BISHOPS’ GUIDELINES FOR
FREE AND FAIR ELECTIONS

Some time ago, in the midst of  the voter registration exercise leading up to the national tripartite elections later this year, a young Zambian told me something that enlightened me a lot about the political processes here in this country.  There had been a few months period to register, which then had been extended a few more weeks because not so many people had registered.  But even after this extension the number of eligible voters actually registering still was disappointingly low.  So the exercise was extended another few weeks, in hopes that giving more time would encourage more people to register. 

But my Zambian friend told me quite simply:  “Don’t give us more time to register, give us more reasons to register!”  And that blunt remark contained a painful truth about the current state of politics. Voter apathy, spurred   on  by   discouragement and disgust by the way elections are held and the way so many of the elected politicians treat the citizens of the country, is a major threat to genuine democracy in this so-much blessed African state.

Unless good reasons are given for making the effort to register and then going to vote intelligently on Election Day, then Zambia might just as well have stayed a British colony some 41 years ago, allowing non-Africans to determine what is its future!

PASTORAL RESPONSE

Will we have free and fair elections this year, with no violence, cheating or intimidation?  Will candidates be chosen who really love and serve the people above all else?  Will Zambia move forward after the elections to put in place a new Constitution and to experience economic growth that benefits all the people, especially the poor?

These are questions bothering many Zambians today.  Granted that putting food on the table tonight is surely the number one issue, but I believe that the outcome of elections will have a lot of influence on whether there is food on the table tomorrow and the day after!

On 20 July 2006, the Zambian Episcopal Conference (ZEC) issued a strong and wise Pastoral Letter entitled, “The Truth Shall Set You Free.”  This statement from the Catholic Bishops hardly says anything new but says things that need to be repeated again and again, and absorbed into the blood streams of all Zambian citizens and those who would claim to be worthy to be elected and lead this country as President, MP or local councilor.

The theme of the Pastoral Letter is an emphasis on the importance of this year’s national tripartite elections.  Of the many points laid out in the Letter, let me mention four, with hopes that their message might work to overcome the apathy and discouragement of my young Zambian friend as well as many more Zambians.  These four are the dignity of the voter, the responsibility of the government, the quality of the candidates and the honesty of the campaigns.

DIGNITY OF THE VOTER

First, the Bishops make clear that voting is something very important, indeed, very sacred:  “Voting is not only a right but also a duty to the country to help identify and put in place credible people who will make the state function in the promotion of the common good.”   There is a lot of political philosophy in that statement, indeed, a lot of political theology! 

All the instruments of the state – the Presidency, the Judiciary, the Parliament, the many government offices at national and local levels – have only one primary purpose: promote the good of all citizens in all aspects of life.  The blessing of a democracy is that the people get a chance to say who should be in charge of those instruments of the state.  At least that is what the text books told me when I studied political science!

So Zambians not only have the right to vote but they also have the duty to vote.  An older Zambian once told me, with pride, that that is what the Independence struggle was all about – people should have a say in who governs them and the kind of decisions that are made that affect them.    And  that  is really a religious truth – since those of us who are Christians remember that each and every human person is made in the image and likeness of God (Genesis 1:27) and hence has immense dignity.  To vote is to show forth that dignity in a critically important fashion.  To neglect to vote – or to hinder people from freely voting -- is an offense against that God-given dignity.

Responsibility of government

And that is where a second point made so strongly in the Pastoral Letter comes out, the responsibility of the Government of the day to assure free and fair elections. 

The Bishops do not hide their strong disappointment that the MMD Government rejected the possibilities of genuine electoral reform.   Two Supreme Court decisions relating to petitions on the elections of 1996 and 2001 and clear recommendations coming from the Constitutional Review Commission (CRC) and the Electoral Reform Technical Committee (ERTC) were, in the words of the Pastoral Letter, “ignored for partisan expediency.”  As a consequence, “The recent Electoral  Bill  that the  Republican President signed into law, as the new Electoral Act in May 2006, is inadequate as a firm basis to guide the coming elections.” 

So what do the Bishops say should be done by the Government prior to the elections to at least do the best that can be done in the inadequate circumstances?  The Bishops acknowledge that “the responsibility of preparing elections in a pluralistic political system is immense and indeed challenging.”   But they note something that this Government should pay keen attention to:  the fulfillment – that is, the pride and sense of achievement that would be felt by all associated with a Government that had presided over a credible electoral process. 

Given some past history in Zambia and given sad instances of electoral disasters in other African countries – indeed, also in countries like the USA! – the current government leaders would be recorded in history in a glorious way if, in the words of the Pastoral, they “leave no stone unturned in trying to create a reassuring and truly credible electoral atmosphere.”  Indeed, if a trusted consultant to the President wanted to offer the best of advice at this moment, it would be to tell him that he would be a hero in Zambian history if he goes flat out to guarantee that the 2006 elections in Zambia are completely free and fair – whether or not he wins another term! 

It is unfortunate that one aspect of the electoral process was not reformed as it could have been – setting the date for the elections. The Bishops state very clearly: “But in the spirit of democracy and good stewardship of public processes, we appeal to Government to do it [set the date of elections] in a manner that does not disadvantage anyone and underscores their autonomy.” 

President Mwanawasa chose to go against the appeals of civil society, the Law Association of Zambia and many interested parties by declaring on his own authority the 28 September date.  Citizens can hope that the new Constitution will be enacted with the clause setting a specific fixed date for the elections, removing this important matter from partisan influence.

ELECTORAL MATURITY

With the announcement of the tripartite election date, a lot of very good things have been said and seen about the preparations and execution of the big event on 28 September.  Justice Ireen Mambilima, chair of the Electoral Commission of Zambia (ECZ), has explained very clearly the procedures to assure free and fair elections that will follow a stringent Code of Conduct. 

President Mwanawasa has emphasised that he wants to be elected with no complaints about illegal or unethical practices.  Opposition party leaders are pledging integrity in all their electoral pursuits.

One encouraging sign of emerging democratic maturity in Zambian politics has been the formation of alliances or coalitions to put forward commonly supported candidates.  Despite considerable infighting and confusion in the making, breaking and remaking of these alliances, it now appears that Zambia will have only five presidential candidates (instead of the eleven during the 2001 elections) and in many of the 150 parliamentary constituencies the candidates will be limited by mutual agreement among the several opposition parties.

QUALITY OF CANDIDATES

So what should Zambians be looking for in deciding for whom to vote?  The ZEC letter treats the quality of the candidates very clearly.  But it notes that unfortunately the process of choosing the candidates has been in most instances a flawed process, one that doesn’t contribute to a democratic culture. 

“It has been a constant cry from party members that this process is fraught with undemocratic practices.  Choices of the people are often ignored.  Adopted candidates end up as those favoured by the top leadership of the parties.  This has led to the emergence of leaders who are arrogant, disrespectful and contemptuous of the will of the people.  For such leaders, blind party allegiance becomes the beginning and end of their political life.” 

That’s the critical analysis of ZEC – and it’s sad to say that its observation rings very true indeed.  But once the candidates are chosen – by a flawed process or by a good one – what qualities should voters be looking for before casting their very precious vote?  The Bishops offer a non-partisan set of qualities that need careful reflection: “professional competence, courage to speak the truth, concern for social justice, desire to work for the common good as opposed to self enrichment, a disposition to use power for service especially the service of the poor and under-privileged, an openness to dialogue, good moral standing, transparency, accountability to the electorate.” 

Of course, one can object that no candidate is likely to possess all those wonderful qualities!  But at this critical moment in Zambia’s history – a real “watershed” moment – surely the citizens can demand that the woman or man who comes to solicit their vote would be intelligent, honest, compassionate, selfless and morally upright.  If not, then she or he should simply be chased from the scene!  And that applies to candidates for President, MPs and local councillors.

We know that some politicians put on a good act as elections draw near.  They remind us of the ciNyanja proverb about the handsome fig that is full of ants:  “Cikomekome cankhuyu mkati muli nyerere.”  We should be able to break open that handsome fig, look at the past record, examine the friends and associates, ask probing questions, find out where they stand, etc.    That can be a great contribution of NGOs, Justice and Peace committees, churches, women’s and youth groups, etc. -- to develop a set of criteria by which to judge the candidates fairly and sharply. 

Honesty of campaigns

But let’s face a sad fact:  good candidates don’t always win the elections!  Bribery and corruption ruins the process.  “Our political system suffers in the end,” states ZEC, “as it is not the best candidate who wins but the highest bidder in the competition of bribing the electorate.”  A patriotic Zambian told me recently that It is truly disturbing to see the precious vote bought expensively by the blood, sweat and tears of early freedom fighters now purchased cheaply with bribes of citenge and cibuku. 

It is indeed heartening to hear President Mwanawasa and other political leaders very clearly denouncing any electoral corruption.   But all the leaders of both Ruling Party and opposition parties should be even more explicit, by stating quite emphatically: “As Head of Party, I promise to dismiss immediately from the Party any candidate involved in any corruption, even if she or he is an MP candidate or someone very close to me personally!”  What possibly could keep our leaders from uttering these words?  Granted that the new Electoral Code of Conduct makes bribery an offence subject to arrest, let’s have even stiffer punishments: isolation from any political standing or affiliation.

And such stiff punishment should also be applied to the use of public resources during campaigns.  Vehicles, facilities, etc., that belong to the Government should never be used for political campaigning. 

In a political rally speech, the President referred to those notorious 150 automobiles used by MMD in the 2001 election and said they shouldn’t be used in the 2006 campaigning – if they are still usable!  (Where are those mysterious vehicles anyway?  Should anyone have been brought to trial for diverting government resources for purchase and use of such cars for political purposes?)   Let the President set the tone and a good example by simply announcing publicly that any MMD candidate using GRZ vehicles for campaign purposes will be immediately dismissed!

An honest and fair 2006 campaign does seem now to be supported by the efforts to provide open and equitable access to the public media, by ECZ’s determination to avoid all the hitches of previous elections such as improperly printed ballots, late opening of polling stations and irregularities in counting procedures, and by the strong resolve expressed by leaders of the law enforcement agencies to behave impartially in all activities.  These are indeed encouraging signs!