In recent times, professional critics have had their fill of writing about Presidential election malpractices in Africa. I came across one such piece by Justice Novati Rutenge, which was published in THE CITIZEN newspaper on Monday, 11th September, 2017. Its title was “Decades on, just why can’t we get our elections right?” And he went on as follows: “Kenya’s 2017 elections were a cautionary tale of how electoral malpractices can divide a nation and led to deep-seated turmoil . . . After taking what seemed to be all the steps in the right direction in terms of setting up a foolproof electoral process, just how did Kenya manage to have botched elections? . . . However, this issue is not unique to Kenya, for most African countries still have a long way to go before they start holding proper and meaningful elections”.
And one year earlier in 2016, I had seen similar, scathing criticism, regarding Uganda’s Presidential election which had been held in February 2016; in which, under the heading “Africans are given to stealing elections”, the writer asserted that “ Presidential elections in Uganda have been stolen by the declared winner, President Yoweri Museveni, and therefore, in terms of sustaining democracy, they were actually useless and meaningless”.
And one year earlier in 2016, I had seen similar, scathing criticism, regarding Uganda’s Presidential election which had been held in February 2016; in which, under the heading “Africans are given to stealing elections”, the writer asserted that “ Presidential elections in Uganda have been stolen by the declared winner, President Yoweri Museveni, and therefore, in terms of sustaining democracy, they were actually useless and meaningless”.
Hence, in the light of the seemingly positive Zambia’s Presidential election outcome (where there have been no claims of votes being stolen) I suppose that, in all fairness, such critics will now agree that even in Africa we still can have our elections right.
The useful lessons from Zambia.
One simple lesson is that, despite the stated overwhelming odds, it is still possible for an opposition party to win an election in Africa. And Zambia was actually the first country to show this possibility when, in their first ever multi-party general election which was held in 1991, Opposition party candidate Frederick Chiluba convincingly defeated the incumbent President Kenneth Kaunda.
We devoted last week’s discussions on the lessons which could be usefully learnt from the just ended Presidential election in Zambia which brought President Hakainde Hechelema to power, having beaten the incumbent President Edgar Lungu by a landslide of around a million votes; and Edgar Lungu gracefully conceded defeat.
The useful lessons from Zambia.
One simple lesson is that, despite the stated overwhelming odds, it is still possible for an opposition party to win an election in Africa. And Zambia was actually the first country to show this possibility when, in their first ever multi-party general election which was held in 1991, Opposition party candidate Frederick Chiluba convincingly defeated the incumbent President Kenneth Kaunda.
We devoted last week’s discussions on the lessons which could be usefully learnt from the just ended Presidential election in Zambia which brought President Hakainde Hechelema to power, having beaten the incumbent President Edgar Lungu by a landslide of around a million votes; and Edgar Lungu gracefully conceded defeat.
However, in that presentation we were able to focus on only one aspect, namely the opinion that had been expressed by one of the country’s leading newspapers THE CITIZEN, in its editorial on this subject. That editorial had presented a view which seemed to indicate that ‘the independence of Zambia’s electoral commission is all that accounts for the more “positive” results, which enabled an opposition candidate to soundly defeat the incumbent President. And I made an attempt to challenge that point of view (with reasoned arguments), with the aim of presenting my own perspective on that matter.
Today’s presentation will endeavour to put that perspective on record; which, briefly, is that there are many other important lessons which we could profitably learn and benefit immensely from them. These includes the following:-
Today’s presentation will endeavour to put that perspective on record; which, briefly, is that there are many other important lessons which we could profitably learn and benefit immensely from them. These includes the following:-
(a) the basic causes for the ruling party’s election defeat; (b) the incumbent’s gracious acceptance of defeat; and (c) the need to invest greater trust and confidence in the country’s electoral Authority.
The basic causes for Zambia’s ruling party’s election defeat.
Lesson 1: the ruling party’s unsatisfactory performance. Commenting on what propelled Hichelem’s victory; a political commentator Professor Nic Cheeseman of the University of Birmingham, told DW from Lusaka, that the long term economic decline is what led to the downfall of Edgar Lungu’s government: “A lot of Zambians blame the Patriotic Front government for the economic difficulties they have been facing. they connect it to corruption, and the rising country’s debt”. He explained further that “many Zambians feel that the situation is not going to get better under the Patriotic Front leadership, and are now banking on Hichelema’s reputation as a successful businessman, who could perhaps be better at managing the economy.
Lesson 1: the ruling party’s unsatisfactory performance. Commenting on what propelled Hichelem’s victory; a political commentator Professor Nic Cheeseman of the University of Birmingham, told DW from Lusaka, that the long term economic decline is what led to the downfall of Edgar Lungu’s government: “A lot of Zambians blame the Patriotic Front government for the economic difficulties they have been facing. they connect it to corruption, and the rising country’s debt”. He explained further that “many Zambians feel that the situation is not going to get better under the Patriotic Front leadership, and are now banking on Hichelema’s reputation as a successful businessman, who could perhaps be better at managing the economy.
Another Zambian political analyst, Neo Simutanyi, opined that the election results could be seen as a “protest vote” against Lungu’s rule. “This election was much more a rejection of the Patriotic Front” he told DW.
Apart from these economic woes, other observers also noted “a worrying trend towards authoritarianism towards the end of Lungu’s rule”. His administration was accused of “targeting. critical media houses and journalists who reported alleged corruption; and opposition politicians were arrested for questioning government decisions”, including Hichelema himself, who says he has been arrested 15 times”.
These appear to be the principal causes that facilitated Zambia’s ruling party’s election defeat. They could be compressed and rephrased to read thus: “Zambia’s ruling party’s election failure was caused primarily by the grave dissatisfaction by the majority of the Zambian voters, regarding its unsatisfactory performance and delivery”.
Apart from these economic woes, other observers also noted “a worrying trend towards authoritarianism towards the end of Lungu’s rule”. His administration was accused of “targeting. critical media houses and journalists who reported alleged corruption; and opposition politicians were arrested for questioning government decisions”, including Hichelema himself, who says he has been arrested 15 times”.
These appear to be the principal causes that facilitated Zambia’s ruling party’s election defeat. They could be compressed and rephrased to read thus: “Zambia’s ruling party’s election failure was caused primarily by the grave dissatisfaction by the majority of the Zambian voters, regarding its unsatisfactory performance and delivery”.
In other words, the majority voters’ dissatisfaction was the primary cause of its ejection from power.
Lesson 2 : the gracious acceptance of defeat by the incumbent President.
One obvious reason which motivates an incumbent president to refuse to accept the results of an election, is his insatiable ambition to stay in power. Adlai Stevenson, that well known US statesman of the early 1960, is on record as having said the following, in a speech he delivered in January 1963:- “Power corrupts, but lack of power corrupts absolutely” .
It is precisely for this reason, that in 1984, Mwalimu Nyerere persuaded his colleagues on the CCM National Executive Committee, to accept the principle of imposing a constitutional limitation to the President’s term of office.
It is precisely for this reason, that in 1984, Mwalimu Nyerere persuaded his colleagues on the CCM National Executive Committee, to accept the principle of imposing a constitutional limitation to the President’s term of office.
It may be helpful to revisit his reasoning in support of this principle; which was as follows:- “No matter how able or efficient a leader might be, there comes a time when his ability and efficiency, will be impaired by his advancing age.
Similarly, no matter how popular a leader might be, there will come a time when his popularity will vanish, not necessarily because of any mistakes he has committed, but simply because the people are tired of seeing the same person in the same office for a long period of time, It is for these reasons that I have personally decided to retire at this moment in time. He continued thus:- But it is obviously not easy for every incumbent President himself to make this decision to exit from office; for there will always be people around him with strong vested personal interests, who will be telling him that he is still needed,
And neither will it be easy for any of his own party organs, to ask the incumbent President to vacate office, for there will always be people therein with the same strong vested personal interests, who will actively encourage him to stay in power. I thus believe, that the Constitution is the best placed authority to decide for a leader at that level, what is the right time for him to quit”.
Many African countries soon followed suit, and introduced similar provisions in their countries’ Constitutions. It is, presumably, the ‘absolute’ corruption induced by the fear of being in a state of ‘lack of power’, which drove some Presidents to change their Constitutions by removing such provisions which imposed limitations to Presidential terms in office.
Indeed, that happened even here in Tanzania when, under the second-phase government of President Ali Hassan Mwinyi, attempts were made to change the Constitution in order to enable the incumbent to remain in office after the expiration of his second term.
Many African countries soon followed suit, and introduced similar provisions in their countries’ Constitutions. It is, presumably, the ‘absolute’ corruption induced by the fear of being in a state of ‘lack of power’, which drove some Presidents to change their Constitutions by removing such provisions which imposed limitations to Presidential terms in office.
Indeed, that happened even here in Tanzania when, under the second-phase government of President Ali Hassan Mwinyi, attempts were made to change the Constitution in order to enable the incumbent to remain in office after the expiration of his second term.
And similar attempts were also made in Zanzibar during President Salmin Amour’s Presidency, in order to enable him to contest for a third term in the 2000 Zanzibar Presidential election.
Happily, in both cases, these miserable attempts failed; solely because the ruling party (CCM) just refused to entertain them.
Hence, the fact of incumbent President Edgar Lungu’s willingness to accept defeat, was a good lesson, which others in similar situations, should follow.
Lesson 3 : the need to invest greater trust and confidence in the Electoral Commission .
In last week’s article, we quoted the words from THE CITIZEN newspaper’ editorial of 18th August, 2021 which seemed to cast grave doubt on the independence electoral commissions which are appointed by Heads of State; asserting that “they can hardly be described as independent in the first place”. And I was quick to challenge that assertion, for reasons which I clearly stated. I will now elaborate further on that matter, by adding a few more points. Indeed, lack of confidence in our own National Electoral Commission, has been on the cards of the opposition parties ever since the reintroduction of multi-party politics n our country way back in 1992; as evidenced by their persistent demand for a new Constitution, which will allegedly make provision for such an independent electoral authority.
When President Ali Hassan Mwinyi appointed the first electoral commission in preparation for the first multi-party general election of 1995, he took care to appoint some high judicial officers, who could be trusted to carry out their duties “without fear or favour”. But, not long after they had started discharging their responsibilities, the opposition parties started singing the same song that was repeated by the CITIZEN editorial quoted above, namely that they had no confidence in that Commission, claiming that “since its members were appointed by the President, who is at the same time the Chairman of the ruling party CCM, they would be biased in favour of the ruling party candidates”.
Hence, the fact of incumbent President Edgar Lungu’s willingness to accept defeat, was a good lesson, which others in similar situations, should follow.
Lesson 3 : the need to invest greater trust and confidence in the Electoral Commission .
In last week’s article, we quoted the words from THE CITIZEN newspaper’ editorial of 18th August, 2021 which seemed to cast grave doubt on the independence electoral commissions which are appointed by Heads of State; asserting that “they can hardly be described as independent in the first place”. And I was quick to challenge that assertion, for reasons which I clearly stated. I will now elaborate further on that matter, by adding a few more points. Indeed, lack of confidence in our own National Electoral Commission, has been on the cards of the opposition parties ever since the reintroduction of multi-party politics n our country way back in 1992; as evidenced by their persistent demand for a new Constitution, which will allegedly make provision for such an independent electoral authority.
When President Ali Hassan Mwinyi appointed the first electoral commission in preparation for the first multi-party general election of 1995, he took care to appoint some high judicial officers, who could be trusted to carry out their duties “without fear or favour”. But, not long after they had started discharging their responsibilities, the opposition parties started singing the same song that was repeated by the CITIZEN editorial quoted above, namely that they had no confidence in that Commission, claiming that “since its members were appointed by the President, who is at the same time the Chairman of the ruling party CCM, they would be biased in favour of the ruling party candidates”.
For the inquiring mind, such assertions will inevitably raise the question: What kind of independence are they looking for? The question arises because, as we pointed out in last week’s article, constitutional independence is already guaranteed to the National Electoral Commission by articles 74(7) and 74(11) of the Constitution of the United Republic of Tanzania, 1977. Thus, clearly, the Constitution is not the problem; which, obviously, lies elsewhere. And, in my humble opinion, it lies squarely in their individual mindsets.
This is because the dictionary definition of the word “independent” is given as follows :- “being dependent on, or controlled by, other people or things”. Now, there are certain statutory requirements, which necessarily oblige the electoral commission to be dependent on other authorities.
The electoral commission’s statutory dependence.
There are two types of ‘dependence relationships’ which the national electoral commission cannot possibly avoid. One is its dependence on the Parliament of the United Republic. Since the commission is required to perform its duties and functions strictly in accordance with the laws of the land, and itself has no power, or authority, to enact or amend any law; it is entirely dependent on Parliament in respect of that function.
The second aspect of dependence, is that the commission needs money, or a budget, which will enable it to perform its functions. But since the Commission does not have its own independent sources of revenue, it must depend on the government of the day to provide the requisite funds; and this dependence on the government cannot possibly be avoided, because it is in-built in the governance system itself.
The electoral commission’s statutory dependence.
There are two types of ‘dependence relationships’ which the national electoral commission cannot possibly avoid. One is its dependence on the Parliament of the United Republic. Since the commission is required to perform its duties and functions strictly in accordance with the laws of the land, and itself has no power, or authority, to enact or amend any law; it is entirely dependent on Parliament in respect of that function.
The second aspect of dependence, is that the commission needs money, or a budget, which will enable it to perform its functions. But since the Commission does not have its own independent sources of revenue, it must depend on the government of the day to provide the requisite funds; and this dependence on the government cannot possibly be avoided, because it is in-built in the governance system itself.
Unfortunately though, this dependence carries with it the obvious danger that a President with an insatiable ambition to remain in office; could, unethically, postpone a general election on the pretext that the government does not have enough funds to conduct such an election!
piomsekwa@gmail.com / 075476757.
piomsekwa@gmail.com / 075476757.
Source: Daily News today.
No comments:
Post a Comment