Election observers’ role under scrutiny 

Nice Public Trust has just launched a book Democracy Tested which reflects on the 2019 elections. The book covers a variety of issues but in this entry, Lilongwe Assistant Bureau Chief SUZGO CHITETE focuses on one of the chapters which raises questions on the relevance of election observers.

There are mixed views on the relevance of international election observers in Africa. While some think their presence enhances the credibility of elections, others hold that observers really add no value.  The latter seems to gain credence in most African countries, including Malawi.

The court’s nullification of the 2019 Presidential Election in Malawi is the latest case which further put into question the role of international observers. This was an election declared to have been free and fair, yet the court judgement indicated otherwise. Should these observers really be trusted? This is a question Malawians are grappling with as they head into another general election scheduled for 2025.

In her chapter, Democracy Tested political scientist Anna Kapambwe Mwaba, who has extensively researched on the role of international organisations in elections, offers a compelling analysis on the role of observers.

Apart from sharing the context of election observations, the political scientist also makes a strong point that there is indeed need to reconsider the role of these observers based on the outcome of the 2019 and 2020 presidential polls.

“Consequently, if election observation is to continue, serious considerations and changes must be made,” argues Mwaba in her last sentence of the chapter.

The political scientist does not really suggest that Malawi should do away with observers, but stresses the need to learn from the past and make necessary changes.

“There needs to be more rigorous research into the role of individual election observer groups and what they did, or should have done to encourage greater public confidence in the electoral outcome and improvements in the transparency and accountability of determining these resources,” reads the chapter in part.

In 2019, the dissatisfaction with international observers, was evident among political players themselves. Both President Lazarus Chakwera and Vice-President Saulos Chilima, who were petitioners in the presidential elections case, raised concerns with pronouncements from observers who seemed to suggest that the 2019 polls were ‘well-done’.

In the the book, Chilima is quoted as having said: “If what they are going to continue to do is election tourism, we should scrap it. It is no better than a cartel protecting each other. But if we want to continue with them, let’s redefine their role. It should not be a tick-the-box exercise”.

In February 2020, critics were vindicated: The 2019 Presidential Election results were nullified due to massive irregularities which included alteration of figures. In fact, part of what observers do is to check how voting is done and also the counting of actual votes. The expectation was that observers should have equally discredited these results based on what was widely reported.

During the 2020 Fresh Election, save for diplomatic corps, international observers were not present due to Covid-19 travel restrictions and yet elections were held without serious questions. This just strengthens the argument that an election can be held without international observers. 

“The June 2020 rerun brought the ability of international election observers to fairly assess the elections into question with their reputations significantly tarnished” reads Mwaba’s line of thinking.

Arguments on election observations in Malawi echo sentiments from most African countries and the closest case is Kenya where the court also nullified elections in 2017. On Social media, Kenyans blasted international observers and opposition leader Raila Odinga stated that the invalidation of the vote ‘put on trial the international observers who moved fast to sanitise fraud.

According to Mwaba, while hosting a state dinner for President Chakwera, Mnangagwa praised Malawi’s peaceful election and stated that: “this makes us think whether it’s necessary in the future for SADC countries to look for supervision from across oceans”.

During the launch of Democracy Tested on October 6 2022 at the residence of European Union (EU) head of delegation in Lilongwe, media trainer and communication expert Levi Zeleza Manda sent the message home when he raised questions over the relevance of observers in the presence EU Ambassador and other diplomats.

His role was simply to introduce the chapters in the book and he did so with a lot of thought-provoking analysis.

He said “I am lucky to have voted in all elections since 1992. In the 1992 referendum, I voted and observers were there. In 1994 they observed, 1999, 2000 until 2019 in all these elections all what they said was the elections were either free or fair, free substantially fair. No election has been condemned as unfree and unfair.

“So, the question Mwaba is asking is do we still need international observers? If we still need them, how can we make their job better instead of accommodating them in hotels, drive them around and come back to write a report using their own template.

Manda also picked on local observers who are quick to endorse election results even before electoral disputes are resolved.  He pointed out that sometimes these local observers make their positions to gain favours “no wonder some end up being appointed in public office”.

The media trainer said 2019 was the funniest case in which local observers endorsed the outcome of presidential polls and issued a signed statement on the same just to turn around and protest against what they had earlier described as free and fair.

“They endorsed the elections. We still have that statement. They signed with their signatures. Free and fair, they signed. Later on, they joined the protests that the elections were not free and fair even though they signed.  Do we need local observers or do they take us for granted?” said Manda.

These weaknesses aside, Mwaba in her chapter finds domestic observers a bit more relevant because they understand the socio-political context of elections better than their international counterparts.

She opines: “The main advantage of these domestic observer groups is their ability to have larger missions. In addition, they are more familiar with the ‘political culture, language and territory’ which renders them capable of capturing issues that international observers would miss.”

Domestic observers consist of citizens and organisations tasked with monitoring the electoral process.

Nice Public Trust and other local civil society organisations have been accredited to observe elections. The most common international observers include the EU, the African Union (AU) and the Southern African Development Community (Sadc), among others.

Interestingly, on the day Democracy Tested was launched, the European Union Observer Mission for 2019 held a press briefing in Lilongwe, hours before the launch, to take stock of progress on the implementation of their recommendations to government based on their mission in 2019.  Out of 24 recommendations, government has managed to implement three.

But at this briefing, the EU Observer Mission did not agree with the negative sentiments on their role in elections, arguing that it is not their mandate to “certify or reject election results as observers, it’s the authority of the electoral commission of the country concerned”, according to Miroslav Poche, the chief of mission for the EU team.

But even with the mixed views on the role of observers, Manda agrees with Mwaba that it would help Malawi to have clear guidelines on election observation.

“Let us define how it should be done. If you are an observer coming from Zimbabwe, we must tell you that here in Malawi these are the things we want you to observe,” he said.

Nice Public Trust acting executive director for Gray Kalindekafe said the aim of this publication was to stimulate debate and influence action in the interest of future election.