John Campbell

Africa in Transition

Campbell tracks political and security developments across sub-Saharan Africa.

Print Print Cite Cite
Style: MLA APA Chicago Close


No Mo Ibrahim Prize for Achievement in African Leadership this Year–Again

by John Campbell
October 16, 2012

Sudanese-born telecommunications entrepreneur Mo Ibrahim listens during a conference promoting good governance in Africa, in Tanzania's capital Dar es Salaam 15/11/2009. (Katrina Manson/Courtesy Reuters)


The Mo Ibrahim Prize for Achievement in African Leadership is awarded to a democratically-elected African chief of state who pursues good governance and then leaves office according to the constitution.  The prize has been awarded only three times since it was established in 2006: to Mozambique’s Joaquim Chissano (2007), Botswana’s Festus Mogae (2008), and Cape Verde’s Pedro Verona Pires (2011). In 2009, 2010, and again this year, the selection committee found no candidate who met the eligibility criteria. The committee has made two exceptional awards, to Nelson Mandela (2007) and, this year, to Archbishop Desmond Tutu.  But the lack of laureates is commonly taken to be an indictment of the quality of African leadership.

Mo Ibrahim, a Sudanese telecom billionaire and possibly the world’s richest African, currently resident in London, can be blunt and to the point.   The BBC quotes Mo Ibrahim as saying, “you make your bed, you have to lie on it.  If we said we’re going to have a prize for exceptional leadership, we have to stick to that.  We are not going to compromise… We are not just in the business of positive messages–we would lose our credibility.”

The prize is extraordinarily rich: U.S. $5 million spread over ten years, followed by U.S. $200,000 a year for life. Among other things, the prize is intended to free African leaders from the financial concerns that have led some of them to cling to power.

Andrew Harding, BBC Africa correspondent, in a thoughtful comment raises the question of whether paradoxically, the prize actually re-enforces the link between money and power that it is supposed to discourage. He asks whether there might be a way to reward a country, rather than an individual, for advancing democracy and good governance. I think he has a point. However, if nothing else, the prize, and its dearth of qualified recipients, focuses popular attention on the importance of democratic leadership at the top.

Post a Comment 1 Comment

  • Posted by Constance J. Freeman

    I agree with Ibrahim that the prize should be for the individual. It is not just intended to take away the incentive to stay in office to avoid financial difficulties after leaving office (something which Momoh of Sierra Leone did face) but to decrease the incentive to make as much money as possible while in office. It is naive to assume that these goals would be accomplished with a prize given to a country because that would just benefit the successor and require a level of altruism which is in short supply everywhere. Connie Freeman

Post a Comment

CFR seeks to foster civil and informed discussion of foreign policy issues. Opinions expressed on CFR blogs are solely those of the author or commenter, not of CFR, which takes no institutional positions. All comments must abide by CFR's guidelines and will be moderated prior to posting.

* Required