Many African nations continue to use colonial-era titles for their leaders, a practice that contradicts their rejection of colonialism itself.
Titles like “Honourable” and “His Excellency” are applied to elected officials and presidents across the continent. These terms stem from British parliamentary and colonial administrative traditions. Professor Douglas Boateng points out this subtle but powerful inconsistency, which shapes institutions and leadership culture.
This situation exists within a broader African context of grappling with colonial legacies. Decades after independence, discussions about exploitation and economic imbalance remain strong. However, the retention of these inherited symbols of power suggests an unfinished journey towards true autonomy. Data from various African states shows a consistent use of these honorifics in official protocol.
Professor Douglas Boateng, a Chartered Engineer and Chartered Director, has voiced concerns about this practice. He states that while respect and structure are necessary, the contradiction lies in preserving colonial expressions of hierarchy after criticising colonial dominance. This is observed not only in Ghana with its “Honourable” parliamentarians but also in Nigeria and Kenya, mirroring British administrative language.
The continued use of these titles can influence how leaders perceive their roles and how citizens interact with them. It risks fostering entitlement and creating distance between the populace and their representatives. The contrast with Scandinavian countries, where leaders are often addressed by name, highlights a different emphasis on accessibility. This practice across Africa is not unique to one country but represents a widespread pattern, suggesting a shared, unexamined habit.
The implications of this persistent use of colonial titles are significant. It raises questions about genuine decolonisation and the development of distinct African leadership models. Leaders and policymakers must critically examine whether these inherited titles serve national dignity and identity. The focus needs to shift from inherited status to demonstrated service and accountability. The trend suggests that a deeper introspection into symbols of power is required for complete self-determination.