The role of observer missions in the SADC region: Promoting or hindering democracy - Zimbabwe a case study

Khabele Matlosa, EISA, 2002.

Zimbabwe's elections were attended by over 250 international observers from civil society organisations, foreign delegations, government, regional and international institutions. Despite the numbers, there were serious concerns about the effectiveness of the work of observers, and this ipso facto translated into a serious challenge to the political role of the international community.

The sudden withdrawal of the European Union Observer Mission EOM critically increased the pressure on domestic and regional observers, such as the Organisation of African Unity (OAU) and the Southern African Development Community (SADC) Parliamentary Forum, to provide regional stewardship, work collaboratively and fill the political vacuum, strengthening the fabric of democracy in the process. Besides, with the departure of EU observers, differences and incompatibilities between Western and non-Western approaches became more and more evident.

On the one hand, Western governments were strongly accused of impinging upon the national sovereignty of a country to forward their own political agenda, overtly partisan and pro-opposition and protective of white farming interests. On the other hand, the response of African and Southern African countries to Zimbabwe was perceived as detracting from the overriding importance of democratic accountability to give precedence to the history of the region, characterised by problems of equitable access to land, secure tenure rights and racial justice. Issues of national sovereignty and double standards, the reminiscence of the liberation struggle and anti-imperialist stances resonated forcefully in the Southern African region. Statements and interim reports from Zimbabwe's African neighbours hence faltered in a mild contempt of Zimbabwe political environment, which paid scant and inconsistent attention to human rights concerns and fuelled polarization both domestically and regionally.

The EISA Democracy Seminar dedicated to the Role of Observer Missions in the SADC region represented a further opportunity for dialogue and exchange of views between development practitioners, international observers and academics. The seminar was addressed by members of the South African and SADC PF Observer Missions, the Zimbabwean High Commission, the Movement for Democratic Change and the Zimbabwe Election Support Network and looked at elections holistically investigating the role of observer missions in Zimbabwe as far as promoting or hindering democracy. The four speakers raised the following points:

  • Utility of Electoral Observation: Speakers felt that there were undue expectations that the consistent presence of electoral observers would ipso facto translate into a smooth, free and fair election. Nevertheless, the weak and diluted standing of most Southern African observer missions undermined the credibility of regional actors in the building of a viable programme of democratic consolidation in Southern Africa and raised questions as far as the usefulness and effectiveness of electoral observation;
  • Enforcement Mechanisms for Recommendations: Where more critical stances were taken no enforcement mechanisms existed to uphold recommendations. The 2002 Presidential elections inherited institutional shortcomings identified and still outstanding from the past 2000 Legislative elections, the most notable being the independence of the Electoral Supervisory Commission. It was therefore argued that the lack of enforcement mechanisms severely impaired the impact and significance of electoral observation;
  • Observer Missions Accountability and Hidden Agendas: The need for observer missions to be accountable and truthful rose to visibility during the Zimbabwean elections. It was the opinion of most speakers that a principle of accountability should be established to avoid the phenomenon of electoral tourism. In this respect, observers raised concerns about the political impact of short-term observer missions misleadingly adding legitimacy to the electoral process by pronouncing the elections free and fair;
  • Observation Targets and Goals Beyond Declarations of Intent: Speakers felt that technical issues should have critically informed assessments. In particular, specific components of the electoral process, such as registration, inspection of the voters' roll, violence and intimidation, campaign access and methods, media monitoring, the implementation of a code of conduct for political parties, as well as polling and counting should have been set as targets of international observation. Instead, the circumstances in which elections were held hijacked objective interpretations of the concepts of freedom and fairness and the will of the people. In addition, the last segment of the electoral process -polling- was taken as a valuable determinant of the whole practice;
  • The Role of Civil Society Organisations: In comparison to government-led observations, which tend to be more politicised, civil society-based observer missions have an added value of thorough scrutiny, independence and freedom. If achieving impact is a priority for international observation, civil society has a distinctive advantage in that its reach is widespread and its value as an outlet to enforce laws and standards of democratic governance is broadly acknowledged. There are, however, serious concerns regarding victimisation of civil society representatives in the aftermath of elections. In Zimbabwe in particular, it was strongly felt that there was no space for being non-partisan even within civil society. In addition, Zimbabwe legislation severely constrained accreditation of non-governmental organisations and civil society, and the selection process was itself far from transparent;
  • Human Rights Universality: The realization and universality of human rights for all people should have been a central part of any and all efforts to uphold democratic principles in Zimbabwe;
  • South African leadership in the region: Mainstreaming regional benchmarks such as the SADC Norms and Standards should have been the preoccupation of regional leaders and South Africa in particular. This expectation proceeded from the assumption that South Africa would be willing to integrate its economic partnership with countries in the Southern Africa region with a comparable political commitment. Nevertheless, in academic and government quarters this claim was fundamentally questioned.

Zimbabwean elections showed with uncouthness that the region has yet to develop indigenous leadership capacity to enhance introspective analysis and uphold democratic principles. In such political vacuum, divergent interpretations bent on polarization between regions and cultures, in a revival of historic and political allegiances pointing at a central global antagonism between North and South. The Questions and Answer (Q&A) section of the Seminar critically revisited such concerns and raised the following points as far as the effectiveness of electoral observation:

  • Exaggerated expectations and contradictory mandates doomed observer missions from the start and were then chastened by an unrelieved record of deceitful statements;
  • A defective political culture frame devoid of democratic values notably featured in the statements of Southern African observer missions and could explain why these failed to stand up for acceptable democratic conditions;
  • Double standards fed the primitive impulse to give precedence to group solidarity, calling for a sharp definition of us-versus-them approaches to evaluative statements;
  • Anchored in Southern African liberation politics and culture, racial allegiance created strong motives for collusion between governments of the South, at the expense of democratic principles;
  • Lack of regional leadership limited conditions for enhanced engagement of single countries in democratic development.

In the Q&A section, a strong emphasis was also put on actors. It was for instance widely acknowledged that the composition and dimension of observer teams was an important factor in achieving higher quality observation. Small, highly qualified observer teams might have been a more manageable and appropriate option. Other participants however felt that larger teams retained the distinctive advantage of reaching widely in the rural communities, acquiring both in terms of visibility as well as in the grasp of issues dominating the political environment.

Regional actors and institutions were recognised as bearing the potential to uphold democratic principles. In this respect, a more realistic option would have been to develop indigenous leadership capacity starting with a core group of committed governments. Consistently with a functionalist, 'spill-over' approach, a handful of governments willing to cede sovereignty could provide constructive peer criticism. Then, a gradual transition towards effective regional leadership would enhance political stability in the region and entrench a culture of good governance contributing to make democratic practices more palatable to reluctant political leaders.