Institutionalizing Democracy in Africa: A Comment on the African Charter on Democracy, Elections and Governance
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract This article provides an exegesis of the recently entered-into-force African Charter on Democracy, Elections and Governance. Democracy has a decidedly mixed history in Africa and, despite a concerted effort by the African Union (AU), it has made only halting inroads in those states that are nondemocratic or struggling to consolidate democracy. That may change as more states ratify and implement the Charter, a comprehensive regional attempt to promote, protect, and consolidate democracy that entered into force in February 2012. This Charter, the culmination of two decades of African thinking on how democracy should develop on the continent, represents the AU’s attempt to institutionalize principles of good governance and democratic ideals. Although hurdles remain on Africa’s road to democratic development, including poverty, illiteracy, and corruption, the Charter provides a means to address these stubborn problems. Whether it will succeed will depend on state implementation of the obligations undertaken by ratification of the Charter, as well as the AU’s own commitment to ensuring observation of the Charter’s key provisions. If the AU and its member states do fully implement and practically observe the Charter’s obligations, then the prospects for democratic governance in Africa have a bright future.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it