Zambia’s Election: A Mixed Bag for Democracy in Africa

Zambia’s President Hakainde Hichilema won his second term with a significant margin, but beneath the surface of this election lies a complex narrative of democracy in practice. The incumbent’s victory was anticipated, given the inherent advantages of incumbency and Hichilema’s popularity among voters.

Reports of fraud allegations, intimidation, and violence marred the electoral process, which international observers deemed “largely peaceful” but criticized for its limitations on fundamental freedoms. The European Union’s observation mission noted that late legal changes, uncertainty, and unequal campaign conditions distorted the playing field. These irregularities have become a recurring theme in Africa’s electoral landscape.

Zambia has a history of peaceful transfers of power through elections, dating back to 1991 when multiparty politics were reintroduced. However, as other countries on the continent struggle with democratic backsliding and authoritarianism, Zambia’s election serves as a reminder that even stable democracies have room for improvement.

Hichilema’s camp has dismissed allegations of fraud as lies, but Mundubile’s National Reconciliation Party for Unity and Prosperity (NRPUP) has raised valid concerns about the raid on their leader’s home, which left a member of parliament wounded by gunfire. The government’s explanation that the raid targeted “militia activity” is unconvincing in light of these events.

The election highlights the limitations of Zambia’s electoral process, which allows for a lack of transparency and accountability. As Africa’s second-largest copper producer, Zambia has a significant stake in maintaining its reputation as a beacon of democracy. The outcome will have far-reaching implications for Zambia’s governance and international relations.

Hichilema’s commitment to working with those who backed his opponents is a welcome move, but it remains to be seen whether he will address the underlying issues that plagued the electoral process. The suspended vote-counting, which was eventually resumed after hours of delay, raised concerns about the credibility of the election.

As Zambia looks to its future under Hichilema’s leadership, international observers will be watching closely to see if the country can maintain its democratic credentials. This is not just a test for Zambia but also a reflection of Africa’s broader struggles with democracy and governance. Will Zambia continue on its path towards strengthening its institutions, or will it succumb to the same pressures that have beset other African democracies?

One thing is certain: this election has exposed the cracks in Zambia’s electoral process, and only time will tell if Hichilema can address these issues and restore confidence in his administration. For now, Africa’s democratic landscape remains a mixed bag, with Zambia sitting precariously between stability and uncertainty.