Abstract
M.A. (Politics)
This study examines the four democratic elections that have been held in Malawi, Zambia, South Africa and Madagascar in order to establish whether there has been an improvement in the quality of elections over the years, to ascertain the challenges faced in each country, and to determine the possible implications for the future of democracy in each of the countries. The criteria according to which elections are assessed in the SADC region guided the investigation. These are the PEMMO standards which, in contrast to a reliance on generalised terms such as „free and fair‟, offer practical guidelines on establishing progress in the electoral process, as well as the SADC-PF and SADC standards. The discussion has been structured along the lines of the three phases of the electoral process, namely, the pre-election period, the election period, and the post-election period, each with its own set of indicators to be met. The study finds that despite the minimal achievements, the overall management of the electoral processes in Malawi, Zambia and Madagascar has stagnated over the years. The institutional and legal framework is one of the major areas that need improvement in Malawi. The Malawi Electoral Commission (MEC), which was charged with the responsibility of organising the various elections, experienced enormous difficulties in establishing a level playing field as well as in exercising its full mandate. Other problem areas include the voter registration process, the use of state resources by the incumbent party, and the acceptance of the electoral outcome by some opposition leaders. In the case of Zambia, the procedure for the appointment of members of the Electoral Commission of Zambia (ECZ) undermines the independence of this body. The other difficult aspects (as in the case of Malawi) are the lack of public funding of political parties, the use of state resources by the ruling party, biased media access and coverage for the ruling party, and the acceptance of election results by some of the opposition parties. The inadequate training of the electoral staff has also been a major contributing factor to these challenges. In contrast to the abovementioned countries (including South Africa), the legal framework in Madagascar did not provide for the establishment of an independent electoral management body. Consequently, the
various elections resulted in recurrent shortcomings in the voter registration process, the use of state resources, and the management of election material. However, despite the above bleak picture regarding the elections in Malawi, Zambia and Madagascar, there were some marginal improvements in the conduct of the elections over the years. The polling and counting exercises in Malawi, for instance, proved to be generally well-managed by the fourth election. Similarly, the Zambian elections over the years have improved in terms of the voter registration process, and the decrease in acts of political violence and intimidation. In Madagascar the campaign periods were generally peaceful. However, the government has since been overthrown in a coup d’état in 2009.
In contrast with Malawi, Zambia and Madagascar, the four elections in South Africa have been of a high standard, notwithstanding the few flaws, particularly during the first elections in 1994. The independence and credibility of the Independent Electoral Commission (IEC) over the years, as well as its continuation of members for all the elections, have among other reasons, contributed to the high standard of elections in the country. The continuous significant flaws in the elections in Malawi and Zambia pose a serious problem for the advancement of democracy in these countries. In other words, if the basic requirements of democracy – that is "free and fair" elections – are not met it does not bode well for the democratic future of these countries. The legitimacy of the elections and that of the resultant governments can be undermined, as has since been illustrated in the instance of Madagascar. The case of South Africa demonstrates the direct link between the "freeness" and "fairness" of elections and the extent to which its political system is labelled a democracy.