An electoral coup in Namibia?
First published in Amandla!.
Namibia had her 8th general election. The results of the National Assembly elections held in November 2024 were: South West Africa People's Organisation (SWAPO) (53%), the Independent Patriots for Change (IPC) (20%), the Affirmative Repositioning (AR) Movement (7%), the Popular Democratic Movement (PDM) (5%), the Landless People’s Movement (LPM) (5%), South West Africa National Union (SWANU) (1%), the Namibian Economic Freedom Fighters (NEFF) (1%), etc. In the presidential election, the SWAPO candidate, Netumbo Nandi-Ndaitwah, got 57%, while the IPC’s Panduleni Itula secured 26% (29% in 2019).
Namibian citizens came out to vote in large numbers. There were 13% more registered voters than in 2019, and altogether, 90% of the 1.4 million voters registered. The majority were youth who were undoubtedly inspired by Botswana and South Africa, namely, that it is possible to get rid of the corrupt ruling elite. It was, therefore, the most crucial election after political independence as it was, first and foremost, an anti-corruption election. Secondly, the youth are sick and tired of unemployment and poverty. These were the main issues of the election. That is why, prior to the balloting, the Namibia Statistics Agency released a report without the unemployment statistics to try and hide the enormous joblessness rate among young people. But the disaster of mass unemployment is seen everywhere.
If the official results are to be believed, SWAPO obtained 53% this time, down from 65% in 2019. It lost 12 seats, including that of Utoni Nujoma, who was the minister of labour, industrial relations and employment creation. The critical change, however, is that Namibia has a new opposition party, the IPC, which was formed in 2020. It succeeded in presenting itself as an inclusive and non-ethnocentric party with a leadership connected to the grassroots. The IPC picked up 20 seats but — together with some opposition parties — refused to recognise the official outcomes and will go to the electoral court to challenge it. It remains to be seen, though, if the SWAPO-dominated judiciary will deliver justice.
In 2009, the electoral court called for a recount of votes, although the government maintained that the ballot boxes were apparently destroyed by rain seeping into a warehouse, while in 2019, that court declared the electronic voting machines as unconstitutional but did not proclaim the election as null and void. Thus, a cloud hangs over the electoral court. The second biggest opposition party now, the AR, has a base among the youth but will unfortunately not join the court challenge. Likewise, the LPM and SWANU will also not. Personality differences weaken the opposition. It might also be mentioned that, surprisingly, SWANU managed to acquire one seat despite having been wracked by internal bickering and ideological deterioration.
Voting was marred by widespread irregularities. In opposition areas such as Windhoek (Khomas region), Walvisbay, Swakopmund (Erongo region), Keetmanshoop and Lüderitz (IIKaras region), the ballot papers ran out after a few hours on election day. An estimated 113,000 voters could not vote in the Khomas region on 27 November. With the two-day ‘extension’ on 29 and 30 November, only one polling station was provided for the Khomas region and none for Erongo and IIKaras — without any proper explanation from the SWAPO-controlled Electoral Commission of Namibia (ECN) to date. In the end, the total votes in Khomas were about 187 000. Around 95,000 voters could not cast their ballot even after the extension. Only 4,900 made it to the single polling station in Windhoek over the two days. So, there was about a 66% voter turnout in Khomas, compared to around 77% nationally of registered voters. Was this voter suppression? What about Erongo and IIKharas, who could not continue to vote? In fact, only 8 out of 121 constituencies voted on the extra days.
Needless to say, this was such a flagrant and brazen violation of the democratic rights of Namibian citizens and undeniably qualifies as voter suppression. The ECN did not even bother to consult the opposition parties about the extension. In addition, the final outcomes for hardly more than one million voters were only announced on 3 December, several days later, after the drip feeding of results while people were voting during the extension.
On the other hand, the SWAPO-dominated northern rural regions of Namibia showed a remarkably large number of voters were able to vote. It is noteworthy, however, that the results of polling stations in those regions were not reported separately by the ECN, only as an entire region. Take, for example, Omusati (12 polling stations) (SWAPO 102 561, IPC 15 337), Ohangwena (12 polling stations) (SWAPO 94 217, IPC 18 465) and Oshana (11 polling stations) (SWAPO 58 774, IPC 30 324). This means that most — if not all — polling stations in those rural areas had very high voter turnouts on 27 November and did not have too many problems with ballot papers or verification devices like in opposition areas. In the Ohangwena region, for instance, 10,355 people voted on day one at the Engela polling station, and SWAPO got 7,518 of the votes, while in Okongo, a total of 12,363 voted in the presidential election, of which the SWAPO candidate received 10,715. Another unusual result was Rundu Urban (Kavango East), where 22,948 voted in one day (SWAPO 15 143, IPC 3 951).
Can the ECN, therefore, provide us with the number of votes at each polling station? These high numbers do not make sense, and it is hardly unreasonable to say that the suspected foul play must be thoroughly investigated. In Omusati, where there were seven polling stations for those two extra days, a mere 131 people voted. So, where did those extreme figures for that region come from? In the Okatyali constituency (Oshana), the seven polling stations processed four voters over the extended period. Again, no explanation from the ECN. Was the extension a smokescreen to try and justify the abnormal numbers in those areas?
Of course, if it is considered that the ECN printed an additional 400 000 (29%) ballot papers, instead of the standard 5% extra, then it must be assumed that the unavailability was deliberate. The argument that citizens could vote anywhere still does not explain the huge shortages. Could the electoral body, therefore, produce the unused ballot papers? What exactly happened to the 400,000 ballots? If anything, it seems like a sophisticated strategy of ballot stuffing and voter suppression was implemented, not necessarily by the ECN.
A report from the (independent) Southern Africa Human Rights Lawyers (SAHRL) Election Observer Mission, focusing on voting procedures at 219 polling stations all over Namibia, indicated that most of the stations did not have the necessary voting material and were unprepared to start. There were no voters’ rolls displayed at any station and shortages of ballot papers from as early as 11.00 am on voting day. Professor Talent Rusere, a High Commissioner with the SAHRL, speaking on Kosmos Radio news on 3 December, was scathing in his criticism and called the election a scandal. He asserted that Angolans were brought into Namibia to vote and that ZANU-PF was involved in the sham. In fact, both leaders of the AR and the LPM were similarly of the view that the Zimbabwe ruling elite were implicated behind the scenes. The NEFF accused SWAPO of bringing in two busloads of voters from Angola to Oshakati East (Oshana).
The manipulation of the ballot papers made the rigging of the Namibian elections subtle and largely invisible. But the elections were clearly not credible and must be declared as invalid as soon as possible. Namibian citizens should demand a re-run, but it would have to be supervised by a different electoral body. The electoral coup must be reversed to protect democracy in Namibia.
Shaun Whittaker and Harry Boesak are members of the Marxist Group of Namibia.
Namibia elects its first woman president
No comments:
Post a Comment