Abstract:
A fundamental tenet of modern constitutionalism is that nobody, regardless of his status is above
the law. Extensive powers conferred on African presidents in the independence constitutions,
reinforced by ineffective mechanisms of accountability and presidential immunities led to the
phenomenon of “imperial” presidents who operated outside the law and regularly abused their
powers. Constitutional reforms in the 1990s saw the introduction in many African countries of
constitutions which for the first time provide some prospects for promoting constitutionalism and
respect for the rule of law. This paper attempts to review the extent to which these reforms have
addressed the issue of presidential absolutism and the abuses that go with it. It examines some of
the factors that made African presidents to be so powerful that the conventional constitutional
checks and balances could not restrain their excesses. It also reviews the attempts to limit
impunity through immunity provisions. It concludes that unfortunately, the 1990 reforms did not
adequately address the problem of presidential absolutism. A number of ways in which
presidential accountability could be enhanced and the culture of impunity ended is suggested.
Because it is argued that tyranny and authoritarianism is no longer simply a national but also an
international problem, it is argued that the expanding reach of international justice is bound to
make life difficult for present and future African dictators. It is thus clear that African leaders
can no longer expect to easily get away with any abuses of powers, especially where these lead
to the commission of international crimes against their people. The different measures, both
national and international that are suggested to deal with the issue of presidential lawlessness and
impunity may not eliminate these problems but nevertheless act as a deterrent by sending a clear
message of the strong likelihood of punishment.