Never mind if elections are stolen, just keep on voting...

What are African elections all about? Malawi's President Bingu wa Mutharika has just won an election. The media reported that the poll was “viewed as a test for political stability in the poor country.”

Last December's election in Ghana was either a “test for the West African region as it struggles for democratic consolidation,” or a “test of Ghana's democratic credentials.”

In December 2007, the Kenya election that eventually ended in bloodletting, was presented as “a test of Kenya's young multiparty democracy,” and some international publications said it was “a test of Kenya's democratic credentials in a continent plagued by election controversies.”

Again the word “credentials.”
So, when Uganda held its election in 2006, it was, “The country's first multiparty polls in 25 years are seen as a test of its democratic credentials.” There was a more ambitious view on the Uganda case, which stated that the election was a “test of the strength and legitimacy of Uganda's political institutions.”
When Rwanda last had elections, it was “a test of how far Rwanda has come since the genocide in 1994.”

AND IN 2005, ELECTIONS IN TANZA-nia were a “test of the democratic credentials of Tanzania,” and “a test of Tanzania's hard-earned reputation for stability in a turbulent region.”

However, our politicians themselves rarely frame the elections as a test of policy, national institutions, democratic credentials, or awareness of our countries' strategic role in their regions.

We the media write that stuff because, well, elections in mature democracies are framed that way — or we make these things up to lend an aura of gravitas to our elections that they otherwise lack.

Usually, the elections are about more basic issues. First, will the incumbent president or his party win the election? If so, will it be an honest victory or will they steal the vote? If they lose, will they do a Robert Mugabe and openly reject the result and remain in power?

And, if the opposition is beaten fairly because it ran a lousy campaign, as it often does, will it do the honourable thing, concede defeat, and congratulate the winner?

For the candidates, usually there are two practical questions: How much will they need to buy votes? Second, how many votes from my tribe can I rely on, and by how many votes will the other tribes vote against me?

And for the voters, it is the same two questions, asked differently: First, how much is the candidate willing to pay, either directly, or in sugar or booze for my vote? Second, what is his or her tribe (and sometimes religion)? If the candidate is a woman, is she married or single?

Appreciating this is important, as it helps us not to be too disillusioned with democracy in Africa, because then we understand that it is a work in progress. The vote rigging, buying, and selling are the price we pay for it.

Like all investments, if you put in money long enough and are able to withstand the ill winds, it pays off. Right now, if an African election is fair, it is a bonus we must take and quickly bank. Otherwise, the more important thing is to vote repeatedly until it becomes a habit.

We lie when we say elections are a “test of democratic credentials.” There is no democracy or credentials to be tested yet.

Charles Onyango-Obbo is executive editor for the Nation Media Group's Africa Media Division.

   Comments0