a whole lot of English rascals. Who were, after followers of Cecil Rhodes. You heard about that other crook? You know who brilliant crook, none the less. Africa was theirs and they were to craft it in their own image. They even named, renamed all our rivers and lakes. Lake Victoria is still there. Said, no, no any federation that is being engineered from that colonial, imperialist ideology will not work for us. So we would pick against it and move against it and destroy it. Then now, let's sit down and construct our own federations. Our federal ideas will be home grown depending upon the dynamics of our lives, the viability of our nation's needs and so on and so forth. So, I do not believe that we should go federal for going federal's sake. Moïse Tshombe was a dangerous little imp. Who was a cat's poor of the Belgiums. And this led to a lot of bloodshed in the Congo, which is still not over. The Congo fight, the massacres that are going on today you can trace it back to the Belgium intervention. Since King Leopold at the turn of last two centuries. Who was this famous robber and the cutting of the arms of people was begun by Kind Leopold's men. You produce, I don't think you're responsible for your fellow called Henry Stanley, who was an Irish adventurer, ended up in Louisiana and became an explorer in the Congo and was responsible for so many terrible things down there. I think, I was correct at this point. Which morning which newspaper sent him? One of the Bennet's papers, right? Yeah. So there's so much packed in there. The history of who owns Africa. Who takes over Africa. Even Tarzan went there were without a passport and a visa. No, I don't mean it as a joke. It's a very serious point I'm making because it was there to be taken. And all kind of characters were in there. Particularly, the beginning of the 19th century, when the so-called slave trade was coming to an end. And the process is what generated. That process generated the characters like Moïse Tshombe, Edward Unbuntu and so on. Unbuntu did not rise up because he was that. They killed Umunba and Umunba was kind of a hero in Africa. overthrown, not because they were all against abusing human rights and so on. If you overthrow people who like that and then you install whom? Mobutu, Joseph Desire Mobutu. He changed his name later on to Mobutu Sese Kuku. The big cock that crows on the hill or something. Some nonsense like that. He was just a straightforward gangster and what's in political systems adopt gangsters. And you've done a few in your own hemisphere here. A good number we also done on the continent. So we don't think federation. Kwa federation would be the solution. Where regional institutions or formations come together and through a series of debates. Your union process or the African union process which has been regionalized. Has been going on for almost 40 years, since 1963 and we hope that by 2050, by 2050 things may be a little better. The regret is that some of us will not be around. [Joel Barkan]- Thank you very much. I think you put it in perspective. Remember, it tool over 100 years for us, or even more than that to even have universal suffrage here. For our audience, thank you and for the local audience for coming to hear Kofi Awoonor speak today on Africa and Traditional Governance and Democracy and thanks to our sponsors again Lumas Construction, Helen Lee Hensley and Howard Wegner. With that, I declare the session adjourned.