William Gumede
The IEC has undermined its independence, damaged its credibility
The Electoral Commission of SA’s (IEC’s) decision to allow the ANC to register candidates for local government elections after the deadline undermines the independence, credibility and trust in this critical democratic institution.
It may also undermine the credibility of the elections. The decision leaves the IEC open to accusations of bias.
SA needs a credible IEC as the country enters the start of the decline of the ANC. Elections in future are likely to be decided by slim margins. Results could likely be disputed in courts, or on the streets. To deal with that the IEC will have to be above suspicion.
The local government elections are likely to be the most contested since 1994, with the ANC at its most divided and weighed down by incompetence, corruption and indifference.
Before its recent decision, the IEC was mostly perceived as one of the democratic institutions that had not been captured, or not been manipulated by groups within the ANC. This decision cancelled that.
What were the IEC’s chief electoral officer and commissioners thinking, or did they even apply their minds to this decision? Even more sinister, was their thinking bent by pressure from ANC leaders?
Electoral commissions deciding in favour of governing parties, or perceived to be bending the rules for governing parties, have been the cause of conflict in Africa. Governing parties, leaders and dictators who want to stay in power often manipulate electoral commissions to make decisions that favour their re-election.
All parties could nominate candidates by the August 23 deadline. Many parties met the deadline. If the ANC had registered its candidates on time, but an opposition party failed to do so, would the IEC have reopened the process? Would the ANC have accepted it?
ANC’s incompetence has come with little consequences ... not even in electoral terms as many continue to vote for it
The failure of the ANC to lodge its candidate nominations in time was incompetence, similar to what we have become accustomed to with the party’s management of the state, economy and society.
The irony is that many South Africans have suffered under the incompetence of the ANC. The ANC’s incompetence has come with little consequences to itself, not even in electoral terms as many party supporters continue to vote for it, continuing further cycles of incompetence.
The party, for a change, through not meeting the registration deadline, would have had to face the consequences of its own incompetence first-hand — if the IEC had not made it an exception.
It is likely that as the ANC’s popularity declines, elections will be more closely contested, which needs an independent, credible and transparent IEC. It is reasonable for opposition parties, civil society and citizens to see the IEC’s decision as favouritism for the governing party.
Even if the IEC decision stands and the ANC wins in the wards where it registered after the deadline, the legitimacy of such victories will be open to contestation, and to court challenges. The ANC missed the deadline to register candidates in 93 municipalities.
The DA and the EFF have taken the IEC to the Constitutional Court to challenge the IEC’s decision to reopen the candidate nomination process for the November 1 local government elections. They want the court to declare the IEC’s decision unconstitutional, unlawful and invalid, and set it aside.
The IEC’s appalling decision should prompt a review of the IEC itself, whether it is fit for the purpose in a new, coming era in SA’s politics when elections are going to be more fiercely contested. Such a review should look at whether the way in which the chief electoral officer and electoral commissioners are appointed is able to ensure independent, non-partisan and publicly credible candidates.
The IEC is composed of five electoral commissioners, one of whom must be a judge. Commissioners of the IEC are appointed by the president on the recommendation of the National Assembly, following recommendations by a National Assembly interparty committee.
The National Assembly interparty committee is given a list of eight nominations by a panel consisting of the chief justice, representatives from the Human Rights Commission, the Commission on Gender Equality and the public protector. Representatives from civil society have no say.
Both processes, choosing the National Assembly interparty committee and the panel consisting of representatives of the Human Rights Commission, the Commission on Gender Equality and the public protector, appear flawed. They need to be reviewed to at least give civil society a say in the appointments of the electoral commissioners and the chief electoral officer.