The institutional context of the 2004 general elections in Malawi

Whi is executive dominance still a norm in African politics?

By: Gloppen S, Kanyongolo E & Khembo N
Published by: Chr. Michelsen Institute, Norway, 2006
Via: Eldis

How can electoral processes retain legitimacy? Ensuring that elected political leaders act in accordance with their mandate without violating citizens' rights is a key challenge for new democracies in sub-Saharan Africa. In Malawi, as across the continent, executive dominance is still the the norm in spite of the many institutions in place to make the government more accountable. Elections and succession test the strength of these institutions and their ability to stem executive dominance.

This report assesses the role of the core democratic institutions in the 2004 Malawi elections with an emphasis on six main stages of the electoral process: registration of voters and the compilation of the voters' roll; the nomination of candidates; civic and voter education; the electoral campaign; the conduct of the polling exercise, including counting of ballots and the announcement of results; and the conversion of the electoral mandate into political positions.

The authors focus their attention on four sets of core institutions of democratic governance and accountability:

• those responsible for electoral administration
• the party system
• parliament
• the judiciary

The report concludes that the 2004 general elections were judged to be ‘free but not fair’ due to inadequacies in the administration of the electoral process. Civi society organisations as well as domestic and international election observers have emphasised the need to restructure the Malawi Electoral Commission to improve its performance and ensure the legitimacy of the election results.

(http://www.cmi.no/publications/file/?2541=the-institutional-context-of-the-2004-general)