Fair? What Has Fairness Got to Do with It? Vagaries of Election Observations and Democratic Standards

Abstract

The observation and monitoring of elections and referenda has become a ‘growth business’ in Africa since external and internal pressures have forced the leaders of one-party states to test their political legitimacy. The closely monitored 1991 presidential and parliamentary elections in Zambia heralded the first peaceful transition from a single to a multi-party system of governance with a change of leadership in English-speaking Africa. It marked the beginning of an era of confidence in the possibilities of democratic change, and confirmed the positive influence that international observers can have on such processes. Their presence was henceforth considered an essential pre-condition for acceptable transitional multi-party elections. The hopes that Zambia would indeed ‘set a standard for Africa’, and offer encouragement to nascent democratic movements on the continent have, however, remained elusive. More recent elections have been replete with controversy, intimidations, and violence. Despite being certified to varying degrees as free and fair by observers, the losers have contested the results—in Angola with arms, in Kenya and Ghana with threatened and actual boycotts.

International Influences on Elections in New Multiparty States

“…A common criticism is that monitors sometimes legitimize fraudulent elections (Abbink & Hesseling 2000, Carothers 1997, Geisler 1993, Kumar & Ottaway 1998, something Kelley (2009) has demonstrated more systematically. This may have a host of other unfortunate effects on the political situation in the country.…”

Botswana’s 2004 Elections: Free and Fair?

“…This suggests that for free and fair elections to take place, certain conditions have to be fulfilled. These, according to Geisler (1993), include the right of the electorate, candidates and parties to participate, the right to freedom of expression and information, the right to a secrete ballot, and the right of the winning candidate and party to assume power.…”

“…In practice, these conditions require that there should be no problems with voter registration and rolls and nomination of candidates, no intimidation and violence, and no buying of votes, tampering with ballot papers or switching or meddling with ballot boxes (Geisler 1993).…”

“…They state succinctly that free and fair elections entail equal opportunities for both parties and candidates to campaign and compete; easy access by the electorate to polling stations, with no long queues; ensuring that elections are free of fraud, irregularities and rigging; and safeguarding proper counting and announcement of votes to reflect the voters' preferences. Geisler (1993) raises pertinent issues and controversies surrounding the notion of free and fair elections. She draws our attention to the difficulty of gauging whether conditions for freeness and fairness have been fulfilled, especially in Africa, where, for example, demographic statistics make it difficult to verify the accuracy of voter registration and rolls, inadequate infrastructure compromises the work of polling agents, and illiteracy stands in the way of a secret ballot.…”

“…Section 55(b) of the Electoral Act authorises election officers to assist a voter by 'informing him of the procedure he should follow after entering the polling booth' (Electoral Act, CAP 02:09:27). The provision allowing voters to be helped is a catch-22: on the one hand it assists the 'illiterate' voter to make a choice, on the other, as Geisler (1993) vehemently contends, it undermines the freeness and fairness of the vote. Elklit and Svensson (1997), however, support assisted voting as long as it is impartial.…”