Flawed Election Management Poses Serious Threat to Democracy-EU

The EU EOM’s findings indicate that while GECOM executed the logistics of the electoral process with relative efficiency, underlying structural issues raise serious concerns about impartiality. Comprising seven members — three appointed by the president, three by parliamentary opposition, and a mutually agreed-upon chairperson — GECOM’s composition is deeply entrenched in political allegiance. This structure has led to a fractured organisation where commissioners often operate along party lines, reinforcing perceptions of bias and eroding public confidence. The chairperson’s frequent deciding vote in favour of the ruling  regime only heightens these suspicions, making it clear that the commission is far from a neutral arbiter.

The report criticises the current tenure of GECOM’s commissioners, noting that their appointments, made between 2007 and 2022, do not represent the changing political landscape reflected in the National Assembly. This static composition has paved the way for discord among commissioners, who have publicly expressed conflicting views on election preparedness, undermining the institution’s credibility. The report firmly recommends a comprehensive review of GECOM’s structure to foster inclusivity and impartial decision-making processes.

Moreover, the lack of transparency within GECOM’s operations has been alarming. Statutory meetings are conducted behind closed doors, and information shared with the public is limited and inconsistent. The EU EOM pointed out that the issuance of only 24 press releases during the election period, many of which were filled with complex jargon,  that cannot be understood by ordinary people, resulted in widespread confusion among electorate members. This lack of a clear and accessible communication strategy not only undermined stakeholder trust but also contributed to an environment ripe for misinformation. A recommendation from the report urges GECOM to implement a comprehensive communication strategy that ensures timely access to vital information, including regulations, decisions, and instructions, in simple language.

Despite these challenges, GECOM managed to administer the elections effectively, overseeing the operation of 2,790 polling stations and recruiting over 11,000 poll workers. Training sessions for these workers were assessed as thorough, displaying the potential for operational success. Nevertheless, the logistical strengths of GECOM did not guarantee an equitable electoral environment. The report observed that GECOM’s public communication strategy impeded transparency, which could have decreased voter confusion significantly. This prompted EU officials to urge improvements in the agency’s public relations efforts.

Critically, the integrity of the voter registration process was also under scrutiny. The EU EOM highlighted concerns regarding the accuracy of the official voter list — comprising 757,690 voters, an increase of 15 percent from the 2020 edition. While a notable surge in registrations was recorded, the metrics have been met with scepticism. The absence of data regarding voter demographics, particularly concerning gender and age, has fuelled suspicion of manipulative practices. Stakeholders, including opposition political factions, noted that the exclusion of Commonwealth citizens in publishing the voter list heightened concerns about transparency. The report emphatically calls for GECOM to release timely voter list data disaggregated by various categories to engender trust in the electoral system.

The procedures surrounding voter registration also came under fire, as a cut-off date of June 30 effectively disenfranchised those who turned 18 between the cut-off and Election Day. Additionally, the truncated claims and objections period — reduced from eleven days to just one week — limited opportunities for eligible voters to correct inaccuracies in their voter profiles. Appallingly, leading up to the elections, the government had not addressed shortcomings in the removal of deceased voters from the list, signalling a critical gap in the reliability of the electoral roll. The EU EOM strongly recommends that GECOM revamp its voter registration processes to include recent population data and to ensure streamlined channels for relevant state institutions to communicate updates regarding voter statuses.

Attention was also drawn to the campaign environment, which, while largely peaceful, revealed alarming inequalities emerging from the ruling party’s advantageous position. The EU EOM found that the

People’s Progressive Party/Civic (PPP/C) and We Invest in Nationhood (WIN) were among the most active political factions, yet claims of an uneven playing field reverberated throughout the campaign period. Observations noted the alarming use of state resources by the ruling party, with public projects launched in close proximity to the elections interpreted as blatant attempts to sway voter allegiance. State-managed resources were reportedly mobilised during over a quarter of observed campaign events hosted by the PPP/C, amplifying concerns over the misuse of public assets for political gain.

Opposition parties have voiced discontent around accessing venues, alleging that the ruling party monopolised public spaces, systematically denying them opportunities to campaign effectively. Reports of civil servants facing pressures to maintain loyalty to the ruling party compounded these issues, with numerous individuals claiming they experienced adverse consequences for supporting rival candidates. Even instances of police passivity during the ruling party’s disruptive activities at opposition events were highlighted in the report, showcasing an imbalance in security provision.

The EU EOM report underscores that the absence of stringent regulations governing campaign conduct has allowed these practices to flourish unchecked. As a priority, the observation mission insists that clear and comprehensive regulations governing the conduct of public officials and the use of state assets must be established to mitigate any undue advantages gained by incumbents in future elections.

Amidst these revelations, the report confirms the importance of maintaining a level playing field to protect the electoral process’s integrity. Recommendations made by the EU EOM include the obligatory adoption of improved frameworks for campaign oversight, stricter restrictions on the use of state resources during election periods, and reinforcing protections against political intimidation.

The structural flaws and operational shortcomings outlined in the EU EOM report starkly illustrate a pressing need for reform within GECOM. Unless significant changes to its organisational structure, transparency protocols, and voter registration practices are enacted, the foundations of our democratic processes remain precarious.