Legitimacy, Authority and the Transfer of Power in Ghana

Abstract

The problems of authority and legitimacy experienced by post-colonial states are often explained in terms of a ‘colonial legacy’. The validity of this hypothesis is examined, in the case of Ghana, by analysing changes in the kinds of legitimacy claimed by the state from the colonial period through decolonization to independence. It is concluded that, whilst the most enduring legacy of colonialism was the attempt to found legitimacy in particularistic, indigenous systems of law, the decolonization process failed to transfer any one of the new, competing claims to legitimacy which emerged. Nationalism, of its very nature, was precluded from claiming authority on the basis of expertise in being European, and was also led to deny the validity of indigenous cultures. Representative democracy too was contradictory in so far as its results often challenged the nationalists' conception of a nonethnic national identity. Ultimately neither democracy nor ‘being African’ was a sufficient basis for the legitimacy of the new state.

Cite this work

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 52 citations exist upstream.

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.