Could monarchy still work in Africa today?

Most of us in the world today descend from a history of monarchy or a version of it. Even the birthplace of democracy, Greece, had a king & Rome started of with a dictator - then in time, Rome's empire was governed by an emperor (i. e. a king of many nations). Monarchy is the most natural form of leadership because it is what we are naturally used to as human beings. A king rules until death or until he abdicates - or is forced to abdicate & his son takes after him. A simple order. 

While the idea of democratically electing a president is less than one hundred years old in most of Africa, it has gained rapid popularity because of influence from Europe. So between monarchy & democratically elected national leaders, which is better? 

The original stance of a monarch was that a monarch's word was the law, divine rule as it were. But today, in the age of global human rights, most monarchies have moved towards a constitutional monarchy where the king may not always be above the law. This benefits a nation in the case there is a self-destructive monarch, the nation could protect itself from destruction through the law. While democratically elected national leaders are through people's votes, many elections are rigged when there is a secret ballot. The main objective of a politician is to get public votes so often politicians will make promises they will never keep. While the monarch has no obligation to keep any grand promises, he is already the head of state. In fact, many constitutional monarchies in the world today who have employed democracy when electing ministers are considered more democratic than countries who have "democratic" in their name. The monarch only has to keep the land stable, ensure it's economic prosperity & defend it from external threats for his rule to be considered a success. Monarchy also provides continuity & political stability in that monarchs often rule for decades while elected heads of state often rule for a period of five years before campaigning again trying to get votes from the people. Most election campaigns are an inconvenient waste of money disguised as the people's power while a monarch simply appoints a minister & could call for a referendum to consider the people's approval on a matter.

Ideally, elections in a democratic land should be done in a way that even bystanders can see exactly which political party an individual voted for in real time. But since elections are often a secret ballot, a lot can happen in the shadows including double-voting, lost ballot boxes & other forms of election rigging. 

An elected monarch: 

Since many countries in Africa have people who want to have the lifetime reign of a king, an elected monarch may be a solution. A list of the strongest, fastest, most intelligent & wealthiest people in the land could be compiled. The one who the people is the strongest, fastest, most intelligent & wealthiest in comparison to the rest could then be elected as king & establish his dynasty in the country to rule for eternity. 

Monarchy is still the most enduring form of governance worldwide & maybe we should accept it as the default setting of humanity.