Chance to live in peace again
 

Doubtful Fair 2005 Elections

29 April 04

A US civil rights leader, in an interview with the BBC television, said America is not ready to vote in November this year.. Her reasons? Voters’ education. Correct voting procedures and mechanisms. The failure to release of billions of dollars promised for electoral reform. The entire process could be computerized, she said. But with a click of the, mouse, the choice of millions could be altered in what they called hacking,, the African-American cited.

This is America, wealthy, technologically advanced, and a tested democracy. But the results of its last elections were settled by 9 un-elected individuals on the Supreme Court, sparking a controversy over the credibility of its elections.

Liberia sits in primitive backwoods, and it is expected to give electoral democracy another trial in less than one year three months. It, too, has made history in the past when it comes to electoral fraud, registering at one point more voters for the winning president than the population.

Of its estimated 3m people, a mere 600,000 voters were registered in 1997 to elect Charles Taylor, the indicted war criminal now in Nigeria. Many of the expected voters were condemned to refugee camps around the region. It also made another history in 1997 that went mostly unnoticed, in that although there are hardly any roads or communications facilities in Africa’s oldest republic, the results of the elections were announced minute by minute as ballot boxes poured in from remote villages with hardly any inhabitants and ruled by rebel commanders. But the world declared the results free and fair, even after Taylor threatened the elections commission with violence if the polls were delayed and eventually if he lost.

But another election is scheduled in October 2005. Both UN officials and other international actors determining the country’s political future have warned the polls will not be delayed. The warning has not been issued in a vacuum. Although the peace agreement that gave rebels and politicians a power-sharing regime emphasised elections, they are not in a great hurry. Since the regime was put together in August 2003, the formation of the elections commission, with the monumental tasks of organising the polls in a disintegrated country with large numbers of prospective voters still in refugee camps, has become the least of the priorities. The commissioners were appointed only after public criticisms of the regime for reneging on this pivotal aspect of the peace agreement. But since their appointments, the rebel-led parliament has simply refused to begin what they call confirmation proceedings, a process through which individuals appointed are vetted, passing if they have US dollars to pay the Assembly members.

There have been reports that the regime has been lobbying international actors to see the rationale for postponing the elections and to give them more time. More time for what is the question, since disarmament may soon be completed as the UN prepares to repatriate refugees, many already coming in the tens of thousands on their own. Apart from disarmament and demobilisation, conducting the elections is one of the most important steps for the UN, and all signs indicate there will be no acceptable excuses not to conduct the polls.

But if the greatest country on earth is unprepared for elections, what about the poorest country on the globe, according to UN statistics? Without accelerated moves now, such as a census, credible voters registration programmes, and fast reforms, October 2005 will be another opportunity to make another crude history in electoral fraud. The interim regime’s Information Minister last week said they are committed to the polls, but deeds, not words are more honourable. The process should commence if transparent results are expected.

Shady elections lead to continued contest over power. In 1985, Samuel Doe, defeated at the polls, decided in his wisdom that burning ballots and appointing his concubines to count the remaining ones was the best option. This served as an applauded justification for Charles Taylor’s war and enormous popularity in waging his war was based on the popular conclusion that Doe stole the results. But in 1197, Taylor, despite his open threat and mass theft of resources, including mortgaging state resources to those who would make him president, was declared a fair winner. If the 2005 are not fair in the real sense of this word, and if they are not seen as fair, they could provide the stage for another conflict.