In a democracy, the main responsibility of leaders and representatives is to serve the people. Accountability means that leaders and representatives are held responsible if they fail to perform certain tasks. Accountability requires penalties for failing to fulfill these responsibilities. It is important that these penalties can be effectively enforced. Sometimes there are rules about penalties, but leaders ignore them. In this case, there is no real accountability.

Democratic elections (where bad leaders can be replaced) make sure that leaders are accountable to the people. This is why people say that democracy is good at meeting the needs of the people. People will only choose leaders who meet their needs. If a representative ignores the needs of the people, they won’t stay in power. This makes sure that the only leaders who stay in power are those who do what the people want.

In a democracy, all public officials have a responsibility to answer to the public for their decisions, policies and actions. Accountability is a key requirement of democracy. Not only the government, but also businesses and civil society organizations must also be accountable to the public.

Organizations or institutions should be accountable to each other. For example, the police should obey the government, but government workers must be accountable to the police (e.g. If they commit a crime).

Accountability can be seen in the following ways:

1. Voters can remove leaders or governments in free and fair elections
2. Civil society is diverse, powerful and independent of government
3. Citizen participation makes sure that unpopular policies & abuses of power can be challenged.

Kinds Of Accountability

Horizontal Accountability: Power is separated and dispersed among multiple, independent branches and institutions of government (checks and balances).

1. Executive power (where power is most concentrated and most easily used) is limited, constrained and scrutinized by an independent legislature, judiciary, and other institutions

2. Independent institutions to monitor and control corruption & abuse of power. Not only traditional institutions (executive, legislative, judiciary), but also new institutions which have emerged:

• Counter-corruption commission Ombudsman (public complaint commission)
• Parliamentary investigative committees
• Supreme audit agency

Vertical Accountability: The people hold their agents (public officials) accountable to them.

There are two types of accountability: Electoral accountability and vertical Accountability

1. Type 1: Electoral Accountability

• Party system is sufficiently competitive,
• Competition is sufficiently fair,
• Voters are sufficiently informed and aware of their interests
• As a consequence elected officeholders can be held accountable and removed for bad performance.

2. Type 2: Societal Accountability

• Civil society is sufficiently pluralistic, resourceful, and independent of government
• Mass media are sufficiently independent and professional
• Public is sufficiently vigilant and mobilized.
• So that unpopular policies & abuses of power can be challenged and reversed.

Case Studies: The Communist Party in China and the ANC in South Africa

In China, elections are regularly held after every five years for electing the country’s parliament, called Quanguo Renmin Daibiao Dahui (National People’s Congress). The National People’s Congress has the power to appoint the President of the country. It has nearly 3,000 members elected from all over China. Some members are elected by the army. Before contesting elections, a candidate needs the approval of the Chinese Communist Party. Only those who are members of the Chinese Communist Party or eight smaller parties allied to it were allowed to contest elections held in 2002-03. The government is always formed by the Communist Party.
The African National Congrss(ANC) has similarly been the dominant party in South Africa since the ending of apartheid in in 1993, its position being based on its preeminent role in the long struggle against white rule. With its wide support base due to its history as the victorious liberation movement, the initial party dominance of the South African government system by the ANC was a given. The ANC’s dominance has been confirmed by its attainment of an overwhelming majority (approximately 2/3 of seats in parliament) in the 1994, 1999 and 2004 elections.

As a result, many opposition voters feel they cannot possibly impact or influence government; and opposition parties face challenges in developing their own profiles and agendas. This often leads to reactive instead of proactive behavior on the part of the opposition. Dissatisfaction with government performance is more likely to lead to protest and social unrest than to a change in electoral results that could threaten the dominant ANC. Many voters who are dissatisfied prefer to stay away or continue to vote for the ruling party because the opposition fails to present itself as a viable alternative to the ANC.
Source:One-Party Dominance in African Democracies