Burundi can redeem Africa’s taintage image by rescheduling the June elections

As Burundi goes to the polls in June amid violent protests and political instability following the recent attempted coup, several electoral reforms and institutional improvements need to be put in place to avoid being in the league of numerous contentious and flawed elections in the African continent.

The just concluded Ethiopian elections explicitly demonstrated how much Africa still needs to do to have a credible electoral system. The disproportionate playing field accorded to the opposition meant the government in power had the upper hand in the elections.  And yes, Prime Minister Hailemariam Desalegn won with a resounding victory albeit through deceit – that wasn’t a surprise. 

Sudan as well had her fraudulent elections recently with the incumbent president Omar El Bashir winning as was widely expected – the opposition in Sudan too cried foul over the electoral playing field as they viewed it as deception to Sudanese people. This has led to an ideology all over the world that Africa can rarely hold credible elections.

In the early 1990s, a beckon of protests emerged in Africa reflecting the global passion for democratic, accountable leadership and representative political systems. In the wake of this upsurge of protests among African populations, the discrediting of socialist – Marxist systems and the fall of the Berlin Wall as a contributing factor; many electoral reforms were implemented. Until then, only a few African states like Botswana and Mauritius experienced satisfactory elections and democratic systems.

However, many autocratic regimes in Africa in the early 1990s gave in to the combined pressure for reforms both from their own citizens, the donor countries and the civil society campaigners who were demanding “good governance and accountability” and introduced periodic elections. This mostly occurred with formation of new parties and the introduction of multiparty systems as of yet, most African states were single party states.

African states like Ghana and Zambia mainly introduced the free, fair and competitive electoral systems in the 1990s; typically after talks between the civil rights groups and the incumbent governments. These two countries for example seem to have built  on the political good-will and the excellent electoral systems  they put in place in the 1990s and up to date, have always held  laudable elections.

In some African countries like Kenya, meaningful elections did not come into realization until the 2000s. These elections not only led to regime change but also to higher costs in terms of political divisions and violence as witnessed in 2002 general elections. 

Ghana has held admirable and competitive elections since 1992 as they put in place the political goodwill and idyllic environment for electoral practices. Kenya however has held competitive but deeply divisive elections with; in most incidences violent aftermaths as witnessed in the 2007 general elections. Ethiopia on the other hand has had façade elections where the playing field has never been level and the incumbent always win in all elections since 1992.

As for states like Benin, the first election was a success in terms of democratic change but it later reverted to the tyrannical tendencies as years went on. Several post war countries like Angola and Mozambique for example held very precarious elections and in the absence of multi-party systems, the ruling parties were re-elected with much ease. Countries like Eritrea on the other hand never held elections at all.

Despite the fact that Nigeria held credible elections in March – April 2015, she too has had her fair share of sham elections due to the deeply rooted ethnic and religious divisions experienced in that country. Elections there have always been marred with problems such as vote-rigging, corruption allegations and political assassinations even if the final result reflected the opinion of the majority.

Zimbabwe, Uganda, Rwanda and The Gambia have always held elections with which the international community has labelled as a sham as these autocratic regimes have always subjugated the opposition parties and their leaders thereby giving them unwarranted advantage during the campaigns. This, in addition to being in power has always given them the upper hand as they control all the government institutions including the electoral systems – which they can always manipulate.

Elections are a necessary but not a sufficient condition for democratization process to be successful. In fact, it is crucial that factors in the political culture are taken into account. Burundi, with a fragile electoral process in a post-conflict condition and only going to the ballot for the second time since 1990 should therefore not rush into holding elections.

President Pierre Nkurunziza should put the election on hold and open a channel of communication with the opposition to consult on a suitable date for the elections.

The EAC should as well urge president Nkurunziza to mull over postponing the elections until such a day that the country will recoup peace. In doing so, Burundi will hold a free, fair and credible election and that will in turn spare Africa’s blushes as far as holding credible elections is concerned.