There's something called institutional path dependence, The more you delay a change in institutions the harder it will become to change into something else. Democracy is not something you can choose to implement anytime.
Africa should strive to be real democracies, one party states/dictators are just too dangerous, the risk of imploding isn't worth anything else.
Look at Kenya v Ethiopia/Somalia
Ghana v Mali/Liberia
Tanzania v Congo
Tunisia v Libya
I definitely want us to have real democracies in Africa, but they should conform to our own unique socio-political realities, stages of development and challenges.
Western style democratic electoralism is entirely unsuited for Africa; the system I've spoken about is actually more democratic than what is currently in place in any Western State, but it has significantly more safeguards and guide-rails.
Our Houses of Representatives and Senates should be filled through sortition -> jury-duty applied to politics; this would be significantly more representative; this would remove divisive elections; and it would greatly reduce the prospects of sinister State takeover, nepotism, kleptocracy and corruption.
Sortition members would be subject to a security and criminal and background check; and an extensive character assessment.
There would be an education requirement, which at minimum would be a high school diploma; there would also be a mandatory and thorough psyche evaluation...
..And a comprehensive education and training program in the laws of the Nation, economics, human rights, separation of powers and the organs of Government; this training program would last for 6 months to 1 year. This is where sortition members would learn the ins and outs of committee hearings and the intricacies of drafting legislation.
In addition to mandatory psychiatric evaluations necessary to screen out grandiose, psychopathic and sociopathic people... a body should be established to determine the most suitable individuals; this body would screen out hostile, vain, uncooperative, incompetent and corrupt people.
Elections would still take place but they would be for platforms and policies instead of politicians and personalitie; and they wouldn't be decided by millions of people that couldn't be properly informed on policy; or by people that could be easily swayed by charlatans and charismatic demagogues.
It would be significantly easier to properly inform 99 demographically representative members in Citizen Assemblies of the details of each policy proposal with the help of experts and policy representatives.
I'll use the Australian State of NSW as an example:
We have 8 million people spread over 128 councils and 90% of the 5 million enrolled voters are said to have participated in the State election in 2019.
The Citizens Assemblies model would randomly select 99 demographically representative members of each of the 128 councils and have them informed of the different policy platforms of each party over a 90 day period...
..This would mean that only 12, 672 people would cast a vote; these votes would be significantly better informed than the votes of 5 million people.