What is the role of parliament in the political machinery of African countries? What is the extent of its impact on the domestic and foreign policies pursued by an African State? What are the specific features of the formation of legislative power in Africa? Is it possible to positively assess the impact of the form of government on the level of political stability in Africa?

In most African countries, the 1990s (the period of the emergence of political pluralism) were marked by the constitutional consolidation of mixed forms of government, combining elements of parliamentary and presidential republics. However, this process can hardly be considered complete. The article discusses its various aspects.

I

For a long time there has been a discussion among Russian and especially foreign social scientists about the merits of various forms of political democracy, including parliamentarism, as well as around the systems of public administration - parliamentary or presidential - and their possible varieties - semi-presidential or semi-parliamentary.

It is widely believed that for a democratic state, a parliamentary form of government is preferable to a presidential one, since "the presidential regime leaves much less room for consensus and compromise, and, conversely, the parliamentary system more often leads to the establishment of a stable democracy, especially where political differences are deep and there are many political parties" [Linz, 1994, p. 14].

The main principle of parliamentarism is the competition of different points of view when discussing the most important issues for the country and respect for the opinion of the opposition. Consequently, parliamentarism usually acts as a guarantor of democracy, giving the political process a certain flexibility in contrast to the rigid system of presidential rule. For supporters of the latter, such "rigidity" is a positive point, since it helps to prevent the uncertainty and instability characteristic of the parliamentary system, in which many "actors" - parties, their leaders, and even ordinary legislators-can make some fundamental changes to the constitution at any time between elections, make regroupings of political forces and, most importantly, appoint a new or remove the current Prime Minister.

And while the need for firm authority and predictability speaks in favor of a presidential form of government, such unexpected events as, say,,

page 93

the death of the president or serious mistakes made by him under the pressure of unforeseen circumstances can make presidential power less predictable and often weaker than that of the Prime Minister. The latter can always assert its "legitimacy" and increase its power, either by obtaining a vote of confidence or by dissolving Parliament and holding new elections. In addition, the removal of the Prime Minister is not necessarily accompanied by a crisis of power. The fact that under a parliamentary system of government would result in another government crisis, under the presidential system it can become a crisis of the regime as a whole. Events in some African countries are proof of this.

According to H. Linz, "the parliamentary system of government is especially favorable during the transition from one regime to another and when it is necessary to consolidate power, when the strict provisions of the presidential constitution give way to the prospect of a compromise proposed by parliamentarism" [Linz, 1994, p. 14]. The weakness of the presidency is precisely the lack of flexibility in a constantly changing situation. Sharing this view, Professor of social policy at George Mason University S. M. Lipset believes that "the presence of presidential rule contributes to the weakness of parties and the executive branch, while parliamentary rule has the opposite tendency, of course, affecting the conditions for the implementation of democracy" [Lipset, 1994, p.32]. This does not mean, of course, that presidential democracy cannot be stable: on the contrary, the most stable democratic regime in the world - in the United States - has a presidential constitution. However, there is reason to believe that in many other countries, the chances that a presidential system of government will ensure the preservation of democracy are much lower.

This does not mean that any regime of parliamentary rule offers a more flexible framework for creating and consolidating democracy. Here it is important to understand what is the most perfect form of a parliamentary constitution and what are its specific institutional features. This is primarily the confirmation of the post of Prime Minister, who has the necessary power functions and at the same time bears full responsibility for them. Another feature is the presence of strong, established political parties that ensure the formation of stable governments. However, parliamentary systems are not immune from a serious crisis or even collapse. In Nigeria, the parliamentary system of government that existed from 1960 to 1966 collapsed and was replaced by a presidential one. During Madagascar's parliamentary regime (1992-1998), the National Assembly passed a vote of no confidence in three Prime Ministers and six Governments.

Apparently, the question of the advantages of a particular constitutional system in building democratic societies does not have a clear answer. Much depends on the strength of historical traditions, the degree of complexity of socio-economic problems, political, spatial relations, cultural and religious factors. In any case, when considering the situation in Africa, all this cannot be ignored.

II

To determine the place and role of African parliaments in the mechanism of exercising power, it helps to get acquainted with the history of representative principles in the state structure of the continent's countries. In the initial period of postcolonial statehood, parliamentary institutions often copied the relevant models of former metropolitan areas, although they clearly fell out of the" context " of local conditions. Parliaments were considered to be completely alien entities, while-

page 94

They were either a form of bicameral rule (Westminster bicameralism) for English-speaking states, where the council of chiefs acted as the House of Lords, or a form of Gaullist presidentialism for Francophones based on the matrix of metropolitan parliamentarism. According to Cameroonian professor Pat Bole Dieng, "legal monopartism has actually taken the place of political pluralism, which is the basis of parliamentarism", African leaders for a short time abandoned the very fundamental principles of the metropolitan constitution, which was handed down to them, borrowing from democratic pluralism only " electoral theatrical suspensions for searchlights in order to ensure full sustainability in the acquired power" [Le monde desparlements, 2001, N 2, p. 2].

It is well known that the Parliament's activities as a state institution are based on two basic principles: the participation of all those who are involved in its activities, and representation. The implementation of these principles involves taking into account the multicomponent and multidimensional nature of human communities, whose vital activity is regulated by a state mechanism. This determines the complex nature of representative bodies.

The question of how many chambers a Parliament should consist of has proved to be one of the most contentious issues of constitutional law. It usually boils down to an alternative to a unicameral or bicameral system. The following arguments are put forward in favor of a bicameral one: first, it provides a more stable balance between the executive and legislative powers, and second, it restricts the power of one chamber to create another, formed on a different basis.

Parliaments in a significant group of sub-Saharan countries have been characterized by a bicameral structure since independence (Zaire, Kenya, Madagascar, Nigeria, Lesotho, Swaziland). The creation of the second chamber was due to a number of reasons: in some countries it was associated with the form of government (regional autonomy in Zaire and Kenya, federation in Nigeria), in others - with the desire to consolidate the position of tribal aristocracy (Lesotho, Swaziland). In general, according to the Russian legal scholar Yu. A. Yudin, "the upper chambers were called upon, as a rule, to protect the regionalist interests of individual ethnic groups and the interests of the most conservative forces of African society" [Yudin, 1980, p.125]. Unlike the lower houses, which were elected by general and direct elections, the upper houses were formed in an undemocratic way.

With the development of national statehood in Africa, there was a revision of parliamentary structures, which led to the elimination of the bicameral system in most countries, which not only did not contribute to maintaining stability and democratization, but also, according to L. M. Entin, was a "brake on the path of national consolidation" [Entin, 1978, p.239]. As of 2000, only 12 of the 52 African States had bicameral parliaments (Nigeria, Liberia, Ethiopia, Mauritania, Namibia, Algeria, Gabon, Madagascar, Morocco, South Africa, and Malawi).

However, there is another point of view, as advocated, for example, by the Cameroonian scholar Manasseh Aboya Endonga, head of the group for the study of parliamentarism and democracy in Africa. He believes that bicameralism is not a historical model, but a model of the future in the African parliamentary system. In his opinion, the second chamber can be a tool for managing conflicts, especially in establishing civil peace. It is the bicameral system that will allow the African state to calm the political ambitions of opposition movements and achieve social peace. He believes that there is already a political concept of a bicameral parliament in Africa, which is ahead of the legal one [Revue de l'Ecole, 2000, p. 52].

page 95

III

It should be borne in mind that almost nowhere in Africa is parliament formed on the basis of political beliefs, conscious representation, social class and political interests. Patriarchal structures, traditional consciousness, thinking with feudal and clan ideas, belonging to a particular ethnic community, religious brotherhood, tribe or community are dominant. Therefore, the parliaments are attended by sheikhs of fraternities, tribal leaders and clans. After the granting of independence to African countries, tribal leaders generally had a fixed representation in the upper house. For example, the Zaire Constitution of 1960 stipulated that at least three senators from each province should be traditional chiefs. In Lesotho, 22 chiefs were ex officio senators. The chiefs participate in the Parliaments of the Gambia and Sierra Leone.

The inclusion of traditional institutions in the constitutional machinery sometimes takes the form of a hidden bicameral system. The example of Botswana is illustrative in this regard. According to the Constitution (Article 58), the Parliament (National Assembly) of this country is unicameral. However, the chapter "Parliament" actually provides for the existence of a second chamber - the Chamber of Chiefs, consisting of 15 members. Eight of them hold their seats ex officio (the leaders of the main tribes), four are elected in districts, and three are elected by the first two categories of members of the chamber from persons who "have not been engaged in active political activity" for the last five years (Sinitsina, 1993, p. 312).

The House of Chiefs in Botswana is an advisory body. It considers draft laws submitted to it by the National Assembly concerning the amendment of the Constitution, issues related to the appointment, removal and recognition of chiefs, elders, tribal property, organization of African courts (i.e. respect for customary law). In addition, the House of Chiefs may, on its own initiative, discuss any issues affecting the interests of the tribes and send a corresponding submission to the National Assembly. Thus, the House of Chiefs participates in the legislative process on a certain range of issues. According to I. E. Sinitsina, "such a high status of leaders in Botswana is historically predetermined by the fact that over the past century the so-called leaders, and in fact the rulers of the Tswana people, shared executive and, to a certain extent, legislative power with the colonial administration" (Sinitsina, 1993, p.312).

In Lesotho, a country with a unicameral parliament, the Senate is not elected, it consists of traditional chiefs and appointed 11 members [Countries of Africa..., 2002, p. 652] and performs approximately the same functions as the House of Chiefs in Botswana.

Under the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, chiefs are also represented in the Federal Parliament. The Government of Western Nigeria consolidated the rights of traditional rulers by creating the House of Chiefs, the highest legislative body in the Western Region, and declaring its respect for and non-interference with customary law where chiefs were concerned (Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, 1998).

In Zambia, the House of Chiefs comprises 27 traditional rulers, three from each of the country's nine provinces. Speaking at its opening in December 2003, Zambian President Levi Mwanawasa called on the chiefs to refrain from political activities, pointing out the need for harmonious relations between the House of Chiefs, Parliament and the Executive branch. According to him, the chamber should become an advisory body of the executive and legislative authorities on issues of traditions and customs [ITAR-TASS, 22. XII. 2003].

page 96

The Chambers of Chiefs, which also exist in a number of other States, are not formally considered as an integral part of Parliament. However, the very possibility of participation in the legislative process leaves the possibility of their transformation into an integral part of legislative bodies. An example of this is the increased activity of traditional rulers in South Africa, who demand that the authorities grant them more powers in local government structures, and preserve traditional tribal borders when demarcating a particular electoral district. The main problem is that the country's leaders fear a reduction in their influence in rural areas as a result of efforts to democratize local government. They consider it insufficient to have only 20% of seats in government bodies for leaders. During the first democratic elections in 1994, South African politicians did not oppose the institution of chiefs, but proposed the coexistence of both democratic and traditional institutions of power. The leaders themselves believe that "without meeting the demands of traditional rulers, there can be no free and fair elections in the country" [ITAR-TASS, 7. X. 2000].

The South African government has promised to develop new legislation regulating relations with traditional rulers. It has approached this issue from the standpoint of preserving the accumulated positive experience in the activities of traditional institutions of power and believes that they should be considered as a "partner of the state" in nation-building. Moreover, the sessions of the House of Chiefs discuss such topical issues for the whole country as" the role of traditional power in the implementation of the long-term socio-economic program of NEPAD (New Partnership for Africa's Development), the integrated strategy for the progressive development of agricultural areas of the country " and others [ITAR-TASS, 22.VII.2002].

The importance of integrating traditional institutions into the constitutional framework is demonstrated by the fact that the summit of African Heads of State in Lomé on 12 July 2000, which adopted the founding Act of the African Union, stressed the need for a renewal of the legislative and legal branches of government that would take into account the traditions of the continent. At the same time, attention was drawn to improving the legal culture of the councils of elders as an indispensable lever of influence on the voter [Le monde diplomatique, 2000, N 557, p. 15].

IV

The position of the Parliament in the system of state bodies is determined to a decisive extent by the scope of its powers and the degree of their implementation. The Parliament's priorities include:: 1) adoption of state laws; 2) approval of the budget; 3) participation in the formation of other state bodies and control over their activities. The extent to which a representative body can influence the resolution of these key issues of state policy depends on which direction - towards democracy or authoritarianism - a particular regime will move.

In the vast majority of sub-Saharan Africa, there is no institution of Government responsible to the Parliament; the Government is responsible to the President. But even where the constitutional texts provide for the parliamentary responsibility of the Government (Botswana, Burkina Faso, Malawi, Kenya), this is not of practical significance. In theory, the parliament can remove the government. In practice, such situations are not recorded in Africa, and the situation in the region is not very clear.-

page 97

The statement of the Government's responsibility to Parliament can at best be seen as a declaration of moral significance.

Studies show that in African countries, national assemblies are the legislative organs of the so-called managed democracy system, which has no constitutional reflection. Most of them depend on the will of the President and the executive branch. The practice of early dissolution of the Parliament by the president is widely used, and the latter establishes control over the parliament by forming a "majority party" that fully supports the presidential course. According to our calculations, in 52 African countries with a multiparty system, the majority of seats belong to a pro-presidential party.

The study of parliamentarism in Africa cannot be separated from the analysis of electoral systems. At first glance, the choice of an electoral system poses only one technical problem: how it will ensure that the will of the voters expressed during the voting process is correctly reflected. There are, as you know, two main systems: a majority system with one or two rounds of voting, in which the winner is the one who received the largest number of votes, and a proportional system, when seats are distributed among lists of candidates or parties in proportion to the number of votes cast for them.

The UK has always used a single-round majority system. Each electoral district elects one deputy. The candidate who receives the largest number of votes is declared elected, regardless of what percentage they make up in relation to the total number of votes cast [Parliaments, 1967, p.62]. This system also exists in countries that have followed the British example, primarily in the countries that are members of the British Commonwealth-in Ghana, Nigeria, Sierra Leone, etc.

The electoral system of each state reflects the structure of the politically active part of society, existing political concepts and traditions. In a two-party system, a majority system with a single round of voting is usually used. The system of proportional representation is typical for countries with a large number of parties.

But the goal of all electoral systems should be to ensure the most equitable representation possible, and in particular the representation of the minority. American scholar I. L. Horowitz believes that "the Nigerian system is a unique variant that can be applied in federal states, especially multi-ethnic ones" [cit. by: Linz, 1994]. It uses the most common method of conducting elections: the absolute majority system with an additional round of voting for the two candidates who received the majority of votes.

This is particularly evident in such countries as South Africa, Morocco, Algeria, etc. For example, in the general elections of 2004 in South Africa, the former electoral system was maintained on the basis of proportional representation on party lists. But already during the 2009 elections, it is proposed to introduce either a mixed system of proportional representation or a majority system. In discussions on this issue, the ruling African National Congress favored a system of proportional representation. A public opinion poll on the electoral system conducted in South Africa in 2002 showed that the majority of respondents of all racial groups supported the creation of a mixed electoral system in the state, and 63% prefer to choose the president not by the country's parliament, but by direct vote.

page 98

Changes in the parliamentary election system also affected Morocco in 2002. According to the new rules, all 325 members of the lower house of Parliament are elected by universal secret ballot on the lists of parties and public organizations, which are assigned an individual number. Women who pass on a separate list are guaranteed 30 deputy mandates. Candidates on the lists of parties that do not receive 5% of the vote are considered unelected. Previously, the House of Representatives was elected by direct general elections.

In 1997, Algeria adopted an electoral law that replaced the majority system with a proportional representation system. It provides for the establishment of a single electoral quota for winning one deputy mandate. The total number of votes cast for a party is divided by the electoral quota, which determines the number of seats received by each party. The more votes a party receives in an electoral district, the more seats it has. Such a system is beneficial only to large parties that have a large electorate. Moreover, there is a clause under which parties that have received less than 5% of the votes of voters in this electoral district are not allowed to distribute parliamentary mandates at all. This measure is caused by the authorities ' desire to prevent candidates from Islamic parties from entering parliament [Sapronova, 2001, p. 146].

At the present stage, some African countries are looking for a "comprehensive model". In most countries of the continent, according to many experts, "elections are fraudulent in nature and ethnic orientation." Former editor-in-chief of the magazine "Jeune Afrique" F. Sudan believes that "the government or the dominant party always has advantages over its political opponents. And the main problem in sub-Saharan Africa is not falsification, but the problem of inequality before the possibilities of falsification "[Jeune Afrique, 1988, N 1979, p. 16].

Another problem is elections based on ethnicity, voting by communes or by religious affiliation. For example, during the parliamentary elections in Nigeria in April 2003, political leaders took into account that more than 70% of the population is illiterate, living "below the poverty line", and counted on success based not on their own programs, but mainly on religious and ethnic factors. They tried to nominate candidates who were close to the population in terms of tribal affiliation and religion [Kompas, 2003, N 17, p. 75]. The tribal power apparatus has become an indispensable lever used by ethnic Elites to influence the electorate.

The majority of the population of African countries remains trapped in community psychology, which deprives the individual of the possibility of political self-identification. The dominance of communal-tribal relations restricts the social and political will of the African, prevents him from realizing his individual political interests. In everyday political life, this translates into the insignificant influence of individual individuals on the political decision-making process. All this leads to a low voter turnout. In the 1998 Senegalese parliamentary elections, for example, the participation rate was quite low (50%). In Congo (Kinshasa), Guinea, and Cameroon, 40 to 50% of eligible voters voted in the 2003 parliamentary elections. This indicates that half of the population has no interest in public and political life and distrust of the elected bodies. The predictability of election results also leads to political apathy among the population. Despite this, many researchers believe that it is necessary to participate in elections in Africa, since this is a small but sure step in the direction of democracy. In their opinion, even in France and Great Britain, it took a whole century to "establish a real semblance of an electoral game" [Jeune Afrique, 1998, N 1979, p. 17].

page 99

Thus, the process of democratization is inseparable from the formation of parliamentarism, it takes place in rather difficult conditions and cannot be short-lived. This was highlighted, in particular, at the 1998 Libreville conference on the results of democratization in Africa, which was attended by 53 member States of the International Association of Parliamentarians of la Francophonie. The conference agenda included two main issues: "Democracy in Africa and electoral processes" and "The role of parliaments in the functioning of institutions in Africa". Presentations were made by senior members of the Parliaments of Gabon, Senegal, France, Canada, Burkina Faso, Mali, Central African Republic, Ivory Coast, Cameroon, Benin, Togo, and Mauritania.

At the same time, there is a different opinion, which was spread among researchers of national political elites at the XVIII Congress of the International Association for Political Science, held in Quebec in 2000. Many scholars, analyzing the ongoing changes in the "elite-mass" system, have pointed out the following important trends that may affect the formation of parliamentarism in Africa::

1. The crisis of pre - existing parties and party systems in a significant number of developing countries;

2. A clear shift towards plebiscite forms of political mobilization in these regions;

3. Gradual marginalization of national parliaments and local legislatures due to the growing influence of non-accountable economic structures such as the IMF and the International Monetary Fund;

4. The spread of organized communities on a global scale and the failure of national legal systems to curb their activities;

5. The growth of legal and illegal emigration from countries that are on the verge of a social explosion and are not able to provide the population with a living standard [Gaman-Golutvina, 2000, p. 170].

Economic globalization will also be accompanied by political globalization, which means that it will lead to a decrease in the ability of national elites to control the spheres of politics and culture, national electorates.

The tendency to establish a system of temporary elite alliances that cross state borders and make decisions at the supranational level will encourage such political activity, which sooner or later will come into conflict with the interests of national electorates. This, in turn, leads to a systemic crisis in the architectonics of African society, based on the certainty of national cultures and the stability of value-rational forms of the world order.

One of the attempts to counter this process was the intention of African parliamentarians of the member countries of the African Union (AU), established in July 2002, to create a continental parliamentary union-the All-African Parliament (EAP). There are a lot of problems along the way. As the Russian researcher Yu. V. Potemkin rightly points out, " the principle of inviolability of sovereignty, the absolutization of political independence (although somewhat softened in comparison with the OAU period), as well as the general level of political culture and the nature of socio-psychological foundations of society preserve the breeding ground for authoritarian regimes, supporting their unwillingness or inability to sufficiently serious transformations in the country and regional frameworks" [African integration..., 2003, p. 53].

page 100

Nevertheless, the creation of an inter-parliamentary union on the African continent was completed: on March 18, 2004, the Pan-African Parliament was inaugurated in the capital of Ethiopia, Addis Ababa. It is one of the five main bodies of the AU*, which has the goals of achieving political, socio-economic integration of the continent, ensuring peace and stability in Africa [ITAR-TASS, 23. XII.2003].

One of the main tasks of the EAP is to bring the legislation of the member States into line with the principles laid down in the constitutional acts of the African Union. This will not be easy to do, as the laws and parliamentary traditions of different states differ from each other. Some countries followed French models, others followed British ones, and still others followed Portuguese ones. In the opinion of African legislators, it is possible for national parliaments to partially transfer their powers to the pan-African one. Another option is to develop so-called laws-frameworks that provide guidance for the best course of action. The task of the EAP is to consolidate the peoples of Africa and achieve peace, security, stability and economic development of the continent. According to Kenyan Foreign Minister Kalongo Musyoka, the creation of the Parliament "was another step forward in realizing the African dream of creating a United States of Africa" [Pulse of the planet. 2004.22. III. AF, L. 2]. For the first five years of its existence, the EAP will perform advisory functions and meet twice a year. Then it is planned to transfer legislative powers to him.

African Union President Thabo Mbeki, speaking at a conference on elections and democracy in Africa held in April 2003 in the capital of South Africa, proposed the creation of a continental forum of African electoral commissions to represent them in the AU. It will act as a coordinating body, learn from positive experiences, disseminate new initiatives and provide technical assistance to member countries. It is planned to create a permanent research institute designed to study the best methods of conducting elections. The forum is expected to be established by the end of 2005. At this stage, the EAP can only discuss certain issues and make recommendations to the heads of the African Union member States. Umar Konare, Chairman of the AU Commission, said that the main task of the Parliament is to promote the protection of human rights and the consolidation of democratic institutions on the continent.

Thus, parliamentarism as a form of political democracy gets a new impetus on the African continent and can become a factor of stability in this region, since one of its most important tasks is "compliance with the norms of democracy in all member countries of the African Union". African scholar Pathe Bole Dieng notes that "African parliamentarians, despite the various pressures that are exerted on them under certain authoritarian regimes, must have the courage and fight to fulfill the important mission assigned to them - the integration of individual administrative and legislative structures into a new organization - AC" [Dieng, Pathe Bole, 2001, N2].

The study of the formation and development of parliamentarism in Africa suggests the weakness of representative democracy as a form of government. African parliaments (for the most part) are devoid of real power. They can only be considered as a deliberator-

* 1) The supreme body of the AU is the Assembly of Heads of State and Government. 2) It has an Executive Committee of Ministers (Foreign Affairs), a Committee of Permanent Representatives and a Commission (secretariat), and a Peace and Security Council.

page 101

an independent body under the head of State. L. M. Entin's conclusion that almost everywhere in Africa the two institutions represented by the executive and legislative powers have come to a collision has not lost its relevance. And this "confrontation ended with the defeat of the parliament" [Entin, 1978, p. 140]. American political scientist H. Linz is more categorical: he believes that we are dealing with the defeat of not just parliamentarism, but rather of democratic institutions in general, which are alien and have no deep roots in these countries [Linz, 1994]. According to the Monde Diplomatique columnist, "the presidential regime establishes the closest way of governing to the African mentality" [Le monde diplomatique, 2000, N 558, p. 15].

Thus, the legislative bodies in African countries formally have approximately the same powers as in many other regions of the world, but in fact they are an appendage of the all-powerful executive branch. The current political and state-legal practice, the very structure of state bodies, the form of their interaction with each other do not allow the legislative power to come out on top and determine the direction of state policy. In addition, there are other features of the formation of legislative power that are peculiar only to Africa.

But if we look at the broader role of African parliaments, there are two important positive points to note. On the one hand, the preservation of" popular representation " and the use of formal elements of parliamentary procedure make the authoritarian regime somewhat democratic. On the other hand, the Parliament is called upon by its activities to affirm the idea of unity of all social and ethnic groups, i.e. it can act as a factor of stability in African society.

Africa cannot stand aloof from the global process of civilizational development. The recent crisis of the African State has energized a significant part of society; citizens have become increasingly aware of their ability to influence the ongoing political and economic processes. It is impossible not to take into account foreign policy factors. Since the 1990s, former metropolitan areas and other Western countries have linked economic and other assistance to the democratization of Africa's political systems. The study of socio-political processes in African countries shows that parliamentarism is not completely rejected; it is with it that many African politicians and public figures pin their hopes for the revival of Africa.

Nigerian scholar Atsutse Kokubi Agbobli believes that " the parliamentary regime is a sword of Damocles over the head of our future rulers." In his opinion, only "a parliamentary regime reduces the risk of the emergence of despotism, which lies dormant in the heart of every new democrat with an education and a diploma "[Jeune Afrique, 1992, N 1624, p. 30].

Political dynamics in a number of African countries allow us to trace the movement from an authoritarian system to its milder, veiled forms, in the form of controlled "democratization from above". Such a course of events does not contribute to the development of representative democracy, although in some cases it is possible that authoritarian-pluralistic regimes will gradually evolve towards democracy. As world practice shows, the process of democratization is associated with the search for alternative ways of political development to authoritarianism, new forms of organizing power and governance. It is likely that the new form of government will be a kind of fusion of individual principles and institutions of traditional and modern forms of democracy and authoritarianism.

The process of forming parliamentarism itself is parallel to the development of the political culture of African countries, and the first one is clearly defined-

page 102

It is determined both by the forms of the state-legal structure and by the wide use of traditions, including religious ones, in particular those prescribed by Islam.

list of literature

African integration: socio-political dimension. Edited by Yu. V. Potemkin, Moscow, 2003.

Itar-TASS. 2000, 2002, 2003.

Kompas, Moscow, 2003.

Linz, Juan J. The dignity of parliamentarism//Anthologies. Limits of power. 1994. N 2 - 3 (http:/www.russ.ru/antolog/prately/2-3/dem4htm)

Lipset S. M. Rol ' politicheskoi kul'tury [The role of political culture]. Limits of power. 1994. N 2 - 3 (/http:/www.rus.ru/antolog/predely/2-3/dem32htm)

Parliaments / Translated from English by Z. I. Lukovnikov, Moscow: Progress Publ., 1967.

Gaman-Golutvina O. V. Transformation of the role of elites and ethics of civil service in the context of globalization. Polis. Moscow, 2000.

Pulse of the planet. Moscow, 2004.

Sapronova M. A. Arab East: Power and Constitution, Moscow, 2001.

Sinitsina E. I. Traditional rulers and leaders of Black Africa and their influence on the social structure. Sotsial'naya struktura i obshchestvennoe razvitie [Social Structure and Social Development]. Moscow, 1993.

Strany Afrika [African Countries] / Spravochnik, Moscow, 2002.

Entin L. M. Political systems of developing countries, Moscow, 1978.

Entin L. M. Separation of powers. Developing countries of Africa, Moscow, 1995.

Yudin Yu. A. Vysshiye organy gosudarstva v stranakh Tropicheskoi Afrika [Higher organs of the state in the countries of Tropical Africa].

Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria. Lagos, 1998.

Dieng Pate Bole. Un parlement africain subsidiaire et consociatif pour reussir la necessaire unification des etats africains actuels // http:/perso.wanadoo.fr/chatou78/africessor/. Le monde des parlements, 2001, Gen'eve.

Jeune Afrique. P., 1992, 1998.

Le monde des parlements. Gen'eve. 2001.

Le monde diplomatique. P., 2000.

Revue de l'Ecole nationale d'administration. Vol. 10. Alger, 2000.

Permanent link to this publication: