Members of the Diplomatic Corps,
Leaders and Representatives of Political Parties,
Fellow colleagues in the civil society organisations,
Members of the Press, Invited guests,
Ladies and Gentlemen,
The
Foundation for Democratic Process (FODEP) monitored all the processes leading
to 2001 Presidential, Parliamentary and Local government elections. On
polling day itself, we deployed 6,247 monitors in polling stations while
others were roving monitors.
Based
on our pre-election monitoring and information from the observation forms
on election day from almost 90% of our monitors, we have prepared an Interim
report on the 2001 tripartite elections. The Report, which covers 11 components
of the electoral process that were monitored, highlight some of the difficulties
experienced in conducting reasonably successful and widely acceptable election
results.
Our
interim statement is quite detailed, but for the purpose of this press
briefing, I will read a summarised version.
From the pre-election monitoring reports, FODEP has come to the conclusion that the preparations of the elections were not adequately and properly handled. For instance, the delimitation exercise ended up being a review of constituency boundaries as opposed to the real delimitation. Though the exercise was undertaken, there were no changes in the number of constituencies. The exercise only resulted in the increment of polling stations from 4,610 to 5,509. However, the increment of polling stations was commendable, though the experience on voting day showed the need for more polling districts in most high density areas.
FODEP
wishes to recognise the positive efforts made by the Electoral Commission
of Zambia to discard the most despised 1996 voters’ register prepared by
an Israel company called NIKUV. Such an action in itself had contributed
to political confidence in the process. Unfortunately the voter registration
exercise failed to meet the stakeholders’ expectations in terms of the
number of registered voters. The 2,604,761 registered voters may seem to
represent 71% of the estimated number of 3,649,255 eligible voters by the
Central Statistical Office in their 2000 Census of population Report. However,
subsequent reports from the CSO indicate that the estimated number of eligible
voters is 4,687,997, which means that the number of registered voters represent
55% of the estimated eligible voters.
Ladies and Gentlemen, going by the overwhelming
voter turn of about 70% of the registered voters, it is fair to assume
that if the voter registration exercise had not been bungled, the total
number of registered voters could have been much higher. From FODEP’s assessment,
the voter registration exercise failed to yield necessary results because
of late funding of the Electoral Commission by the Government. FODEP noted
that at a time the Electoral Commission should have been funded, the government
was planning to undertake a national referendum on the possibility of amending
the Constitution to pave way for President Chiluba’s third term.
The
orchestration of the abortive campaign for President Chiluba’s campaign
was deeply regrettable as it diverted the nation’s attention from addressing
electoral issues in good time. This resulted in a crisis management of
the voter registration exercise by the Commission. The inadequate and erratic
funding of the National Registration Department also contributed to lower
voter registration. As you may all be aware, being in possession of a National
Registration card is a pre-requisite for voter registration. Unfortunately,
owing to logistical constraints faced by the Department, there was a backlog
of citizens demanding to be issued with green NRCs. The situation was worse
in Eastern, Southern and Western Provinces where the mobile exercise of
issuing NRCs had not yet started even after the voter registration exercise
had started. The desperation by the public to get NRCs, coupled with the
inadequate capacity of the National Registration Department, gave way to
corruption and political interference in the issuance of NRCs, especially
by the District Administrators.
That was quite unfortunate as a selected number of people could have been facilitated to register as voters through the issuance of NRCs at the expense of others. FODEP also found out that there were some mobile teams issuing NRCs on the Copperbelt at a time when the Home affairs Minister had announced that the teams had moved to Eastern, Southern and Western provinces.
Ladies
and gentlemen, FODEP also monitored the election campaigns by various political
parties in various parts of the country. While the campaigns were generally
going on well, there were widespread reports of flagrant violation of the
Electoral Code of Code (Statutory Instrument No. 96 of 1996). The Code
has continued to be breached or ignored with impunity due to lack of enforcement
by the law enforcement officers. For instance, there were some political
hooligans in Chienge Constituency in Luapula who were believed to have
been hired to disrupt campaign meetings by the opposition. One of the victims
was Zambia Republican Party (ZRP) President Mr. Ben Mwila who had to resort
to firing live bullets in self defence. On the Copperbelt, Patriotic Front
President, Mr. Michael Sata was beaten right in Ichengelo Radio Station
by suspected hired political thugs as he was participating in a paid for
campaign programme. FODEP finds such kind of political behaviour reprehensible
in a democratic society.
Another
area of breach of the Electoral Code of Conduct was the selective application
of the Public Order Act. FODEP is concerned that the constitutional freedom
of Assembly continues to be undermined by the discriminatory manner in
which the police apply the Public Order Act. While cadres and officials
of the ruling party could hold public meetings, rallies, processions or
demonstrations at any given time, those holding alternative views from
those of government were denied the right to do so. In some cases meetings
for opposition parties were violently disrupted.
FODEP
found that election campaigns were mostly affected when the President was
on the campaign trail. The Police officers literally banned all public
campaign programmes for the opposition parties in the respective areas,
in some cases in the entire districts, just because the President would
be in an area on an unknown date. This is unfair as it gives undue advantage
to the ruling party. FODEP has noted that some requirements of the Public
Order Act still give lee-way to the police to apply the Act as if those
notifying them about a public event were seeking permission as the case
was before it was amended in 1996. This Act must be reviewed further to
protect and promote the fundamental freedoms of Assembly which is indispensable
in a democracy, especially during election campaigns.
In
addition to this, he was accorded state vehicles and security, yet he was
not even a government officer at that time. The sale of government and
mine houses was used to gain political mileage as President Chiluba issued
title deeds at a campaign rally on the Copperbelt. Those who did not collect
their title deeds were told to collect them from the District Administrators
Office.
Ladies and Gentlemen, the District Administrators’ office has been used as a conduit for syphoning government resources for partisan political campaigns and activities of the ruling party. The DAs have been actively involved in campaigning for the ruling MMD. Yet as civil servants they are not allowed to participate in active politics. In spite of the High court ruling on December 4, 2001 after being sued by the Civil servants Union of Zambia (CSUZ) and the Law Association of Zambia (LAZ) for participating in politics, they ignored the ruling and continued campaigning for the MMD. This is quite regrettable especially that in a democracy, the government is supposed to show exemplary behaviour when it comes to respecting the rule of law.
FODEP,
therefore, is calling on the President-elect to immediately abolish the
position of District Administrator in order to end wastage of meagre national
resources on an office that is clearly meant to advance partisan political
interest of the ruling elite at the expense of national development.
Presidential Discretionary Fund
The President-elect must also scrap the Presidential discretionary fund that has infamously come to be known as Presidential slush fund because of the manner it has been abused. FODEP has noted that the fund has been used to win political support and has been widely used to undermine a level political playing field during election campaigns.
Ladies and Gentlemen, it is not a secret that public media organisations, by virtue of their organisational structures, are operating under difficult circumstances of being interfered with by the government. FODEP is therefore calling for comprehensive media reforms. One of the reforms should be the selection of boards of directors through a process of public enquiry from a cross section of society to avoid having people with the same political views serving on boards.
FODEP wishes to commend the European Union for sponsoring live Television and Radio discussion programmes in connection with the 2001 elections. The programme enabled the various opposition party presidents who were not being fairly covered or not covered at all by the public media, to explain their vision for the country. The electorate were also able to assess the respective Presidential Candidates that appeared on TV or participated on radio programmes. Unfortunately, there were efforts by the government to suppress the public debates in the electronic media as evidenced by problems the Trinity Broadcasting Network (TBN) faced in airing the debates. ZNBC also cancelled a live TV discussion by Presidential candidates which was arranged and paid for in advance. The replacement of the programme with an interview with President Chiluba clearly showed that the action by ZNBC was politically motivated. FODEP deplores any form of suppression of alternative views and information as the practice is incompatible with the dictates of a plural and democratic society that Zambia has been fighting and continues to fight for.
FODEP
has over the years noted that Section 69 of the Penal Code that was intended
to protect the dignity and reputation of the Presidency is increasingly
being used to stifle legitimate and reasonably justifiable criticisms of
the President.
It is FODEP’s view that robust debate, even with caustic and virulent language
should not be stifled in a democracy. We therefore feel that the law pertaining
to defamation of the President should be scrapped. Anyone who gets into
a political office must not be insulated from criticisms by law. In fact,
the law pertaining to criminal defamation must altogether be repealed.
Those who feel that they have been defamed, including the President, can
still use civil defamation law.
FODEP
was impressed with the high voter turn out experienced on polling day.
The voter turn out was 70% of the 2,604.761 registered voters.
However, we are deeply concerned with some grave shortcomings in the management and conduct of the polls by the Electoral Commission of Zambia. Most polling stations throughout the country, including in Lusaka’s Mandevu and Matero constituencies, opened late due to late delivery of election materials such as ballot boxes and papers. FODEP, of course, recognises that logistical constraints are expected in the management of such a mammoth task.
However,
the prevalence of such problems and the fact that the Commission could
have problems in delivering election materials in time even within urban
polling stations in Lusaka, demonstrated sheer organisational and administrative
inadequacies on the part of the Commission. In some cases there were inadequate
and wrong ballot papers delivered to polling stations, while elections
for local government were deferred to an unknown date in a good number
of wards as a result of either lack of ballot papers or wrong ballot papers
being sent to polling stations. In some polling stations there were either
inadequate polling booths or ballot boxes.
As
a result of such inadequacies in the conduct of polls, there were extreme
variations in voting periods and opportunities afforded to the electorate
in various polling stations. While legally polling stations are supposed
to open at 06:00 hours on polling day, some polling stations were opening
as late as 16:00 hours on December 27. FODEP commends the Electoral Commission
for directing their officers to extend voting in polling stations where
voting started late. Unfortunately, there were also variations in the implementation
of that order. Some officers allowed voters to continue joining the voting
line even in polling stations where voting started on time. There were
also cases of election officers turning away voters who were already in
the queues by 17:00 hours. The reasons given ranged from misinterpretation
of the law, which states that polling stations close at 17:00 hours, to
complaints by the officers that they were too tired to continue working.
Others refused to continue working after 17:00 hours saying the Electoral
Commission was not going to pay them over time.
FODEP
also observed that the voting process was too slow, resulting in voters
queuing for abnormally long hours. In some cases, voting went on throughout
the night. There were some polling stations which did not have adequate
light while in some cases polling Assistants, Polling Party Agents and
Monitors slept as voting and counting went on. There were also some cases
where casting of votes was done in different rooms from where Party Agents
and Monitors were seated because the rooms where polling booths were erected
were too small to accommodate the monitors and party agents. This was unfortunate
and made the monitoring exercise ineffective.
FODEP
sympathises with the election officers who had to work for long hours,
in some cases for three consecutive days. This, however, could have facilitated
possible human errors as a result of fatigue or deliberate manipulation.
However, other than such shortcomings, the voting and counting processes
were generally transparent.
Ladies
and gentlemen, FODEP received reports of lack of security of voters’ cards
and ballot papers, as well as ballot boxes after voting. There were reports
of people collecting the uncollected voters’ cards and using them to obtain
NRCs prior to polling day. Such people, in some cases, voted. The genuine
voters were surprised to find that their names had already been canceled
from the register, yet they had not voted.
There
was also intimidation and corruption of the electorate in some areas. For
instance, in Itezhi-Tezhi, a woman was arrested for being in possession
of RVI registration forms and voters’ cards which she had collected from
the electorate whom she promised to pay K50,000 each after voting for a
particular candidate. In Northen Province, there were reports of individuals
“buying” voters’ cards from their opponent’s supporters to make it impossible
for them to vote.
The
addition of ballot papers was generally done in a transparent manner. However,
FODEP is still verifying some election result figures from the monitors
and those announced by the Electoral Commission of Zambia which do not
tally. FODEP has also seen the need for close monitoring of the process
of data entry of election results sent by Returning Officers to the ECZ
before they are announced. FODEP discovered one case where the results
for a Presidential candidate were wrongly entered as 955 instead of 3,955
votes. This could have been an innocent human error, but it exposed a possibility
of deliberately doctoring the election results at that point of tallying
election results. There are several figures that do not tally with the
official results announced, and as I have said, FODEP is still undertaking
a reconciliation of election results.
FODEP
suggests that the election forms containing results sent by the Returning
officers to the ECZ must be counter signed by Polling Party Agents. Those
entering the results should not enter any election results that are received
on a form that is not countersigned before finding out why no one else
signed the form. This will minimise mistakes and suspicions of altering
election figures.
Though the announcement of election results was transparently done, there was unnecessary delay and selective announcement of results. For instance, election results from Monze central and Livingstone were not announced by the Commission two days after polling day. Yet, results from far flung areas that came much later were quickly announced, so were the results that were favourable to the MMD candidates. This created unnecessary tension and speculation that some results were being withheld to facilitate manipulation of some results or create a wrong public impression about the election outcome.
FODEP
is also deeply concerned about the role of the Office of the President
in elections. There are regular and uniformed police officers and party
agents that are assigned at polling stations. Why then should the OP be
involved in monitoring elections? FODEP has found that the involvement
of the OP in elections has been viewed with grave suspicion by various
stakeholders. This contributes to undermining public confidence and trust
in the electoral process. Therefore, we wish to call upon the government
to stop involving the officers of the Office of the President in elections.
FODEP’s
preliminary overview of the 2001 elections indicates that the Electoral
Commission of Zambia lacked the required capacity, mainly in terms of manpower
and logistical support to efficiently and adequately conduct tripartite
elections. It was very clear that most election officials were overcome
with fatigue during critical stages of conducting the elections such as
counting. This rendered the process of adding or tabulating the election
results vulnerable to possible manipulation or distortion due to either
innocent human error or deliberate manipulation.
According
different opportunities to voters by not having standard voting times,
as seen in most polling stations which kept on allowing people to join
the queue at any time and vote, while in some polling stations voters that
had been in the queue by 17:00 were not allowed to vote, amounted to unequal
treatment under the law.
After
analysing almost 90% of election observation forms from the 6,247 FODEP
monitors, and also considering the pre-election monitoring reports, it
is FODEP’s well considered, factual and honest view that the 2001 elections
were not efficiently and successfully conducted. As a result, this has
raised serious questions regarding the legitimacy and credibility of the
election results. This is very unfortunate as it has created public contempt
of the outcome of the election as evidenced by public demonstrations at
a time the President-elect was being sworn in. That indicates the measure
of legitimacy, or lack of it, of the just ended elections.
FODEP
also wishes to strongly recommend that the original requirement of a Presidential
candidate winning by 51% which the country had been using from 1964 until
1996 be restored. The Presidency is a very serious position and anyone
elected to it must enjoy a mandate from a reasonably high number of voters.
A situation where a President is elected by about 30% of the voters as
the case was during the last elections does not give credibility to the
office of the Republican Presidency.
I thank you all most sincerely for coming and listening.