By Ralph Sesay
Sierra Leone’s electoral system has been plagued with a plethora of problems as reported by international observers who have continued to observe our elections since 1996 when we had our first democratic elections.
Year-in, year-out, they have noticed or brought out reports on the general conduct of these elections. They have also highlighted key recommendations, ranging from the political, constitutional and framework and a number of other key policy issues. The rational is to be able to effect serious remedial measures to make the process better and free for all.
Almost all the regimes that have ruled the country since 1996 have reneged on these policy issues. This piece would attempt to bring onboard these issues holistically as reported by the key election observation missions that monitored the March 7th and March 31st polls.
Political Environment
The European Union Observation Mission for the 2018 elections and the Electoral Institute for Sustainable Elections In Africa (EISA) have stated, in their preliminary reports, that the March polls were very much competitive, in the sense that the elections were transitional, coupled with the emergence of the National Grand Coalition, which, according to them, served as an immediate threat to the traditional APC and SLPP.
They further cited the 55% threshold as a further contributor to the competitiveness since all the big strong parties wanted a win in the first round.
EISA and EU/OM have also pointed out some uncertainties that have surrounded the process, such as the uncertainty around an elections date since. According to them, the then President Ernest Koroma was perceived to have been very reluctant to announce a date which led to speculations that he wanted a third term limit.
They cited in their report the issue of the Constitutional Review Committee (CRC) in which, according to them, there was huge disappointment within the civil populace and members of the press and civil society that only 33 of the 138 recommendations of the Committee were approved in the Government White Paper. Most of the recommendations hailed as very progressive to the process were not countenanced by the Government.
Lastly, under this column, was the Supreme Court matter against the candidacy of the National Grand Coalition Leader, Dr. Kandeh Yumkella. The matter, which remains unresolved prior to the polls, also created tension and uncertainty in the process.
Constitutional and legal Framework
According to the observers, the elections were closely conducted with reference to the existing national legislations and laws and also regional and international protocols.
Even with this, the observers consider the 55% threshold as fairly high. According to them, the system does not adequately address the trend of ethnic politics as it remains possible for candidates to win based on the support received from their ethnic base. They suggested the introduction of a minimum regional electorate threshold while also lowering the national threshold.
It was observed that whiles there is a law that provides for independent candidates in parliamentary and local elections, they clearly observed that the same privilege is not accorded to presidential elections. This, according to them, has impinged on the principle of equal opportunity ‘to vote and be voted for’.
Another key provision in the legal framework, according to the observers, provided for the non-discrimination and equal participation of all types of people in the electoral process, but they observed that there is no affirmative action to promote this participation and representation of these vulnerable and underrepresented groups, such as women, youths and people with disability. This, according to them, reflected in their low representation in the entire process.
Elections management
The establishment of the National Electoral Commission (NEC) was provided for in Chapter 5 of the 1991 Constitution of Sierra Leone. Five Electoral Commissioners, according to the Act, are appointed by the President in close consultations with other political leaders and with the approval of Parliament.
According to ESIA and EU/OM, the independence of NEC is guaranteed by the Constitution and reinforced by the Public Elections Act of 2012. But the direct reporting and accountability mechanisms, wherein the Commission reports directly to the President for tabling to Parliament, compromises the independence of NEC. They noted.
Lastly, it was also hugely noted that, while there are clear procedures to account for the contingency ballot at polling stations and for storage of these ballots after elections, procedures for destruction of the ballots are not clearly provided.
The observer mission calls on NEC to be transparent in the handling and safe storage of the unused ballots in the post election period.
To be continued.