TESSA DOOMS | We trust IEC to use its mandate to protect elections against all costs

On May 29, South Africans will vote in the 7th national and provincial elections since entering into an era of democracy 30 years ago.

One of the key features of contemporary democracy in any country is the ability to regularly hold free, fair and credible elections to elect public representatives to form a government, chosen by the people.

For a young and fledgling democracy, SA has the benefit of a track record of elections free from mass violence, with a process that is transparent and trusted and outcomes that have not been challenged in courts.

The  Electoral Commission of SA (IEC) has played an integral role in ensuring elections we can all be proud of. In addition to the 6th national and provincial elections, the IEC has conducted major local government elections, and hundreds of by-elections at local levels throughout the years.

Held accountable by parliament and through the judicial processes of the special electoral courts, the IEC has produced credible results and withstood challenges with transparency, demonstrations of its independence and professionalism under pressure.

In 2021, for instance the IEC, faced with the Covid-19 crisis, appealed to the courts to allow for a later election to be better prepared. When the courts denied its request, the IEC was left with 42 days to pull together and deliver a credible election.

It did so with limited time for registration weekends that it would have preferred, but still delivered. No institution is perfect, and so the IEC too cannot be held to the standard of perfection, but if it does fall short it must be transparent and accountable to maintain the trust of the electorate.

The 2024 elections are proving to be a challenge for the IEC. In the months of March and April it has been in court in over 10 cases. Many of these were cases where parties have directly challenged its administrative processes.

The IEC has successfully defended its processes as fair and decisions as valid in all but one case, that of the Umkhonto weSizwe Party’s challenge of the decision to uphold the objections to the candidacy of former president Jacob Zuma.

Zuma’s candidature was objected to on the basis that he had been sentenced to a term of imprisonment longer than 12 months. The IEC’s decision to uphold this objection was thought to be fairly uncontroversial, but the MK Party and the electoral court disagreed and ruled against the IEC, reinstating his candidacy.

The IEC has since taken this judgement for constitutional review to the Constitutional Court. While some question the wisdom in their decision to do so, the IEC contends that it is using this opportunity to seek clarity, publicly and finally on their interpretation of the constitution given the long-term implications of this judgment on their work.

Whether the IEC wins or loses the Constitutional Court challenge, it is true that the outcome will provide clarity and certainty that will aid its work well beyond this election. It may not be the most popular or comfortable decision to make, but the decisions of the IEC must always be those that lead to the most credible outcome rather than the most popular one.

This is a thin line to walk. The IEC’s greatest currency is trust, but building trust does not require mere popularity but logical, ethical and defensible positions determined in transparent and legally sound ways.

The credibility of an election is sacrosanct. It is more important to have a credible election than a hasty election. As the custodians of the electoral process the IEC has a duty to protect the election over all and any persons or parties.

Thus, in the face of allegations related to the signatures submitted by political parties contesting the election, the IEC has a responsibility to act in the best interest of the election regardless of who the parties or persons are.

In the past two weeks, questions about the authenticity of the signatures submitted by Build One South Africa with Mmusi Maimane and the MK Party have become public. This has raised important questions about whether the IEC has and indeed can verify signatures and what it is empowered to do if in fact there are signatures that can be proven as invalid. The IEC has responded by asking for evidence in both instances, as it admits that it does not have the capability to verify signatures.

Conspiracies are the enemy of a credible election. It is thus important that any person or party making allegations that challenge the adherence of a party or candidate do so with facts and evidence presented to the IEC or to the police, in matters that are criminal.

Conjecture is not enough when the implications of allegations or calls for changes could have major and knock on effects to the election process. If a party were found to have contravened the election code of conduct it could impact on processes like that have time and cost implications. These impacts do not mean that allegations of misconduct should not be raised, but that such allegations should be done with the utmost seriousness by those making the accusations and taken seriously by the IEC.

The IEC is not an organisation above scrutiny.

The IEC does not trade in votes, it trades in trust. While it has had the benefit of the public’s trust almost without question over the better part of 30 years, the 2024 elections is a moment for not only our democracy to mature but its institutions to grow as well.

In this time, it is incumbent on the IEC to act with humility and openness. To act quickly but not in haste. Be decisive but also responsive. To wade carefully through the noisiness of this election to find truth over popular sentiment.

As it does the work to build trust, it is not in the best interest of democracy to have parties and an electorate that do not unduly seek to undermine the reputation of the IEC. It is the same parties and voters who discredit the IEC who will rely on it to conduct a free, fair and credible election.

May we all, parties, candidates, voters, the media and the IEC alike, prioritise the election above our own interests, placing country duty above all else.