The implementation of the Political Funding Act No. 6 of 2018 marked a turning point in South Africa’s democratic consolidation. The Act introduced a system for regulating both public and private funding of political players in a more transparent and accountable manner. Since the Act came into effect in April 2021, the Electoral Commission of […]
Research on international democracy promotion in Africa often emphasises the altruistic intent of the sender, who aims to improve the political landscape in recipient countries, while neglecting other underlying motivations or agendas. Regarding the relations between the European Union (EU) and Nigeria, a few studies have focused on the internal factors in Nigeria that necessitate EU support for democracy. There has also been little exploration of reasons why these external actions have largely failed. The lack of knowledge limits the effectiveness of promoting democracy. The paper presents a qualitative case study that investigates how the EU can promote democracy in Nigeria in ways that suit the local context. Content analysis indicates how the EU’s rhetoric on democracy promotion is clouded by other foreign policy interests, contributing to a fragile democratic environment in Nigeria. The EU’s promotion of democracy is often shaped by internal considerations and is subordinate to the EU’s own strategic interests, particularly regarding migration, economic stability, and geopolitical influence. This situation results in a selective strategy that favours cooperation over resource management instead of enforcing democratic principles. Recommendations are offered to improve the effectiveness of democracy promotion.
The discourse on the reversal of democratic dividends, which has gained momentum in the past decade and a half, focuses on the erstwhile discussion on electoral governance and the relationship between elections and democracy. In this article, I emphasise the pivotal role of citizens and the value addition of elections in a democracy. Elections, as a cornerstone of democracy, provide a platform for citizens to express their will and shape the future of their nation. The article asserts a symbiotic relationship between democracy, elections, and citizen participation. A preliminary conclusion is that democracy is about improving citizens’ circumstances, and regular elections provide the citizens with an opportunity to elect leaders who will ensure that they realise the democratic dividends. Therefore, there is a need for strengthened human rights-centred and inclusive electoral processes with meaningful opportunities and arrangements for citizens’ participation beyond voting.
Violence – ranging from barely detectable to genocidal to coups and post-coup mêlées – has marred most if not all of Zimbabwe’s elections since its 1980 birth. Electoral brutality has been almost normalised since Zimbabwe’s first meaningful opposition, coupled with the ‘fast track’ land reform-inspired crises, accompanied the millennium’s turn. This article suggests that elections are signposts of what Antonio Gramsci might have considered the balance of coercion and consent during the long interregna between colonialism and an uncertain end. Evidence from Zimbabwe’s 2023 election and its predecessors illustrates the changing techniques between the coercion/consent poles as ZANU-PF’s leaders gain and maintain power along the rocky road to an unknown destination.
After declaring its independence from Somalia in 1991, Somaliland has built
a system to deliver basic services to its citizens. Despite having relatively
good security, Somaliland has to date received no international recognition.
With the presidential term extension made by the House of Elders (the
Guurti) in October 2022, politics in Somaliland is at fever pitch. Public
demonstrations, sporadic clashes, mass arrests, and hate speech add to a
general sense of political disorder. Several factors have shaped the current
outlook for democracy in Somaliland, including clan politics, a rent-seeking
mentality, and weak institutional and legal frameworks. This study seeks
to emphasise the contentious way in which elections have been held in
Somaliland, and which have led to a loss of confidence in the country. The
results, as witnessed in the 2017 presidential election, led to disputes, mass
protests, and loss of life. Election time in Somaliland has therefore been
a cause of concern for both political parties and the Somaliland Election
Commission. In the battle for political leadership, the pre- and post-electoral
aftermath has become conventional. But the main victim of the battle for
political leadership has been the Somaliland Election Commission which is
torn between contesting political parties.
