BY FITSUM GETACHEW
Choosing a government is never an easy task for any people especially in a moment of uncertainty and transition as Ethiopians find themselves in these days. Any false move, any bad choice, any ill-pondered and ill-advised option could result with irreversible consequences to the country.
If we look at the elections we have had in the past, we were never able to make fundamental changes and satisfy the wishes of the majority. This is so because of many factors that we must be honest enough to admit and settle with the truth.
Ethiopian politics has yet to reach a stage where it is regulated by well established and structured institutions as we commonly observe in the so-called democratic states. Ethiopians have almost always been suspicious and felt uncertainties on the process of conducting their elections.
This implies that the results have always had the inclination of being seen or received with skepticism because of mainly lack of transparency in the processes that leads to the polling day and the tabulation of the results. Our past experiences have been shadowed by allegations of manipulations and not clear processes.
It is true in any competition that those who are at the losing end are disappointed and may find it difficult to admit and concede loss with magnanimity or grace and digest the results.
This is especially arduous if there is a feeling and perception that there may have been irregularities in the process of casting the votes and then counting them in a transparent manner where neutral observers are in attendance and work in perfect comfort, not influenced by pressure or interference of any sort.
We have seen in the past that this is however more common or usual in the unstable and not so well established or settled, precarious democracies with multiple challenges in many areas than in the more deeply rooted democratic states of the Western world. We have seen that in those countries’ elections are more or less peaceful formalities that are conducted quite safely.
There are no feelings of anxiety about how they are conducted and how contested issues are actually settled. This is so because there are very well established institutions that can carry out the process without feeling any extra pressure.
They know what it takes to run an election. They do it without any specific, insurmountable challenges. We can easily cite the examples of elections in Italy or Israel where they conduct elections as often as the circumstances demand.
We hardly see any extra problems that would risk the stability of the country even if economic challenges may be exacerbated due to the uncertainties on what sort of government may come to power.
In most African countries that have adopted the electoral system of the west as a solution for their political problems, we have experienced contests not considered free and fair by the parameters that these countries have shown.
In many instances, these countries are also somehow supported by the western countries who help them both financially as well as technically counting on their experiences.
Some of these countries which actually run their elections and contested the results have even resorted to courts while a few have gone even further. They were seen calling for general civil disobedience by their constituencies. Some others have even called for outright resistance or dissent through violent means. Street protests, mass rallies and calls for violence disrupting law and order to pressure the government have been invoked.
For instance, we can cite the case of the recent elections in Ghana, Malawi, Central African Republic, and Cote d’Ivoire which all go down the path of contests of various levels of intensity over results. A few have even called for violence.
The Central African Republic, for instance, is actually sadly engulfed in a civil war with those contesting the results of the elections. They have been marching to the capital after occupying the rest of country through rebel forces. Their intention is to openly overthrow the elected government they consider illegitimate.
In the case of Uganda for instance opposition forces led by the presidential candidate who run against the incumbent have been threatening a court case against the results of the recent elections held in January while in the case of other countries more or less similar tactics have been launched to distance themselves from unfavourable results.
We remember what happened even here in Ethiopia during the 2005 elections when there were allegations of irregularities particularly in the counting of the votes and tabulating them. Opposition forces alleged widespread fraud particularly in the regions where the level of observation of recording the results was reportedly low.
In the end the resistance to accept the results brought the country to the brink of chaos with widespread unrest triggered by calls for rallies.
The then premier called for the putting in place of severe counter measures not compromising with any of the claims of the opposition, then called the Coalition for Unity and Democracy.
Those were historic days and could be cited as one of the epochs during which the elections here were prepared and carried out in an almost unprecedented atmosphere with huge mobilization and participation of the public.
Coming to more recent days, just a few weeks ago the world was to witness what has taken everyone by surprise when, of all countries in the world the so called, the oldest democracy, the USA, by many considered as ‘a beacon of peaceful transfer of power’ had a similar case as would a shaky third world country or what they usually disparagingly call a ‘banana republic’!
It all happened ‘live’ on all major TV channels of the world when some Americans exhibited their outright open rejection of the outcome of the election (which was in fact labeled as the most secure and reliable ever in history) as ‘stolen’ and ‘fraudulent’! Some other times there have been reported cases of foreign interference in the elections as during the 2016 polls. In another case in the year 2000, there were alleged cases of miscalculation or alleged fraud.
But this time around the precautions were so severe and extensive and the counting was done twice in states where the margins were minimal that there was little to doubt on the integrity of the polls. And yet the outgoing president and several law makers of the Republican Party both in Congress as well as in the Senate contested the outcome openly alleging widespread fraud although they did not present any tangible evidence that could secure the acceptance of the courts where the claims were presented.
In fact, they were all dismissed as unfounded. But very strangely those who lost the election bluntly insisted that the voice of the American people was stolen and the president was in the forefront sustaining such claim!
Americans who have always been proud about ‘the sanctity of their electoral process’ and ‘the peaceful transfer of power’ for years to the extent of bragging about it were now embarrassed by such development. And this did create discomfort among many Americans.
Even foreign states who have always taken it as a model for their system and copied it were heard disapproving of the acts. There were reports in the media that people were scared for the first time since time immemorial when the system was put under severe shock by these ‘insurrections’.
The government had to use every means available to dismiss and discredit this development as ‘fabricated’ mainly by the extreme right and the more radically conservative circles.
A full-blown crisis was averted also because the system resulted to be fundamentally strong and resistant even to some rebel elements allegedly favoring the revolt from inside the system itself.
In the end, it was the system itself that defended its sustainability with resilience and now they say ‘we must never take for granted democracy or else we can lose it easily to some extremists’.
Many academics were heard arguing that democracy can never be taken for granted because it needs to be nurtured and always taken care of meticulously. It is vulnerable to abuses by extremists who take advantage of the freedoms democracy grants easily to all.
Many then reflected if such a solid democracy as is the USA can be so challenged by a ‘mob of insurrectionists’ assisted by a series of pronouncements advanced by many powerful people including the president himself, what can the result be in a country such as ours where the institutions are still in infancy and do not seem strong enough to withstand or repel such a shock?! If we consider our institutions such as the National Electoral Board, the Judiciary, the media, the civil societies as well as the consciousness and maturity of the people in general, then if we happened to come under the threat of election contests, how will we cope? That is why we need to look beyond holding the elections only because we must also make sure that the system withstands certain shocks provoked by some who may not like the results.
That is why many people are heard expressing their anxiety when elections take place in our country as in fact we often experience in other African countries as well.
The question many ask remains: Are we ready to risk the integrity and stability of our country to hold elections at all costs or are there enough guarantees that things will proceed with reasonable smoothness and with eventual hiccups controlled? No one wants the country to go under severe stress due to what other countries carry out quite smoothly while we make the issue one of “to be or not to be.”
The Ethiopian Herald January 28/2021
