For the first time, African leaders acted with dispatch to ensure a quick transition to democratic rule in Burkina Faso after sit-tight dictator, Blaise Compaore was forced out of power by a popular uprising.

Both the African Union, AU, and the Economic Commission for West Africa, ECOWAS, sent delegations to Ouagadougou where they gave the new leader, Lt. Col. Isaac Zida two weeks to surrender power to a civilian government or be sanctioned.

The Guardian Post welcomes their swift reaction. But would such uprising, drawing experience from the Arab spring that swept away the Tunisian, Egyptian and Libyan presidents, not have been avoided if the AU had been exerting pressure on long-serving leaders to leave power in peace or be slammed sanctions?

Isn’t that what the “peer review” was intended to do or was it just to wait until dictators are kicked out before the AU gets up from sleep to apply medicine after death?

Isaac Zida, the new strongman in control did not understand the logic of peer review the African leaders and the UN are trying to teach by giving him two weeks to hand over to civilians. He has already spurned that ultimatum.

Had they given Blaise Compaore, their peer, until 30 October, an ultimatum not to tamper with the constitution after 27 years on the throne, the uprising should have been avoided. They would have also saved him the shame of having to flee his country like a thief in the night.

African leaders watched with nonchalant silence as Compaore and other sit-tight African heads of state want to become imperial presidents. Then the mob action took control before they rushed in.

The leaders of the African delegation which included John Mahama, the Ghanaian president who is also current chairman of the Authority of ECOWAS heads of state and government, Presidents Goodluck Jonathan of Nigeria and Macky Sall of Senegal urged the military man to hand over to civilians.

After meeting with the leaders of the Burkina Faso's political parties, representatives of civil society, religious and traditional leaders, members of the armed forces, as well as the chairman and members of Burkina Faso’s constitutional council, it was also resolved that legislative elections should take place within twelve months.

A statement issued after the meeting equally noted that there was an agreement to lift the suspension of the constitution. That would empower the constitutional council to declare a vacuum at the helm of state and begin the process of forming a transitional government with the "urgent designation by consensus of a suitably eminent civilian to lead the transition."

It is the transitional government that will then pave the way for a time table for the organisation of presidential and legislative elections by November 2015. It will also guarantee the security of all Burkinabes, including political party leaders, members of the defunct government and the national assembly.

Other responsibilities will include: the protection of human rights and individual choices, initiation of an all-inclusive consultation among political party leaders, representatives of civil society organisations, religious and traditional leaders as well as the national arms forces to develop the structure and composition of the transition organs.

With the refusal of the military strong man to hand over in a fortnight, it is doubtful if the good interventions of African leaders and the salient points are not just pouring water on a deck’s back.

Despite the failure of African leaders to convince their long serving autocratic colleagues to leave power before power abandons them in the lurch, the situation in Burkina Faso should be a case study in several ways.

It illustrates the emerging power of mass civil resistance when the governed become disillusioned with powerful leaders who Pulitzer Prize-winning author, Arthur M Schlesinger Jr says in his The Imperial Presidency, have “overwhelmed the separation of power”. They are the guarantors of the constitution, the supreme magistrates and remotely control the legislature.

Some succeed, others, like in Burkina Faso crash out in infamy. But more importantly, the security forces deserve kudos for not pulling their triggers on the peaceful demonstrators who chased away a “powerful” former military ruler.

Compaore saw the hand writing on the wall, though belatedly and took to his heels. Another dictator like the late Col. Muarmar Ghaddafi who ruled Libya for 40 years would not have bothered if thousands of his compatriots were slaughtered just to keep him in power or he perishes with some of the demonstrators. Compaore surely learnt the lesson from Libya.

But must some African leaders want to serve until there is an uprising to flush them out? Have imperial presidents not learnt that it is more honourable to serve for just two terms than hang on to be humiliated or die in power? Have they not seen the global respect Nelson Mandela had when he served in South Africa just for one term and left when the ovation was loudest? Why can’t they emulate his example? Is it that they have amassed their poor countries’ wealth for egocentric use to a point that they fear they could be tried on leaving power?

Former United Nations secretary general, Koffi Annan once questioned why any leader would want to serve for more than 20 years. At The Guardian Post, we believe African countries should learn from their peers of the developed world who usually rule for five years renewable once.

The president of the United States, the world’s super power and leading economy, serves just for four years renewable once. Psychologically, people in leadership and management pivots run out of new ideas in ten years. That is why most multinationals do not allow their chief executive officers to stay longer than that.

Democratic African leaders should understand that when established forms of political contention, such as petitioning office-holders and the separation of power are hollow and ineffective in dictatorial regimes, they have to step in under the aegis of the peer review mechanism.

To wait until a dictator is chased out by popular resistance or other undemocratic ways before they rush in to pick up the shattered pieces is just like prescribing drugs to the death. That is one of the lessons they and other imperial presidents should learn from Burkina Faso.