“Democratic Elections and Election Fraud in Africa – A Zimbabwean perspective with continental implications”

Speech given at a Conference on 
Democratic Elections and Risk of fraud in Africa by Senator David Coltart

Brussels 1^st April 2014

“The State is an instrument in the hands of the ruling class, used to break the resistance of the adversaries of that class”

Joseph Stalin 1924

I was part of an international team which observed the Kenyan Elections which took place on the 29^th December 1992.The team arrived a couple of days before the election, congregated in a luxury hotel in Nairobi, received a short briefing and was then deployed in two person groups throughout Kenya.

Some of the briefing papers handed to us could have been referring to last year’s Zimbabwean election :

“Opposition parties have been weakened by..the government’s successful penetration of their ranks; their effort on keeping the registration process honest (was) unsuccessful; millions of potential voters were disenfranchised; (the roll) is rife with duplications, underage Kenyans and phony names; only in ruling party strongholds did officials facilitate the registration of citizens”[1]

 I was sent to the Luo region in the west alongside Lake Victoria. I spent a couple of days in the field including election day – in the area I observed those opposed to the ruling party did well and the election was relatively peaceful. We returned to Nairobi and the bulk of observers came to similar conclusions – namely that the Election Day itself was relatively free and fair.

In our debriefing meeting I raised the concern that we had only seen a snapshot of the election, that everyone had been on best behavior and that we could only adequately judge the election if we examined the entire process. Notwithstanding the problems identified in our briefing papers and my own concerns, that Kenyan election was basically given a clean bill of health by the international community and the President arap Moi started another term of office with full international recognition.

The following prescient warning was contained in the same briefing paper I referred to above:

“If the people feel cheated conflict is all but inevitable. The only election process that will be recognized as legitimate is one that is negotiated and agreed to by all the competing parties. If these steps are not taken costly peacekeeping measures may be required to end a Kenyan conflict that will have been the creation of a single man unwilling to subject his rule to the will of his own people.”

The rest as we say is history. Fifteen years on from 1992 that prophetic warning tragically came to pass with crimes against humanity being committed after the Kenyan election of 2007 resulting in hundreds of thousands of Kenyans being displaced. At the root of the violence was the smoldering discontent caused by a fundamentally unfair and fraudulent process. The crisis was only resolved through the intervention of the international community and the formation of an inclusive Government.

What has taken place in Kenya in the last two decades is typical of modern elections in states throughout the world which have shallow democratic traditions. Multi party states and elections are now de rigueur but that doesn’t mean that they are democratic and fair.   Indeed what has happened in Africa in the last two decades is that whilst de jure one party states are no longer tolerated, de facto one party states are. In the last decade even overt violence has become passé. Ruling parties have finessed their control and manipulation of the electoral process in the last decade so that violence is no longer necessary to maintain power.

This is amply demonstrated in the sequence of elections which were held in both Kenya and Zimbabwe in 2007/2008 and March/July 2013 respectively. The elections held in Kenya in 2007 and in Zimbabwe in June 2008 were marked by widespread and shocking violence; both attracted the ire of the African Union and the international community. Interestingly the tyrants in control of the levers of power in both countries adapted to this new political reality and succcessfully modified the electoral process to accommodate this new standard.

Whilst it may seem obvious to those living in countries which have known democracy for decades that corrupt, inefficient and unpopular regimes can be removed through elections, the reality is different. Although in the last 2 decades there has been some democratic  progression in Africa tyrannical regimes still dominate. One party States are no longer tolerated and if the experience of Kenya and Zimbabwe is anything to go by overtly violent elections will not be tolerated by even the African Union in future.

Christopher Hope in his seminal work Brothers under the Skin[2] describes the familiar traits of tyranny which are common throughout the world – in particular the use of state resources, cunning and an absolute inability to concede power. In the book he quotes what Hitler told his dinner guests one evening in 1942:

“Politics is the attainment of a goal by all conceivable means: persuasion, cunning, astuteness, persistence, kindness, slyness but also brutality”.

Hope also makes the point that tyrannies can be indefinitely sustainable and that the mere collapse of an economy does not necessarily result in the end of tyranny. He writes “When things in a police state become unspeakable it is natural to think it can’t last, it isn’t tenable any longer, but that is a mistake; you can’t put a term on modern tyranny. When you terrify the crowds, you are in business”.

The lesson in this is that tyrannical regimes will adapt to retain power and the international community needs to wisen up to this. In the past the mere fact that a multi party election was held was a cause for celebration; recently, as demonstrated in Zimbabwe last year, the mere fact that an election has been violence free has resulted in some observers missions declaring such elections as free, if not fair. But if Africa is to progress democracy has to be real not superficial. And for democracy to take root a genuine expression of the will of the people must form the basis of any Government’s right to govern. It is in this context that those committed to the promotion of democracy need to finesse their own approach to the conduct of elections in Africa.

A brief analysis of Zimbabwe’s July 2013 election provides an insight into how an electoral process can be finessed to subvert the will of the people without employing violence, or overt threats. The electoral process was well organized by the ruling class. I use that word “class” specifically in the same sense Stalin used it – it refers to the body of people, not all of whom are necessarily members of the ruling party, but all of whom have a vested in interest in ensuring that the ruling party retains power.

The methods of subversion were multi faceted; they included the elements of cunning, slyness, and the use of nearly all conceivable means to retain power. Indeed as prescribed by Stalin the State and nearly all its components were used as an instrument to break as many opportunities adversaries of the ruling class may have had. The ruling class was scrupulously careful to avoid making brazen threats – but subliminal threats were there in abundance. It is also important to note that the election was won well before the actual voting day and even before the arrival of the first election observers. The means used were often subtle and hard to expose. Any single one of the methods employed could not be said to have won the election in isolation for the ruling class; it was the collective and cumulative effect which ensured that the election was won well before the election day itself.

So what then were these methods? The following list is not exhaustive but provides an illustration of some of the diverse means used.[3]

Pre election methods

Use of State resources and personnel

The ruling class ensured that in the run up to the election it retained control of all the bodies which were critical to the electoral process. Accordingly the Registrar of Voters, the Registrar General’s office (responsible for determining citizenship), the Chair of the Electoral Supervisory Commission, the Commissioner of Police, the Commander of the Army, the CEO of the Zimbabwe Broadcasting Corporation, the Chief Justice and the Minister of Justice were all members of the ruling class. All had close historical ties to the ruling party and all has benefitted from its policies such as the receipt, gratis, of farms, cheap farm equipment and other benefits.

Having the unwavering loyalty of these key positions the ruling class was then able to coordinate and manipulate the electoral process as it liked. In addition the State resources these bodies enjoyed could then be used to the benefit of the ruling party. Control of these bodies ensured that the ruling party could solely determine the timing of the elections and the voter registration process. Effective control of the courts ensured that the ruling party would not have its plan disrupted by interpretations of the Constitution or Electoral laws in favour of its adversaries.

Although here was little overt violence used in the Zimbabwe election of July 2013 the military and police were used to subtly remind voters of the consequences of voting the “wrong way”.

The key to overcoming this tactic is to set the benchmark of independent appointment of all critical leaders of bodies which play a major role in the electoral process. It is not sufficient for these civil servants simply not to be members of the ruling party – they should be chosen for their professionalism, objectivity and non partisanship.

Control of electronic media

Although there has been some liberalization of the print media in Zimbabwe in the last decade the ruling class retains absolute control over the electronic media. There is only one State owned television station and the radio stations are either State or ruling class owned. For example the only privately owned radio station is controlled by the man who has become the ruling party’s Deputy Minister of Information.

Electronic media is increasingly the most important means political parties use to campaign the world over; this is even more important in developing countries such as Zimbabwe where many people cannot afford to buy newspapers or even have access to the internet.

As result of the tight control the vast majority of people had no opportunity to hear about the policies of all parties – the electronic media was brazenly biased in favour of the ruling party. In fact for most rural people (who comprise some 70% of Zimbabwe’s population) the only information they got about the electoral process and the contesting parties was through State controlled radio.

The key to overcoming this tactic is to set as a minimum standard the freedom of electronic broadcasting and the neutrality of all State controlled media outlets and institutions.

The voters roll and the voting process

As mentioned above the ruling class had absolute control over the institutions responsible for running the elections. Despite Constitutionally enshrined rights of all citizens to be registered as voters and to vote these rights were violated in a variety of ways.

Registration of voters was done selectively and often secretly to ensure that every voter in areas, or employed by institutions sympathetic to the ruling class, were registered. Conversely voter registration in areas antagonistic towards the ruling class was made as difficult as possible.

In addition a veil of secrecy surrounded the preparation of the voters roll; voters were arbitrarily put on the voters roll, moved into certain constituencies, or away from certain constituencies. Clear constitutional provisions enshrining the right of citizens to be registered were simply ignored. No effort was made to facilitate the registration of citizens residing in other countries. In short the Registrar of Voters applied an exclusive, rather than an inclusive, policy towards the registration of voters resulting in the disenfranchisement of tens if not hundred of thousands.

Having manipulated the registration of voters and the preparation of the voters roll itself the Registrar General, aided and abetted by the Zimbabwe Electoral Commission, then ensured that the illegalities could not be exposed by failing, despite a clear statutory obligation to do so, to produce an electronic copy of the voters roll.

Finally the Zimbabwe Electoral Commission ordered the siting of polling stations in a manner designed to assist the ruling party. For example there was a massive increase in the number of polling stations sited around military barracks in some constituencies which in turn facilitated suspected multiple voting practices by members of the ruling class on Election Day.

The key measures that need to be implemented include the insistence that all key electoral process leadership positions be filled by neutrals, that there be an inclusive and automatic voter registration process (ie all citizens who turn 18 should automatically be placed on the voters roll) and the provision of free electronic copies of the voters roll to all contesting parties.

The use of law as a political weapon

Having absolute control of the Police, Prosecution Authority and Courts has enabled the ruling class in Zimbabwe to use law as a weapon rather than as an instrument of justice. Adversaries of the ruling class in Zimbabwe are routinely arrested and prosecuted on the flimsiest evidence – when challenged the leaders of the ruling class will argue that the are bound to respect the rule of law. However the same bodies routinely turn a blind eye to even more serious infractions of the law by members of the ruling class.

Using law in this manner derails the campaigns of those opposed to the ruling class and gobbles up massive campaign resources.

Brazen violations of criminal and electoral law, such as tearing down of posters and providing financial inducements to voters by the ruling party, were simply ignored by law enforcement agencies despite reports being made.

The key to countering this tactic is for the police, prosecution authority and judiciary to be neutral.

Election day methods

Voting

In Zimbabwe a carefully laid plan was set by the ruling class to turn away as many voters of its opponents and to make provisions to enable its supporters to vote early and often! Thousands of voters in areas antagonistic towards the ruling class were turned away from the polls. Conversely there are numerous reports of young men, who appeared to be in the military being bussed in to constituencies they didn’t reside in and being allowed to vote, possibly even several times.

The situation was even more serious in remote rural constituencies where almost all the electoral officials were members of the ruling class. In many of these constituencies some absurd voting patterns emerged – for example ridiculously high numbers of voters turned out to vote (well above historical figures and unsupported by census information) if the figures are to be believed.

Once again the key to countering these practices is to set as a benchmark the need for independent non-partisan people to run the electoral process.

Counting

Zimbabwe and many African states use antiquated methods of casting and counting ballots. This results in long delays in counting of votes and announcing of results, which in turn facilitates the manipulation of both. A long delay in the announcement of the Zimbabwean Presidential election result in March 2008 was used to massage the figures to allow a Presidential run off election.

As shown recently in India there are new and robust computer based technologies which can be employed to speed up and generally improve the voting and counting process.  The shortage of finance is used as an excuse by tyrannies to resist the introduction of these technologies.

Accordingly a key method in countering these excuses is for the international community to provide at an early date the resources and technologies needed to modernize the entire electoral process throughout Africa. There is a debate around the use of bio-metric electoral technologies and it has been pointed out that there are not in isolation a panacea. I concede that this is the case – it is no use using these technologies without ensuring that they are administered by professional and neutral authorities.

Conclusion

The sine qua non of sustainable development in Africa is the entrenchment of democratic practices. At the core of a every democracy is a fair and equitable electoral system.

For so long as Africa’s elections are plagued by fraud and other illegalities the great promise of Africa will remain unrealized. Electoral fraud leads naturally into corruption; corruption then bleeds the lifeblood out of African economies and a vicious cycle of poverty results.

There is a direct correlation between poverty and huge inequality of wealth in those African countries where their respective ruling classes have governed uninterrupted since the end of colonialism. Zimbabwe is probably the most extreme example – it used to have the second largest economy, equal to Singapore, in Africa but is now one of the poorest countries – but there are many others like it.  All its elections since independence have been marked by fraud and, save for the last one, violence. In contrast Mauritius which has one of the most transparent electoral systems has seen remarkable economic growth during the same period. So most economic plans are pointless without a commitment to the reformation of electoral systems throughout Africa.

Whilst there has been an improvement in the electoral processes in many countries throughout Africa it remains worrying that electoral fraud has become more nuanced and sophisticated. Ultimately whether an electorate is bludgeoned or cheated into having leaders they don’t want is immaterial because it results in the same consequence – corrupt, unaccountable and inefficient governments.

It is accordingly critical that an urgent review be conducted of the basic electoral benchmarks and standards to counter the new and relatively sophisticated methods being used by ruling classes to subvert the will of African people.