ElECTORAl PROCESSES

34 OPENSPACE NOVEMBER 2014

Electoral processes

African Elections: Delivering DemocracyGiving expression to popular will?

Ozias TungwararaAfrican citizens are asking whether elections are delivering democratic outcomes – are citizens

exercising popular control over public decision-making and are they treated as equals.

In other words, are elections in Africa giving expression to the popular will?

A hallmark of a democratic election is that it is conducted through a predictable process while

the outcome is not. do recent elections in Africa meet this mundane test?

Growing universality?

Elections have become the predominant

mode for contesting political and state

power in Africa. This contrasts starkly

with a few decades ago when state and political

power could be assumed through a number

of ways that included revolutions, rebellions,

coup d’états, and constitutional manipulation. In

2014 alone some ten African countries will have

held presidential and/or legislative elections.

In countries such as South Africa, Malawi, Mo-

zambique and Namibia, this will be the fifth time

voters have cast their ballots since the return to

plural politics in the early nineties. Unlike in the

past, regular and periodic holding of elections

is no longer the issue. What remains an issue

is the quality and credibility of such elections.

Without a doubt African elections continue

to face serious challenges that undermine

their credibility and the legitimacy of electoral

outcomes.

Challenges

Elections in Africa face a number of challenges

that include: legal and institutional frame-

works that do not promote the rule of law or

do not comply with regional and international

standards; electoral management systems

that are not impartial and elections are admin-

istered in an unprofessional manner; electoral

processes, such as voter registration through

which voters are excluded from voting; electoral

systems that do not ensure that citizens’ votes

count; rampant electoral malpractices that

include abuse of state resources, opaque

election campaign funding, and widespread

violence; and vote tabulation processes that are

not transparent or seen as credible by the voters.

All these factors have been at play in most, if not

all, recently held elections. This state of affairs

makes electoral processes unpredictable and

raises serious questions about the integrity with

which elections are being conducted in Africa.

Gains

In order to understand whether elections are

playing a role in Africa’s democratic consoli-

dation and are providing a viable opportunity

for citizens to decide who governs, it is equally

important to acknowledge positive develop-

ments regarding elections. As mentioned earlier,

regular elections are now the norm rather than

the exception. A number of countries have

undertaken far reaching constitutional and

electoral law reforms with the aim of improving

the legal and institutional frameworks within

which elections are held – so that the rules of

the game are agreed upon and are certain. The

continent has also witnessed the evolution of

regional and continental norms and standards

governing the conduct of elections. The African

Charter on Democracy, Elections and Govern-

ance (ACDEG) came into force in 2012 outlawing

unconstitutional changes of government and

committing member states to conduct credible

elections. The African Union (AU) and regional

Without a doubt African elections continue to face serious challenges that undermine their credibility and the legitimacy of electoral outcomes.

AFRICAN ElECTIONS: dElIVERING dEMOCRACY OSIWA.ORG

OPENSPACE NOVEMBER 2014 35

economic communities (e.g. EAC, ECOWAS,

and SADC) are actively engaged in electoral

processes through election observer missions.

Voter turnout has generally increased in recently

held elections. Another positive development is

the growing role of local civil society organiza-

tions in electoral processes. This engagement

is through domestic election observation,

provision of civic education and advocacy for

electoral reforms. An interesting development

is the increasing use of information technolo-

gies, such as mobile telephony and other social

media, by local groups to monitor elections and

mobilize young voters.

Predictable process, unpredictable outcome

A quick look at some recently held elections

show that in some elections the processes were

predictable and the outcome unpredictable to

varying degrees. While in some elections the

processes were unpredictable and the outcomes

unpredictable as well. Yet still there were

elections where processes and outcomes were

generally predictable.

Ghana probably presents the best case

where there is consensus about the rules of the

game – making the process predictable while

the results are not, reflecting meaningful con-

testation for political power. Having endured

decades of military takeovers and military

rule, Ghanaians appear determined to make a

break with authoritarian rule. Since returning

to plural politics in 1992, Ghana has seen suc-

cessful democratic succession by changing

government through the ballot box for the first

time in 2001 when the ruling National Demo-

cratic Congress (NDC) lost to the National

Patriotic Party (NPP). Another democratic

transition took place in 2009 when the NDC

won power from the NPP. The 2012 election,

won by the incumbent NDC with a 50.77%

share of the vote, was closely contested with

the losing NPP garnering a decent 47.74% of

votes cast. The electoral process was generally

credible although the NPP mounted legal chal-

lenges alleging widespread irregularities at

more than 10,000 polling stations. Ghana’s

Supreme Court dismissed all claims alleging ir-

regularities and fraud. The claimants accepted

the court’s verdict. It is important to note the

existence of an effective election dispute reso-

lution mechanism in the form of the Supreme

Court to whose jurisdiction the contestants

were willing to submit themselves. This is in

contrast to what happened in the aftermath of

Kenya’s 2007 disputed electoral outcomes when

ethnic fuelled post-election violence engulfed

the nation killing more than a thousand people.

Mistrust in the country’s judicial system was

one of the underlying causes of the outbreak of

post-election violence in Kenya.

Kenyans got it right in 2013

There was a marked improvement with regard

to Kenya’s 2013 elections. The transitional ar-

rangements that were put in place following

the disputed 2007 election culminated in the

adoption of a national constitution that enjoyed

widespread legitimacy. The 2013 elections were

conducted on the basis of agreed upon rules

and regulations and a reformed judiciary. The

new constitution required that for a candidate

to win the presidential race one had to get more

than 50% of the votes and at least 25% of the

vote in more than half of the 47 counties. Uhuru

Kenyatta won with 50.51% to Raila Odinga’s

43.7%. Odinga challenged the results in the

Supreme Court, but the Supreme Court ruled

that Kenyatta had won the election fairly and

Odinga accepted the court’s ruling. In this case

the contest was close. Electoral rules were

well articulated as a result of a new constitu-

tion. The winner of the contest was not pre-

determined. The results were challenged and

both parties trusted the judiciary to adjudicate

the dispute with impartiality, thereby avoiding

what could have been a replay of the 2007 post-

election violence.

While Zimbabwe missed the boatZimbabwe provides an interesting contrast with

the Kenyan experience. The two countries have

striking historical and political similarities. These

include an armed struggle against British coloni-

zation, a Lancaster House negotiated independ-

ence constitution (1963 for Kenya and 1979 for

Zimbabwe), a post-independence period of one

party domination and a long period of strong

man rule. No doubt that these factors have had

a bearing on governance in both countries. After

stiff resistance to undertake political reforms

that included constitutional reforms, both Moi

and Mugabe succumbed to local pressure to

re-write their respective national constitutions.

Both parties ended up with negotiated transi-

Are elections in Africa giving expression to the popular will?

ElECTORAl PROCESSES

36 OPENSPACE NOVEMBER 2014

tional arrangements after disputed elections in

2007 for Kenya and 2008 for Zimbabwe. Such

arrangements included the writing and adoption

of a new constitution and undertaking reforms

that would guarantee credible elections. While

Kenya undertook meaningful reforms, especial-

ly regarding the Judiciary and electoral laws,

Mugabe fiercely resisted reforms that would

ensure that there was consensus about the rules

of the game and a level political playing field.

In fact, the country was propelled into an

early election by a dubious court ruling that

ordered elections to be held by 31st July 2013,

barely three months after the adoption of a new

constitution and before necessary reforms had

been undertaken. The May 2013 elections in

Zimbabwe were marred by allegations of ir-

regularities, especially in relation to voter reg-

istration. Political parties had not been availed

copies of the voters’ roll on the eve of elections

as required by law. There was no transparency

regarding the number of ballot papers printed.

The Zimbabwe Electoral Commission (ZEC)

tried the best it could under the circumstances

to run what was in the end considered a fairly

credible election day process. Mugabe of

Zimbabwe African National Union - Patriotic

Front (ZANU PF) went on to win 61.09% of

the vote with Tsvangirai of the Movement for

Democratic Change (MDC) a distant 33.94%.

Even ZANU PF was surprised by the extent of its

own victory. Initially Tsvangirai mounted a court

challenge to his defeat, but soon withdrew the

case citing bias on the part of the Judiciary. There

was clearly no trust on the part of the MDC that

the courts would adjudicate the electoral dispute

in an impartial manner. To date the MDC has

refused to accept ZANU PF‘s electoral victory as

legitimate. The country continues to be gripped

by a debilitating economic crisis. Even with a

two thirds majority in parliament ZANU PF is

failing to respond to the country’s economic

woes and is now mired in a mortal succession

fight. The opposition MDC has also not been

spared the electoral fall-out and split soon after

the July 2013 electoral defeat. It cannot be

denied that electoral outcomes in Zimbabwe’s

2013 elections have had profound impact on the

country’s political formations.

Predictable process, predictable outcome: Non-democratic contestIn countries such as Ethiopia, Rwanda, Uganda,

Angola, the Gambia, and several other countries

elections are predictable because of the undem-

ocratic manner in which they are conducted.

In these countries the electoral contexts are

characterized by state control of institutions

that manage elections. Freedom of expression

and media freedoms are severely curtailed. In

most of these countries it is difficult to conclude

that a system of electoral democracy exists. The

integrity of the electoral processes is so under-

mined to the point of being discredited. The

outcome of electoral contests in these countries

is almost always predictable landslide victories

for incumbents and long unlimited stay in power.

Predictable process, predictable outcome – democratic contestThere are also countries that have invested

in their election management institutions and

systems so that elections are professionally

and impartially administered. South Africa,

Botswana, and Namibia are good examples

of professional election management bodies

whose processes are predictable, but whose

electoral outcomes are also predictable. Since

gaining independence the Botswana Democratic

Party (BDP) has won every election since in-

dependence forty eight years ago. The only

thing that has changed has been the margin of

its victory with October 2014 election being its

worst election having won 37 of the 57 contested

seats against the opposition Umbrella for

Democratic Change’s (UDC) 17. The African

National Congress (ANC) and the South West

Africa People’s Organization (SWAPO) have

dominated the electoral scene in South Africa

and Namibia respectively. While it is difficult to

ascribe ANC and SWAPO dominance to interfer-

ence with the election management processes

Africa needs to move away from perceiving elections as a zero sum game.

AFRICAN ElECTIONS: dElIVERING dEMOCRACY OSIWA.ORG

OPENSPACE NOVEMBER 2014 37

and institutions, their dominance is character-

istic of former liberation movements, such as

CCM in Tanzania, FRELIMO in Mozambique,

MPLA in Angola and ZANU PF in Zimbabwe.

Unpredictable process, chaotic outcome The May 20th elections in Malawi were a classic

example of an electoral process that was unpre-

dictable in the way in which it was managed and

the outcome was also unpredictable until the

courts intervened. Speculation was rife in the

run-up to election day that polling might have to

be postponed because of lack of preparedness of

the Malawi Electoral Commission (MEC). The

voter register was being printed a day before

elections. It also emerged that insufficient ballot

papers had been printed. A hasty decision was

taken to locally print more ballot papers that

had been printed in South Africa. Only about

25% of polling stations had managed to open

by 9 am when polling was supposed to start at

6 am. It soon became clear that most polling

stations did not have adequate materials, such

as indelible ink, the voter register, ballot papers,

ballot boxes and seals and pens. Some folks who

had queued from as early as 4 am were only

able to vote at 2 pm. Polling had to be halted in

some polling stations due to rioting by impatient

voters. Polling had to be extended beyond the

initial 6 pm deadline and in some polling centres

by an extra two days. As polls closed and vote

counting started, Malawians were frantically

debating whether the losing contenders would

concede defeat and accept the outcome.

Even before announcement of official results,

incumbent president Joyce Banda had alleged

massive vote rigging and fraud and demanded

an audit of the results. She then attempted to

annul the elections but this was set aside by

the High Court that ordered to the MEC to

complete the count. After an anxious period in

Malawi’s electoral history it appears again that

an impartial judiciary saved the day.

So, returning to our initial question of

whether elections are delivering democratic

outcomes in Africa: the jury is still out. It is a

mixed bag in which gains have been registered,

but a lot still needs to be done to improve the

integrity with which elections are held. While

elections will never be a panacea for democratic

governance, they are an important aspect of

democratic consolidation. It is clear that insti-

tutions such as the judiciary play a critical role

in underwriting democratic electoral contest,

as does an environment in which freedom of

expression, assembly and the media are guaran-

teed. Africa needs to move away from perceiving

elections as a zero sum game.

Ozias Tungwarara Program Officer

Research and Advocacy Africa

Regional Office, AfRO