“Your democracy is his cherished legacy.” As the rain fell in Johannesburg, and as Barack Obama recounted the momentous contributions of Nelson Mandela, South Africans responded with roaring cheers. This was an opportunity for reflection, but equally a moment of celebration of the life of their greatest son. Mandela’s capacity to inspire and capture the imagination of millions the world over will stand unrivalled for some time.

That is a lesson well understood by South Africa’s current President, the embattled Jacob Zuma. Jeered as he entered the FNB Stadium, millions of viewers around the world witnessed scenes of almost infinite adulation for a leader past, but yet unabashed contempt for a leader present. The African National Congress (ANC) has dominated the political scene of South Africa since Mandela led them to historic victory in 1994. But the party now faces unprecedented pressure. In his tribute, Tabo Mbeki, Mandela’s immediate successor, posed the question: “to what extent are we measuring up to the standard (Mandela) set in terms of the quality of leadership?”

Mbeki did not need to provide an answer. At stake are not merely the reputations of current leaders, but the quality of Mandela’s ‘cherished legacy’ of which Obama spoke: democracy in South Africa.

In elections to the National Assembly in 2009, the ANC received some 65.9% of the popular vote; undoubtedly to the envy of most political parties around the world. This even surpassed the 62.7% secured under Mandela’s leadership in 1994. But the figure reflects a deceptive strength of mandate, with the party now struggling to brush off widespread perceptions of corruption and growing frustration over high levels of unemployment, now standing at over 25%.

The ANC has enjoyed a continued, almost sacred, source of legitimacy by virtue of association with Mandela himself. In his death, however, we can expect some change of perspective. Rather than a tribute to Mandela, more South Africans are likely to see passive support for an ANC that has strayed from its goals as an insult to his legacy.

The bottom line is that no party, no government, should be beyond the sovereignty of voters. The ANC’s rise to power will forever be a symbolic moment in South Africa’s history, representing the end of white-majority rule and the arrival of competitive democracy. The memory of that symbolic moment is not best served by the ANC’s perpetual holding of power. On the contrary, South Africa will only rise to the present political, social and economic challenges it faces if its government has no room for complacency. While the ANC government may be said to be representative of the majority in South Africa in a way that could never be said of any previous administration, we must not assume that the representativeness of a government means that it will be responsive to its people.

This carries a lesson for Northern Ireland. The Good Friday Agreement of 1998, for all its flaws, offered a sign that bitter enemies could indeed work together in the name of peace. Thirteen years later, the Assembly and Executive finally completed their first term of office. This was a remarkable achievement for a power-sharing government, apparently vindicating the view that reconciliation was taking place within Northern Ireland’s institutions of power. These principles undoubtedly capture Mandela’s legacy.

However, an all-inclusive government must not be seen as sacred in itself. With 94% of the Assembly’s members belonging to members of a governing party, the present system offers virtually no opportunity for the current government to be defeated. There is no alternative source of power. That is not healthy for democracy, and is likely to lead to increased levels of apathy and passivity towards politics in Northern Ireland. In South Africa, the early achievements of the ANC are being undermined by the destructive effects of being in power for too long, lacking a meaningful challenge to its authority. In Northern Ireland, the goal of reconciliation is itself threatened by ignoring a growing proportion of society who does not feel that their government is responsive to their interests. Inclusion is important in government, but not to the extent that it is insulated from serious challenge.

The symbolisms of 1994 in South Africa and 1998 in Northern Ireland will go down in history for what they were: turning points for countries with troubled experiences of division. As long as the ANC governs unchallenged and as long as all-inclusive power-sharing government in Northern Ireland leaves voters with no chance to replace it with an alternative, little will be done to serve the legacies of 1994 and 1998.