. Mutesa

By CHARLES SIMENGWA –
IT is not news that voter apathy is bad for any country, but to suggest that it should attract penalties raises the question on how far it compromises the heart of democracy.
If the general demeanour of the electorate resembles that of sullen prisoners, should that be surprising, or should it call for a critical examination on why many people do not seem eager to exercise their right at the polling booth?
It may be something of an esoteric view, but a resident of Chipata District has introduced a subject that many people are likely to dismiss as odd.
Isaac Mtolo, in his submissions to the Legal and Justice Sector Reform Commission that sat in Eastern Province recently, said many Zambians do not take voting seriously and “deliberately” stay away from polling booths.
He petitioned the Commission to introduce penalties for people who shun voting to avoid apathy during elections.
“For example, those in villages should be made to pay chickens for not voting. Some voters deliberately cause apathy,” Mr Mtolo was quoted by the Zambia Daily Mail of November 24, 2014.
From his standpoint, voting is not only one’s right but a valuable undertaking.
According to the seventh edition of the Oxford Advanced Learner’s Dictionary, apathy is the feeling of not being interested in or enthusiastic about anything.
Over the years, many reasons have been offered for being the cause of voter apathy, but the major debates have been around unfulfilled promises by political leaders.
It is not surprising that so much of Zambia’s population has surrendered to apathy on account of some promises made during election campaigns, but were abandoned when a political leader or leaders ascended to power.
Many people are used to seeing political leaders swarming their constituencies as they clamour for votes, but they are left on their own when the election fever ends and the victors ‘comfortably’ take their seats in Parliament or in councils.
But as opposed to the jarring submission by Mr Mtolo for voter apathy to become punishable, it is perhaps time for civic organisations to raise the bar on voter education.
Political parties should be goaded into answering some vital questions on their manifestos instead of allowing them to persistently attack rival parties and turning that into a campaign tool.
It appears to be fashionable for nearly all the political parties in Zambia to thrive on petty – and mostly personality – attacks when they should be selling their vision for the country and the consequent improvement in the living standards of the people.
Some politicians have taken advantage of the widespread ignorance among some voters, particularly in rural areas and poor urban townships, to distribute t-shirts and other party attire as a way to attract votes.
The enlightened population is discouraged by political parties which waste their time on non-issues.
An election conflict management adviser from the European Centre for Electoral Support has prescribed a partial solution to the bothersome problem of voter apathy.
Victoria Florinder, who spoke on the sidelines of a Leadership and Conflict Management for Electoral Stakeholders workshop recently, cited ‘political fatigue’ as one of the contributing factors to the growing apathy.
Ms Florinder urged the electorate to identify key issues which they want political parties to address if they are voted into office, and critically study their manifestos.
“It’s also up to political parties to communicate. That’s what they should do during campaigns, but unfortunately they speak about lack of quality of the other party,” she said.
In the light of this, it is necessary to examine Zambians for Empowerment and Development president, Fredrick Mutesa’s piece of advice.
“The first issue we would like to raise is the need for all candidates to moderate their promises with realism. Whoever wins the January 20, 2015 election will only have 20 months in office before being faced with another electoral test.
“Realistically, that means they will only have one budget cycle to implement their promises. The pressure to gain competitive advantage over rivals through making unrealistic promises should, therefore, be avoided,” Dr Mutesa said in a recent statement.
He further advised political party leaders taking part in the by-election, which would be held following the death of President Michael Sata on October 28, 2014, that in outlining their long-term visions, emphasis should be placed on what they intend to achieve in the 20 months after the election.
Dr Mutesa said promising all things to all people would only create a crisis of unfulfilled expectations which would return to haunt the victorious party in the September 2016 general elections.
“Second, we believe that in between the 2015 and 2016 elections, whoever will be elected into office should explain how they intend to complete the Constitution-making process, address the perennial problem of the Food Reserve Agency late payments to farmers, finance the infrastructural development projects that Government has already embarked on, and improve the management and utilisation of public resources.
“We believe these are some of the key issues that presidential hopefuls and their supporters should be debating about,” he said.
Dr Mutesa also cautioned contestants not to “mortgage” Zambia to foreign interests out of desperation to raise campaign funds.
Violence is another contributing factor to apathy as some people are scared of exercising their right to vote.
Prior to the 2011 general elections, former Anti-Voter Apathy Project (AVAP) executive director Bonnie Tembo appealed to the Rupiah Banda-led administration to break the silence over the alleged existence of militia groups in the MMD.
AVAP said if the president did not address the issue of the militia groups, the elections would be subjected to greater risks.
According to Mr Tembo, the amended 1996 Constitution outlawed the formation of private armies or militia groups by political parties or private organisations. It is only the State which is permitted to have national defence forces.
He was particularly concerned that youths were being lured into joining illegal groupings for the purpose of exporting violence to political opponents.
Since AVAP’s mission is “to contribute to Zambia’s socio-economic, political and democratic development processes through empowerment of citizens with information, skills and knowledge for their effective participation”, this is where the civil society should play the important role of voter education.
It is also important to note voter apathy is not unique to Zambia or indeed Africa. In outlining the causes and remedies for voter apathy in British elections, Ioannis Kolovos and Phil Harris note that socio-economic characteristics affect political behaviour, identification with a party’s values, and people’s propensity to vote. They observe that social factors may influence turnout by limiting the access of voters to political information and may affect their party identification.
Overall, the two major influences on turnout in the UK have been age and party identification.
Factors such as social status, educational level and gender have exerted a fairly weak influence, while strong political competition and ideological cleavages between parties tended to increase turnout.
A study showed that turnout in 2001 was influenced by four major factors which included the electorate’s evaluation of party leaders, the electorate’s perception of the country’s economic performance, the electorate’s discontent with the delivery of public services, and the electorate’s interest in the campaign.
In the United States (US), Palash Ghosh, writing in the International Business Times, noted that one of the consistent themes underlying US politics has been voter apathy, as large numbers of eligible Americans boycott participating in elections.
According to official government data, between 1960 and 2008, the percentage of eligible voters who have bothered to cast their ballots during the presidential elections has ranged from about 49 per cent to 63 per cent.
This means that as much as half of American voters do not care enough to decide which candidate would make a good chief executive.
The very tight 1960 battle between John F. Kennedy and Richard M. Nixon represented a 50-year peak in turnout, with 63.1 per cent of the voting-age population casting a vote.
The lowest turnout was recorded in 1996, when Bill Clinton defeated Bob Dole, as only 49.1 per cent voted.
In 2008, when Barack Obama became the first mixed-race president in history (a campaign that received monumental media coverage), a relatively modest 56.8 per cent of eligible Americans voted.
The turnout during mid-term elections is even more dismal, generally ranging between 47 per cent and 36 per cent over the past half-century.
Jamie Chandler, a professor of political science at Hunter College in New York City, says US voter turnout lags other western democracies by about 10 to 15 per cent.
This has to do with many factors, including the American system of representation, the wide socio-economic and demographic variation in the public, and the way political parties and candidates engage voters.
Apathy, according to Professor Chandler, plays a role, but it is much smaller than socio-economics.
Apathy, or people not caring about politics, has a lot to do whether or not people believe their voice matters.
People with higher incomes and education levels are much more likely to vote. They have the advantage of being more informed about politics and are also more sensitive to political conditions because of their careers, family, and property ownership.
Most of these factors could not be likened to Zambia’s situation because of the different social demography, literacy levels, economic endowments, and other characteristics far removed from the Western world.
However, whether or not Mr Mtolo’s submission to make voter apathy punishable is acceptable is a matter open for debate.