By Cherrel Africa
Campaigns can enhance the democratic system by mobilising people to vote through the presentation of persuasive, credible and compelling messages. However, campaigns can damage the democratic system by engaging in negative campaigning which reinforces public cynicism and distaste for political processes. This can leave voters “turned off” causing them to abstain from voting, thus harming the quality of democracy. During election campaigns parties should ideally propose and explain solutions to important problems facing the nation. However, in South Africa parties typically campaign around the same issues and their aims are virtually identical. The lack of distinction between parties can be seen in their 2009 slogans:
- African National Congress (ANC): “Working Together We Can Do More”
- Democratic Alliance (DA): “One Nation One Future”
- Inkatha Freedom Party (IFP): “The Tried and Tested Alternative”
- United Democratic Movement (UDM): “Now’s the time for ALL South Africans”
- Independent Democrats (ID): “Be a Part of the Solution.”
- Congress of the People (COPE): A New Agenda for Change and Hope for All
Parties promise to address the same major problems: unemployment; crime; poverty; HIV/AIDS; housing; education; health care and services such as electricity and water. The real difference relates to how they propose to deal with these issues. At the beginning of the campaign period, parties launch their election manifestos. These manifestos outline the policies and implementation plans of the party. While the party manifestoes generally contain extensive detail of differing strategies and policy positions, the vast majority of voters are unlikely to read (or have access to) them. Furthermore, this information often does not filter through the rest of the campaign. The reason for this is that parties devote much energy to negative campaigning. Election campaigns in South Africa are characterised by widespread verbal assaults in which political parties lambaste each other. As the election date draws closer these attacks become more scathing, the messages more negative and the exchanges more aggressive.
The competitiveness of the 2009 campaign has taken on a new edge with the long-anticipated split in the ANC finally occurring. Since the formation of the Congress of the People (COPE) by Mosiuoa Lekota and Mbhazima Shilowa, the country has witnessed acrimonious and often hostile exchanges between it and the African National Congress (ANC) as well as numerous reports of disrupted meetings and allegations of voter intimidation. In addition, the old rivalry between the Inkatha Freedom Party (IFP) and the ANC has continued to manifest itself through violence, especially in the province of KwaZulu-Natal. Recently, the Election Monitoring Network (EMN) (1) reported five murders linked to political rivalry in the Eastern Cape and KwaZulu-Natal. Monitors in KwaZulu-Natal also recorded instances of traditional leaders denying political parties the right to hold meetings in their areas and forcing their subjects to join certain political parties or face eviction. In general, in the context of opposition parties perceiving that they could gain from the division within the ANC, tensions have heightened.
Simultaneously, the most recent Afrobarometer South Africa survey (conducted in October and November 2008 by Citizen Surveys) revealed that a significant proportion of citizens feared the re-emergence of election related political violence and intimidation. The survey asked respondents: “During election campaigns in this country, how much do you personally fear becoming a victim of political intimidation or violence?” Only just over a third of potential voters (38%) said that they do not fear it at all. More than a quarter (29%) were apprehensive, saying they fear it “a little bit.” But approximately 30% of voters said they feared it “somewhat” (18%) or “a lot” (10%). Fear was greatest amongst supporters of smaller political parties. 35% of those who said they would vote for parties like the IFP, the United Democratic Movement (UDM), Independent Democrats (ID) or Freedom Front (FF) registered a high level of fear, compared to 26%of declared ANC supporters, 25% of DA, and 24% of COPE supporters. Those who declared they would not vote were also especially fearful (36%). The IEC, political parties, and other concerned organisations will need to maintain a high level of vigilance in order to re-assure the electorate and maintain a politically calm climate.
Additionally, a sizable proportion of South Africans fear that the secrecy of their ballot could be compromised. The same survey asked respondents, “How likely do you think it is that powerful people can find out how you voted, even though there is supposed to be a secret ballot in this country?” The results reveal that almost six in ten (58%) potential voters expressed confidence in the secrecy of the ballot. However, one third of all respondents felt that it “somewhat” (20%) or “very likely” (13%) that a “powerful person could find out” how they voted. An additional 9% were not sure whether this was possible or not. These results reveal significantly less confidence than those obtained by a slightly differently worded question asked in an Idasa / Markinor / SABC Opinion 99 survey in the run-up to the 1999 election where two-thirds of all respondents concluded that it was either “not very possible” (16%) or “not possible at all” (50%) for someone to find out how they marked their ballot. This fear was especially high amongst those who declared that they would not vote (46%). This suggests that this fear may act as a deterrent to voting in the current political climate. There is therefore also a need for renewed voter education to reassure people about the secrecy of the ballot.
How will these results affect the election process? While the results outlined above are undoubtedly a cause for concern, South Africa has robust and well-oiled electoral machinery. The Independent Electoral Commission (IEC) has now successfully hosted several democratic elections. Indeed non governmental organisation the Electoral Institute of Southern Africa (EISA) pronounced that the election in 2004 was “the best administered and the freest and fairest to date”. The IEC is well-aware of the sensitivities of this election. Presumably then, it will be more than capable of hosting South Africa’s fourth democratic national election. In a recently held IEC series of events, all political parties publicly committed themselves to creating an environment for free campaigning and ensuring that voters can express their opinions without fear of retribution. Within this context the onus lies on political parties to promote tolerance and move away from the mud-slinging that has characterised election campaigning in South Africa. The bitter animosity and vicious attacks between parties have clearly done little to draw voters into the electoral process and has the potential to foster political violence. Not only should the content be transformed but also the style and tone with which it is delivered. While the Electoral Code of Conduct commits all parties to a range of provisions concerning electioneering, parties still exercise choice over the ways in which they conduct their campaigns. Thus, parties may operate within the framework of Electoral Code of Conduct but continue to engage in negative practices. Above all, parties should behave in a way that fosters confidence in the electorate.
A positive component of elections in South Africa is the extent of monitoring which occurs. The EMN referred to above has a team of 500 trained, informed and politically independent community based monitors who are in close and regular contact with provincial and national institutions. They are deployed nationwide to keep a look-out for election-related abuse or violence and able to take rapid action with conflict resolution exercises when necessary. Furthermore, the South African Civil Society Election Coalition (SACSEC), which is a national initiative of over 40 non-governmental and faith-based organisations committed to the conduct of free, fair and credible elections, plans to have at least 2000 observers available to observe all facets of the 2009 elections. SACSEC observers will also be present at polling and counting stations during the elections. This coalition will play an essential role in ensuring that free and fair elections occur.
Unfortunately the continuous mud-slinging and harsh tone not only has the effect of drowning out the content of the messages but also draws the discussion away from more substantive concerns. In South Africa the campaigning process, which should attract interest and votes appears to actually hamper voter participation. Participation has declined sharply since the first democratic election in 1994. While the registration drives held in anticipation of the 2009 elections resulted in surge of registered voters, participation as a proportion of the voting age population (VAP) declined from 86% in 1994 down to 72% in 1999 and 58% in 2004. The 2009 elections will therefore be a critical test of the depth of South Africa’s democracy. As the first democratic election to occur after the split in the ANC, it promises to be more competitive than previous elections. Hopefully, election violence and intolerance will not overshadow the process and voters will turn out in vast numbers to make their voices heard.
Cherrel Africa is a political analyst with a special interest in democracy, elections and election campaigns. Ms Africa was recently awarded her PhD in the Political Studies Department at the University of Cape Town (UCT). She will graduate in June 2009. Ms Africa worked at the Institute for Democracy in South Africa (Idasa) from 1995 to 2003. She is currently a lecturer and the course convenor of Advanced South African Politics in the Department of Political Studies at the University of Cape Town (UCT) as well as a Project Manager at the Centre for Social Science Research (CSSR).
Notes:
(1) EMN is a network of independent civil society organisations including the Institute for Democracy in South Africa (Idasa), Action for a Safe South Africa (AFSSA), the South African Council of Churches-WC (SACC-WC) Western Cape Religious leaders Forum (WCRLF) Southern African Catholic Bishops’ Conference(SACBC) Justice and Peace Commission (JPC) Quaker Peace Centre and Black Sash.