In democracies, elections are used to competitively select leaders and offers citizens two important things – participation and voice. Elections however, come with challenges and sometimes controversy. It is a key activity at the heart of all democracies. Elections however are not without challenges and sometimes controversy. The West Africa region has experienced its fair share of elections whose outcomes have been rejected by candidates and their supporters.
Yet, citizens in the region continue to embrace the idea of elections as the way to choose leaders.
High Support for Elections, Low Confidence in Election Outcomes
In the most recent Afrobarometer survey (Round 9, 2021-23), fourteen out of fifteen countries in the region participated. When asked whether leaders should be chosen through elections or by some other method, eight out ten (79%) preferred the use of elections. Across the fourteen countries, the percentage of citizens preferring elections ranged between sixty-seven percent (67%) and ninety-two percent (92%).
Ironically, the strong preference for election does not reflect in the level of confidence citizens express in election outcomes. The Afrobarometer survey regularly asks respondents to rate “the freeness and fairness of the most recent national election”. In the maiden edition of the survey (1999-2001), only twenty-seven percent (27%) gave the most recent election a rating of “completely free and fair.” By Survey Round 5 (2011-13), forty-four percent (44%) gave the most recent election a rating of “completely free and fair,” showing a very significant improvement.
In the subsequent rounds, the percentage rating the most recent national election as “completely free and fair,” were as follows – 39% (Round 6, 2014-15); 50% (Round 7, 2016-18); 49% (Round 8, 2019-21); and 42% (Round 9, 2021-23).
Overall, no more than fifty percent (50%) of citizens in the region, collectively, have rated national elections as “completely free and fair” recognizing that there are country variations.
As can be seen, there is a gap between citizens’ strong preference for elections and their expressed level of confidence in election outcomes. What explains this gap? Here are some insights from Round 8 (2019-21) of the Afrobarometer survey.
Why the Gap?
Three factors help shed some light on this namely– a) trust in the election management body; b) assessment of how well the election management body handled the elections; and c) assessment of the general election environment.
Unsurprisingly, the more trust citizens have in the election management body, the greater the level of confidence they have in election outcomes. Among those who expressed “a lot” of trust in the election management body, seventy-one percent (71%) rated election outcomes as “completely free and fair.” In contrast among those with a “somewhat trust”, fifty-five percent (55%) rated election outcomes as “completely free and fair”; those with “just a little trust” forty-three percent (43%) rated election outcomes as “completely free and fair”; and those with “no trust at all” thirty-one percent (31%) rated election outcomes as “completely free and fair”. Clearly, the greater the level of trust in the election management the greater the level of confidence in election outcomes.
Related to the issue of trust is how well citizens assess the performance of the election management body in handling the election. Among citizens who judged the election management body’s performance as good, sixty percent (60%) rated election outcomes as “completely free and fair”. Those who judged performance as fair, twenty-seven percent (27%) rated election outcomes as “completely free and fair” while those who judged performance as poor, only twenty-three percent (23%) rated election outcomes as “completely free and fair”. Clearly, when citizens feel the election management body handled elections well, it gives them a greater level of confidence in the outcome of the election.
Lastly, how citizens assess the overall environment in which the election occurred also contributes to the level of confidence they express in the outcome. Among citizens who judged the general election environment as good, fifty-one percent (51%) rated election outcomes as “completely free and fair”. Those who judged the election environment as fair, thirty-six percent (36%) rated election outcomes as “completely free and fair” while those who judged the same environment as poor, only fifteen percent (15%) rated election outcomes as “completely free and fair”. The better the election environment, the greater the level of confidence citizens have in election outcomes.
Of the three factors examined, their effect on the level of confidence citizens have in election outcomes is as follows, in descending order – 1) the performance of the election management body; 2) trust in the election management body; and 3) the general election environment.
The Way Forward
Think of elections as a football game. The teams in this game are the political parties whose candidates are contesting for the presidency and a seat in the legislature. The teams are supported by the voters who decide the eventual winner of the game. Football games bring out our deepest passions, but it is no reason why teams and their supporters must ignore the rules of the game. rules. The potential for the rules to be violated is also why a neutral party is needed to ensure that all teams play by the agreed upon rules.
In the coming year (2024), elections are confirmed for Ghana, and Senegal. The jury is still out on the possibility of elections in Mali and Burkina Faso. Nonetheless, this analysis reinforces the critical role of the election management body in ensuring confidence in the outcome of elections whether it is through a) how it delivers on its mandate to conduct a free and fair election; and b) how it contributes to a foster a generally positive election environment in which trust is also high.
Notes
- Data is drawn from Round 8 (2019-21) because the of the comprehensive list of questions in that survey round on elections.
- To gauge the general election environment, the analysis used the following survey questions a) last national election: media covers all candidates fairly; b) last national election: offered food, gift, or money for vote; c) last national election: powerful find out your vote; d). Last national election: fear political intimidation or violence; e) last national election: police or soldiers assist people to cast ballot; f) last national election: voter intimidation.
- The responses to each question were recoded to a scale ranging from anywhere between 0 (negative) and 4 (positive)
- The scores were then combined to a construct a composite score.
- From the composite score, three categories were generated to represent the general election environment – good, fair, and poor.
- To assess the performance of the election management body, the analysis drew on the following questions-
- a) last national election: votes not accurately counted; b) last national election: people voted more than once; and c) last national election: announced results reflect counted results.
- Steps 2-5 described above were followed to arrive at the overall performance categories of the election management body- good, fair, and poor.
- To determine how each of the three factors (trust in the election management body, assessment of how well the election management body handled the elections, assessment of the general election environment) affects the confidence of citizens in election outcomes, a multiple regression analysis was conducted using SPSS. The overall model was statistically significant. All three factors were also significant predictors of confidence in election outcomes.