| |
Back to Index
The
Role of the Media and Other Civil Society Organisations in Elections in
SADC
SADC Barometer Issue 4, Jan 2004, South African Institute of International
Affairs
January 31, 2004
By Michael Davies
Civil society does
have an extremely important role to play in ensuring that elections accurately
reflect the wishes of a well-educated and democratically responsible citizenry.
It is now more than
a decade since a number of African countries, including several in the
Southern African Development Community (SADC), took their first tentative
steps towards democracy. Civil society - the loose collection of voluntary
organisations, groups, associations and networks that form an intermediary
level between the state and the household, and which, defined broadly,
includes all forms of non-governmental co-operation - played an important
role in making these steps possible. In Zambia, for example, the Zambia
Congress of Trade Unions (ZCTU), led by Frederick Chiluba, in collaboration
with various other civil society groups such as church organisations and
academia, successfully challenged President Kenneth Kaunda's 30-year incumbency
in 1991.
Encouragingly, at
least two general elections have been held in most SADC states since 1990,
and five SADC states (Botswana, Malawi, Mozambique, Namibia and South
Africa) are scheduled to conduct multiparty general elections in 2004.
While this could suggest that democratisation in the region is moving
from a phase of transition to one of consolidation, not all signs are
positive. Zimbabwe is currently in political turmoil; the recent local
elections in Mozambique were marred by reports of voterigging; and Swaziland
continues to be ruled by the continent's last absolute monarch. In order
for democracy in the region to be strengthened and consolidated, it is
crucial that the five elections in SADC states in 2004 are well organised
and that they are conducted in a free and fair manner. Although democracy
is not an ad hoc event (every five years), where civil society should
be galvanised, civil society does have an extremely important role to
play in ensuring that elections accurately reflect the wishes of a well-educated
and democratically responsible citizenry.
It is vital that civil
society involvement begins well before the actual day of the election.
It should continuously lobby the government to institute free and fair
electoral procedures. It should also undertake pre-election monitoring,
as this is often the phase during which elections are rigged, or when
intimidation mars their fairness. Voter education programmes covering
issues such as voter registration and the process of voting itself should
be provided prior to the election. Such programmes should go deeper than
just 'voter education'; and extend to civic education, which demonstrates
the importance of the electoral process and how a democracy should function.
This is necessary if democracy is to be understood and practised. Civil
society should also mobilise the electorate by encouraging them to register
and participate in the election.
The monitoring of
the voting and counting procedures on the day of the election, to ensure
that there are no incidents of electoral fraud, is another important role
of civil society. Although it is common for international organisations
to participate in the observation of elections in SADC, local organisations
are better placed than international observers to monitor the entire process
of the election from a much earlier stage, having a better understanding
of the language, culture and context in which the election takes place.
For this reason, it is critical that local and regional organisations
learn to perform this function effectively and transparently.
Finally, civil society
groups such as religious bodies can act as informal arbitrators of disputes
both on election day and following the election by using their standing
in the community. In this way they can encourage the various parties to
resolve their issues peacefully through discussion and mediation.
However, the political
space must be open to allow civil society to make a contribution. Within
SADC there are a number of possible obstructions that might prevent civil
society from fulfilling these roles in elections. Firstly, governments
may attempt to constrain civil society through regulation or legislative
means. This is the case in Zimbabwe, where the Private Voluntary Organisation
Act stipulates that all such organisations must be registered with the
government, which has appointed a board with the power to decide which
organisations to accredit. Secondly, government may try to co-opt civil
society leaders that it finds potentially threatening. This is often the
case with trade unions and student organisations, as these groups are
more prone to activism than other parts of civil society. Thirdly, a lack
of funding, exacerbated by economic conditions, might restrict the role
that civil society could play in elections. This is often linked to weaknesses
in skills capacity and knowledge about doing advocacy and lobbying work
and a lack of organisational capacity. As a result of these constraints,
civil society often suffers from a lack of influence or power, especially
in countries in which the government is highly centralised and dominant.
Although most civil
society organisations can be involved in ensuring that electoral practices
are free and fair, it is the media that are best placed to play the most
significant role. The potential of the media to assist the consolidation
of democracy is undeniable. The press and radio and TV networks have access
to a significant proportion of the electorate, and can communicate invaluable
information, such as where and how to register, and where and how to vote.
It is also important that voters are provided with sufficient data about
the political parties, the candidates and their policies, so that the
choice they make when voting is an informed one. The provision of such
knowledge is largely the responsibility of the media. Television, radio
and print allow political parties and their candidates to communicate
with the electorate, and give voters a way to articulate their views to
political leaders. Even more important, the media can and should facilitate
debate, not only between the various political parties, but also amongst
the electorate. As Dr Tawana Kupe, head of Media Studies at the University
of the Witwatersrand, comments, this role is extremely important in SADC
countries, where there is currently very little engagement between candidates.
William Bird, director
of the Media Monitoring Project in South Africa, suggests a more dynamic
role for the media in South Africa. 'The media needs to dictate the news
agenda', argues Bird, 'instead of merely reporting on an election event
such as a campaign rally'. By being proactive, instead of allowing politicians
to direct the coverage of elections, the media can help the electorate
to identify which parties are most likely to serve their particular interests.
Kupe supports this view, and argues that the lack of critical analysis
of both the party manifestoes for upcoming elections and past policies
contributes to voter apathy. These arguments are applicable to all SADC
countries. The media are also well positioned to act as 'watchdogs', detecting
and reporting any events that are contrary to the country's electoral
law. Finally, they have one other important responsibility: the reporting
of the election results.
The media suffers
its own difficulties in performing its roles in the electoral process.
One significant limitation is that of access. The high rates of illiteracy
in SADC states and the lack of an adequate distribution network, especially
in rural areas, mean that the effectiveness of print media is severely
constrained. A lack of resources is also a problem. As Bird points out,
without resources and skills, the media will be unable to shift from reporting
events to debating issues. The independence of the media is another reason
the media often finds it difficult to perform certain roles in elections.
While radio is a medium that allows for greater accessibility to the population
in many SADC countries, it is often, like television, controlled by the
state. Clearly, when media is owned by the state, even if it does have
some degree of autonomy, it is difficult for it to avoid accusations of
bias and act as a watchdog. This is evident in South Africa where the
SABC has recently been accused of giving the ANC an unfair advantage by
covering the launch of the ANC's 2004 election manifesto. Although all
SADC member states have endorsed the Windhoek Declaration on Promoting
Independent and Pluralistic Media, the autonomy of the independent media
in a number of states is also very fragile, as events surrounding the
closure of the Daily News in Zimbabwe have shown. Threats to the autonomy
of the independent media extends to the press in Swaziland, where journalists
are frequently threatened when they are critical of leaders; Angola, where
Radio Ecclesia, an independent radio station, is often the target of intimidation;
and Namibia, where, in March 2001, the state banned all government advertisements
from appearing in The Namibian, a newspaper critical of the Namibian government's
policies. In fact, there are examples of the autonomy of the media being
threatened in almost all SADC states and, furthermore, the weak response
to the appeal by MISA against the closure of the Daily News does not bode
well for the future of media freedom in the region.
In order to report
accurately on issues of malpractice in elections and be able to fulfil
their monitoring role, the media require independence from government.
According to Dr Kupe, in many Southern African states, 'the government
is the greatest threat to electoral independence'. For instance, in Malawi,
he argues, political leaders hold economic stakes in the media, which
are therefore tied to a particular interest. Without independence from
government and politicians, it is impossible for the communication networks
to provide all political parties with equal and impartial coverage, and
consequently to enable the electorate to make informed decisions when
voting.
The media, however,
like all other groups that make up civil society, also have a responsibility
towards both the public and the government. Civil society organisations
often have their own political agendas which can affect the outcome of
elections, especially when those organisations are co-opted by government.
It is the media that has the added responsibility of being objective,
although not neutral. While it is not necessary that the private media
remain entirely objective, it is extremely important that they provide
a reasonably balanced view of events and avoid sensationalism. In this
way, the media will best achieve their roles of informing and educating
the public about the elections; monitoring the electoral processes; and
strengthening and deepening democracy in SADC.
Please credit www.kubatana.net if you make use of material from this website.
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons License unless stated otherwise.
TOP
|
