Get more Mail & Guardian
Subscribe or Login

Five things to watch in the Zambian elections

Zambia will hold presidential elections in three weeks’ time, amidst an ongoing economic crisis and rising political tensions. The election is effectively a two-horse race between President Edgar Lungu and long-time opposition leader Hakainde Hichilema — and like the last election, it is going to be close. 

There are already major problems with the polls. Some civil society groups and constitutional lawyers argue that Lungu is not eligible to stand as he has served two terms in office. There are accusations that the government is using Covid-19 social distancing requirements to gain an unfair advantage. And the electoral commission that presided over a transfer of power in 2011 is no longer trusted by large sections of the population.

The good news is that unlike recent polls in Uganda, there is a strong international observation presence alongside domestic monitors. The European Union has a core team with more than 10 analysts, 32 long-term observers and a full mission of around 70 people.

In recent elections however, observers have been criticised for failing to identify manipulation. In Kenya (2017) and Malawi (2019), they released statements before final results were released, which appeared to suggest that the polls were acceptable — only for the courts to rule them illegal. 

One problem election observers, civil society groups and journalists face is that in poor-quality elections it is not always obvious where to focus attention, and modern elections are often manipulated in advance using slow-burn strategies that are harder to expose. 

So what are the five most important things to look out for in the Zambian elections?

  1. We don’t know who will be voting

Ahead of the polls the Electoral Commission of Zambia announced that it would be scrapping the existing register. But to cover the country’s nine million eligible voters, the commission allocated just 38 days during the rainy season. Civil society objections were initially disregarded, prompting a group to take the commission to the Constitutional Court in August 2020. Despite the urgency of the application, however, the case is still pending nearly a year later.

Although there is little hard evidence of the kinds of manipulation that characterised the Zimbabwean electoral roll, there are credible reports of under-registration of voters in pro-opposition regions alongside higher rates in pro-government areas. The electoral commission has failed to allay these concerns, refusing to allow the register to be independently audited — despite having done so in previous polls.

Worse still, many young Zambians were unable to register because they don’t have national registration cards. Although the department of home affairs embarked on a process to issue cards to those who came of age after 2016, the rollout was criticised by domestic monitors as being skewed, compounding the problems with the voters’ register. 

International observers rarely condemn an election on the basis of “background” factors such as the electoral register, but this is often the most effective form of manipulation.

  1. Many Zambians are afraid to say who they will vote for

This election period has been characterised by serious violence and intimidation. Although party cadres of all stripes are implicated, the violence has predominantly been committed by young men affiliated to the ruling party. For their part, the police have regularly failed to intervene, and in some cases have been accused of committing human rights abuses themselves. 

The levels of fear and intimidation are clear from the results of the R8 Afrobarometer survey (December 2020), where unprecedented numbers — 38%, compared to just 12% in 2017 — refused to answer questions about their voting preferences. 

A fully free and fair election cannot be held in an atmosphere of fear.

  1. The media has been manipulated

The government has systematically attacked critical media over the past five years, closing the country’s biggest independent daily, The Post (2016), and the main independent television broadcaster Prime TV (2020), while threatening others. Party cadres and police have repeatedly stormed local radio stations during shows featuring the opposition, denying citizens their right to access basic political information. 

State media has also systematically favoured the ruling party. Even after the country’s main opposition party successfully took them to court and won, with the high court issuing an order compelling the electoral commission to mandate coverage to the opposition, the situation remains dire. This is because — in direct contravention of the spirit of the judgement — the commission issued a requirement that each party get just 30 seconds of coverage a day, and even then failed to outline an enforcement mechanism, rendering the decision futile.

Given that almost all physical campaigning has been banned because of Covid-19, this represents an overwhelming and unfair advantage for the ruling party.

  1. The vote counting and results transmission process is open to abuse

In a little-publicised decision, the electoral commission has moved to introduce biometric voter verification — but, in contravention of standard practice, only at bigger polling stations. Although this represents a major change to the rules, voters have not been made aware that they may be biometrically verified, and reports from Lusaka suggest that electoral commission staff have not been trained in how to do this.

The shambolic introduction of an important measure raises three issues. First, it appears that the kits will be used inconsistently, generating accusations of malpractice. Second, opposition voters may be intimidated by being asked to provide their biometric data at the last minute. Third, there is a serious concern that the verification process will be deliberately used to slow down — and hence deter — voting in urban areas, where support for Hichilema appears to be growing.  

This is not the only problem. In previous Zambian elections, results have been announced at the polling stream, polling station and constituency levels. This is good practice, as it makes it possible for observers to compare the results they record at each level to check if the support for one candidate has been artificially inflated.

But in another move that looks set to undermine transparency, the electoral commission  has decided to remove the intermediate stages of the counting and tallying process between the polling station and the national count. 

If as many fear the commission only announces a final total in the presidential race with no breakdown, it will be all but impossible to tell if there has been electoral fraud. 

  1. The watchdogs are being silenced

Given the weaknesses of the electoral system, it is particularly worrying that the electoral commission appears to be actively making life more difficult for observers. 

Civil society groups have complained that in addition to making it much more complicated to accredit observers — such as the requirements to provide certified copies of national identification and proof of having worked in governance for the last three years — the electoral commission has unexpectedly brought forward the deadline for completing this task.

While the commission has justified other changes in terms of the need to prevent the spread of Covid-19, there is no health benefit to these new accreditation rules, which appear designed to evade scrutiny. 

Recent changes to electoral legislation amplify this concern. The Electoral Process (Amendment) Act no 32 of 2021 has made it illegal for any entity other than the Electoral Commission of Zambia to announce and declare election results

The implications of this for media reporting and parallel vote tabulation exercises is unclear, but there are legitimate worries that it effectively criminalises reporting alternative results and accusations of electoral manipulation, and so will further silence the media.

First, do no harm: wait until results are announced

Whatever happens in the elections, one thing observers must avoid is delivering their preliminary statement too early. In all of the recent controversies surrounding election observers, initial statements were made after votes had been cast but before the official announcement of results. 

This makes no sense, and leaves observers chronically vulnerable to overly optimistic evaluations. 

We know from numerous elections in Africa that polling day is usually orderly with problems arising during tallying and announcement. To comment on the elections before votes are counted is like a driving instructor deciding a student has passed the test after they have only just turned on the engine. 

This is a major problem, because it is the preliminary statement, covered by national and international media, that sets the tone for how elections are understood. When the final report is released months later, international attention has shifted elsewhere, and so the often more critical evaluations fall on deaf ears.

Given the high risk of manipulation during the vote count in Zambia, it is essential that the process is not given a clean bill of health when it has barely begun.

Subscribe for R500/year

Thanks for enjoying the Mail & Guardian, we’re proud of our 36 year history, throughout which we have delivered to readers the most important, unbiased stories in South Africa. Good journalism costs, though, and right from our very first edition we’ve relied on reader subscriptions to protect our independence.

Digital subscribers get access to all of our award-winning journalism, including premium features, as well as exclusive events, newsletters, webinars and the cryptic crossword. Click here to find out how to join them and get a 57% discount in your first year.

Nicole Beardsworth
Nicole Beardsworth holds a PhD in politics from the University of Warwick, an MA in International Relations from the University of the Witwatersrand and an MSc in African Studies from the University of Oxford.
Nic Cheeseman
Nic Cheeseman

Nic Cheeseman is Professor of Democracy at the University of Birmingham and was formerly the Director of the African Studies Centre at Oxford University. He mainly works on democracy, elections and development and has conducted fieldwork in a range of African countries including Ghana, Kenya, Malawi, Nigeria, Uganda, Zambia, and Zimbabwe. The articles that he has published based on this research have won a number of prizes including the GIGA award for the best article in Comparative Area Studies (2013) and the Frank Cass Award for the best article in Democratization (2015). 

Professor Cheeseman is also the author or editor of ten books, including Democracy in Africa (2015), Institutions and Democracy in Africa (2017), How to Rig an Election (2018), and Coalitional Presidentialism in Comparative Perspective (2018). In addition, he is the founding editor of the Oxford Encyclopaedia of African Politics, a former editor of the journal African Affairs, and an advisor to, and writer for, Kofi Annan's African Progress Panel. A frequent commentator of African and global events, Professor Cheeseman’s analysis has appeared in the Economist, Le Monde, Financial Times, Newsweek, the Washington Post, New York Times, BBC, Daily Nation and he writes a regular column for the Mail & Guardian. In total, his articles have been read over a million times. Many of his interviews and insights can be found on the website that he founded and co-edits, www.democracyinafrica.org.

O’Brien Kaaba
Dr O’Brien Kaaba is a lecturer at the School of Law at the University of Zambia and a senior research fellow at the Southern Africa Institute for Policy and Research

Related stories

WELCOME TO YOUR M&G

If you’re reading this, you clearly have great taste

If you haven’t already, you can subscribe to the Mail & Guardian for less than the cost of a cup of coffee a week, and get more great reads.

Already a subscriber? Sign in here

Advertising

Subscribers only

Family wants clarity on SANDF soldier killed in friendly fire...

Corporal Simanga Khuselo join the peacekeeping mission in the DRC to save money to build his family a home

SA soldiers have been fighting in a distant land for...

Troops were sent to the Democratic Republic of the Congo in 2001 as part of the UN peacekeeping mission that became an offensive against rebels

More top stories

ActionSA wants pro-poor, business-friendly metros

Branding itself as a corruption busting party, ActionSA said it will establish dedicated independent forensics units in each of its municipalities, with the mandate to investigate all potential corrupt activities

‘We are focused on the local government elections,’ ANC tells...

The organisation has sent another letter to staff members saying that salaries for July, August and September will not be paid on 25 September

Family wants clarity on SANDF soldier killed in friendly fire...

Corporal Simanga Khuselo join the peacekeeping mission in the DRC to save money to build his family a home

SA soldiers have been fighting in a distant land for...

Troops were sent to the Democratic Republic of the Congo in 2001 as part of the UN peacekeeping mission that became an offensive against rebels
Advertising

press releases

Loading latest Press Releases…
×