The Commonwealth in Africa*:
| Date | 01 May 1968 |
| Published date | 01 May 1968 |
| DOI | http://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2230.1968.tb01188.x |
| Author | T. O. Elias |
‘L’HE
COMMONWEALTH
IN
AFRICA
*
INTRODUCTORY
WITITIN
thc last ten years, there have come into existence thirty-
eight independent states in Africa. Of these, eleven are English-
speaking, that is, they were former dependencies of Great Britain.
At
independence, each of these countries freely opted to remain
within the Commonwealth, and has remained
so
till today.
It
is
well known that the grant of political independence
to
a former
dependency of Britain is a matter exclusively for the British
Government of the day to decide, but that membership of the
Commonwealth is a matter for all its members to determine. This
distinction was brought to the fore when Ghana, the first African
territory to be granted independence by Britain, applied in the
usual way through the British Secretary of State for Commonwealth
Relations for membership
of
the club.
It
was feared in some
quarters that the Union of South Africa, as she was then called,
might,
for
reasons of race, oppose Ghana’s membership after Great
Britain had granted independence. Fortunately, the problem was
resolved and Ghana was admitted at least without a public airing
of views among the existing members.
Beginning with Ghana, a fairly common pattern of evolution is
discernible among the African members of the Commonwealth.
This has taken the form of nearly all of them first becoming a
Dominion in the classical sense of the Balfour Declaration of
1026,
with the Queen as the Head of State. Following the examples of
India, Pakistan and Ceylon, an Independence Act is passed by the
British Parliament by which the newly independent territory re-
ceived legal recognition as a sovereign state; this
is
in addition
to
an Order in Council which sets out the detailed provisions of the
constitution.a Such a monarchy soon gives way to
a
republic which
seems, however, determined to remain within the Commonwealth.
Hence Ghana attained independence on March
6,
1957,
and
became a republic on July
1, 1960;
Nigeria, which became independ-
ent on October
1,
1960,
became a republic on October
1, 1963;
Tanganyika became a republic in December
1962,
after a little
over eighteen months as a monarchy other countries that have
*.
.I
lecture
delivered at the School
of
Oriental and African Studies, University
of
London
on
March 2,
1967.
1
Ghana, Nigeria, Sierra Leone, Tanzania, Kenya,
Uganda,
Malawi, Gambia,
Zambia, Botswana and Lesotho.
See,
e.g.,
the
Uganda Independence Act 1962 and the Uganda (Inde endence)
Order
in
Council
1962;
also
the Kenya Independence Act 1963,
and
tie Kenya
Order
in
Council
1963.
Tangsnyika Republic
Act
1962
came
into force
on
December
9,
1963.
284
MAY
1968
THE
COMMONWEALTH
IN
AFRICA
285
followed suit are Kenya,4 Uganda and, recently, Malawi
'
;
there
are rumblings that Sierra Leone and even Gambia may soon join
the republics within the Commonwealth; no such thought has so
far assailed the leaders
of
the newest member, Lesotho. The only
notable exception to this pattern is Zambia, which went straight
from a dependent to
a
republican status at independence, without
the intervening period of monarchical rule.'
So
wide is the discretion
allowed by Britain
to
each newly independent country to determine
its own destiny.8 Two reasons may be given for the vogue among
the newly indepcndent members of the Commonwealth in Africa
for turning their monarchies into republics within a few years of
independence. The first is that, since India broke the ice in
1949
by getting the then British Government to evolve a formula which
makes
it
possible for
a
member
of
the Commonwealth to become
a republic which does not owe any allegiance to the Queen
of
England while accepting her as the Head
of
the Commonwealth,
the newly independent states in Africa are encouraged to follow
this precedent. The second reason is that the emotions
of
national-
ism which the grant of independence generates tend to accentuate
the problems of the dyarchy. The Governor-General, whether
British
or
African,
is
seen, not in his proper role as the legal
representative of the Queen, but as a symbol
of
imperial power.
Also, their French-speaking colleagues, both in the Organisation of
African Unity and at the United Nations Organisation, have always
tended to confuse the Commonwealth idea with the French Com-
munity, while a number of Eastern European countries and others
have until recently insisted that membership
of
the Commonwealth
is
inconsistent with complete independence and sovereignty, especi-
ally of the African and Asian countries. The newly independent
African states for these and other reasons have for the most part
preferred republics to monarchies. They have, however, avoided
the temptation
to
leave the Commonwealth, because they fully
appreciate the economic advantages of belonging to the sterling
area and the periodic opportunities of meeting other Commonwealth
Heads of State and Government.
In constitutional terms, this has nevertheless resulted in a
widespread invocation of thc doctrine of autochthony in the newly
independent African states. It is considered inappropriate that the
4
Kenya Republic Act
1965
gave effect to
Kenya
becoming
a
republic within
the
Commonwealth
a9
from December
12.
1964.
Refore
this, the Malawi Independence
Act 1964
providrd that the terriiories
comprised
in
the
Nyasaland
Protectorate should form the Dominion
of
Malawi
from July
6,
1064.
See
Gambia
Independence Act
1964,
which granted Qambia
fully
responsible
status within the Commonwealth.
The Zambia Independence Act
1964
established the Republic
of
Zambia, with
effect from October
24, 1961,
as
an independent republic within the Common-
wrnlth.
The Irish Republic, Burma, and the
Siidan
are examples
of
former dcpen-
(lencice who freely chose to opt
out
of
the rncmhcrship of the club at indepen.
dencc.
To continue reading
Request your trial