Global concern at the onset of democratic recession has shone a spotlight on the integrity of elections (Cheeseman and Klaas 2018). This is particularly true in countries that have the outward appearance of democracy – holding regular elections, making policy through the legislature – but in many ways continue to operate like authoritarian regimes.
In these ‘electoral-authoritarian’ regimes, opposition parties often allege that governments are only able to remain in power by manipulating the electoral process (Norris et al. 2018).
A commission with weak internal governance – for example, that lacks coherent leadership, is unable to effectively manage its own staff, or faces accusations of corruption – is likely to lose moral authority and to struggle to effectively communicate with political parties and the wider public looking at the case in Ghana going into 2024 presidential and parliamentary elections.
Accusations of wrong doing, especially with regards to the procurement procedures for important electoral materials such as ballot papers or equipment for electronic voter registration, may also be interpreted by opposition parties and a skeptical public as evidence of electoral manipulation – even when this is not the case.
Going into 2024 Presidential and Parliamentary elections, this time round where the stakes are high with unreserved comments and other unprinted words in tabloids and the social media handles and political parties campaign messages agenda is really threatening the peace and the stability of the country as we count down to December 7th polls.
This is especially the case if the Electoral Commission is not seen to be transparent in its dealings with civil society groups, opposition parties, the media and the wider public, to build public trust and confidence, it seems is missing in the conduct of the commission.
Under these conditions, weak governance can undermine the credibility of the commission and hence the integrity of the election itself.
In many but not all cases of disputed elections, a major complaint is that the electoral commission is somehow or other operating in the interests of the ruling party.
By contrast, where electoral commissions are politically neutral, professional and committed to democratic values, they can play an important role in strengthening the electoral process itself.
According to; As Kaaba and Haang’andu (2020: 172) have argued, ‘The legitimacy of elections cannot be separated from the competency, professionalism and independence of the institution administering them.’ Moreover, recent research supported
By global democratic institution findings; it has demonstrated that electoral commissions play an important role in shaping the success – or failure – of long-term efforts to improve electoral integrity.
More specifically, the strength and independence of an electoral commission is a critical factor in whether or not the recommendations made by international election observers are implemented (Dodsworth et al. 2020).
An electoral commission is supposed to be non-partisan, that is, it should not in its decisions or actions benefit any particular political parties (IDEA 2014).
It adds a lot to the credibility of an electoral commission if it is perceived to be non-partisan, which in turn impacts directly on the electoral commission’s perceived electoral integrity.
This is especially the case in new democracies, where electoral commissions often both organise and manage the electoral process and are responsible for counting the votes and announcing the results.
Inadvertently indeed, in some cases, for example such as Zimbabwe where, the electoral commission also plays an important role in identifying and drafting the very electoral regulations that it is responsible for enforcing rules governing the elections.
Similarly, in Kenya the electoral commission is responsible both for a number of contentious issues such as boundary demarcation and plays a leading role in voter education, as well as managing the organisation of voter registration and of course the election itself.
In these contexts – as well as in a number of countries in, for example, it is clear why the credibility of the electoral commission weighs so heavily on perceptions of electoral quality (Birch 2008).
In Ghana we have witness a lot of electoral reforms in the fourth republic and the country credibility in conducting election, has come down and there is a need for the Electoral Commissioner, to employ the experience independent stake holders and factual opinion’s from the political parties and other stake holders have to be engaged, to chart a course of trust and confidence in our electoral system.
The credibility of the electoral commission has two main components: independence and performance. In turn, performance can be broken down into two main capacities: capacity and governance.
It would be appropriate to ensure independence, understood to be the formal and informal independence of the commission from partisan political and other influence.
In principle, partisan interference may come from either the ruling party or the opposition (or both), but in practice the accusation is usually that the ruling party is able to use its greater power and resources to bend the commission to its will.
However, important aspects of electoral commission independence include whether it has: a strong legal foundation that insulates it from politics; an appointments procedure that ensures that commissioners are credible individuals and not simply stooges of one party or another.
In another development, security of tenure so that commissioners can make unpopular decisions without fear of losing their job; autonomy over decision-making in key areas such as staffing, the budget, and decision making in relation to acquisition of election related materials such as ballot papers; and the right to announce the election result without this having to be first signed off by another institution.
When electoral commissions are not seen to be independent, the election results that they announce are likely to be called into question, even if they are accurate.
In my opinion lets we as a country focus on the independence of electoral commission as this is a particularly important driver of public perceptions of electoral integrity. While it is also the hardest characteristic to conceptualise and measured.
In my view such commissions are not intended to be fully independent by definition and so do not fall within our scope.
Given this, it is important to note that we do not address electoral management bodies that take the form of either government institutions (that is, those that are formally part of the government) or have a ‘mixed’ (part government and part independent) set up.
Let’s be reminded that, there is a need for all stake holders to come on board to shape and planned the election timetable devoid of any hidden interest see the country overcome the hurdle of 2024 elections which is very crucial within the sub region engulf with coups and political instability.
AYM Kukah.E:mail:kukahalexander7@gmail.com
