Zur Kluft zwischen Verfassungsgebung und Verfassungswirklichkeit im Demokratisierungsprozess Benins

The process of democratization in Benin has been praised as a model for the whole of francophone Africa. Initiated by an independent National-Conference the process of democratic renewal started with a bloodless coup of representatives of different groups of the civil society. Declared aims of this conference were, to guarantee basic human rights, to substitute the "Marxist" Kérékou-Regime by a democratic elected government, and to draft a new liberal-democratic constitution. Officially, each of these aims had been reached within one year. The new constitution was adopted through a referendum by a large majority of the population in December 1990. In the following four years the formal constitutional political structures, meant to guarantee the balance of power were implanted. However, the political elite which dominated the democratization process pursued a hidden agenda. Moreover, the liberalization of society and economy, propagated by the international donor community, had ambiguous effects. The growth of the market economy had it repercussions not just within the realm of the economy, e.g. privatisation, separation of factors of production, land, labour, and capital; creation of business- and professional organizations. The transformation from subsistence into a market-economy was equally important concerning restructuring the political landscape. The adoption of democratic concepts by the population, based on neo-liberal concepts of exchange of equivalents via the market, the notion of equal legal status of all citizens, equal competition of politicians and political parties, and achievement-orientation, led to high flying expectations, but at the same time to a commercialization of social and political relations, including venality. Besides, democratization in Benin - the cradle of "vodun" - was neatly interwoven with the realm of occult belief systems. Both within the economy and politics, the established ‘traditional’ rules of the informal sector dominated the political agenda of the ‘neo-patrimonial’ state. Gender- and class specific interests of decision makers exerted a decisive influence on the democratisation process