Lesotho: Challenges of a developing democracy

Chris Landsberg, Lecturer, Dept. of International Relations, University of the Witwatersrand, June 19, 2002

Introduction

Developing democracies like Lesotho teach Africa and, more broadly, the international community, crucial lessons in electoral politics and democratisation. One key lesson from Lesotho is this: the smaller and poorer a country, irrespective of how homogenous or heterogeneous a state, the more fierce and competitive are elections and the struggle for power. By extension therefore, the challenges of introducing and sustaining democracy in such contexts are complex and fraught with many pitfalls.

Secondly, inclusive 'rules-of-the-game' processes, driven by consensus-building methods are vital, and lead to greater democratic outcomes in such competitive environments. However, such democratic breakthroughs are not enough to sustain democracy. Constant reinforcing is needed, otherwise the post-election political calm easily becomes short-lived.

Thirdly, irrespective of how inclusive and democratic processes are in countries like Lesotho, we should always prepare for what the Stanford University scholar, Stephen Stedman, calls 'spoilers'. From an electoral point of view, spoilers are those actors and participants, both incumbent regimes and opposition parties vying for power, who fail to accept the outcome of credible, above-board defeats. This kind of behaviour poses real threats to consolidating electoral democracy in Africa.

The fourth and vital lesson is that the 'first-past-the-post' Westminster system, inherited from the British model, with its 'all-or-nothing' ethos, is not only ill-equipped to deal with deeply divided, poor and formerly colonised African states, it is politically dangerous as it raises the competitive stakes. In poor countries like Lesotho, political parties not only contest elections in order to entrench democracy; they also vie for power and participation in elections as a way of survival, and a means of income. In short, political posts provide jobs for desperate people.

Fifthly, we should always make room for administrative and logistical problems in African elections.

Finally, consideration should be given, both before and after polling day, not only to consensus-building models, but also to genuine power-sharing arrangements, what may be called 'sunset' and 'sunrise' agreements.

Analysis

The recently held democratic election in Lesotho - 25-26 May 2002 - was by any international account credible and transparent; it was even 'substantially free and fair', to borrow a South African-invented term, which is not always useful because it can mean any number of things. Yet, in spite of this outstanding election, a few opposition parties still 'cried wolf', and questioned both the legitimacy and credibility of the polls. This brings home the point of the 'spoiler' phenomenon.

Lesotho has a history of contested elections. All past elections in this country's brief post-colonial history have been bitterly contested, with serious disputes following every poll, irrespective of whether any one such election was largely 'free and fair' or not. The independence package of Lesotho, which included the British Westminster single-member plurality system, introduced a culture of fierce contestation for power. The 1965, 1970, and 1985 polls were all highly antagonistic after the fact and were marred by bitter tugs-of-war. The military often intervened as premier 'spoilers', interfering in the fragile democratic process.