Security, the Electoral Process and behavioral requirements
By Rev. Msgr. Dr. Stephen Ntim
The electoral process then is the core, in fact
the foundational pillar of democracy. This notwithstanding, election at least in our part of the globe (Africa), continues to be a mixture of blessing and a curse. It is a blessing in that when well-managed, it confers political authority to the electorate, its will and verdict as who to govern it is respected, indicating that the Rule of Law is supreme instead of dictatorship and the arbitrary will of a despot.
On the other hand, if it is not well-managed especially in new democracies such as in Africa, election can be a potential source of insecurity, conflict and instability. It is on record that in our West African Sub-region for example, since the inception of democratic renewal in the 1990’s, over one hundred electoral contests have been organized in fifteen countries.
While acknowledging that over a period of twenty years of using elections to select who govern us in these countries including our own Ghana, some remarkable progress has been made, it is also true to say that with respect to organizing really clean elections that are in fact peaceful, really fair with no skirmishes, we must humbly admit that we still have a long way to go.
Security
Ideally, the electoral process in any democracy does not need security and security apparatus, if democracy in fact has to do with the Rule of Law, respecting the fundamental rights of each other, the right to freedom of speech, the right to information, and so on, knowing that all these rights in a democratic dispensation go with responsibility. That is my right to freedom of speech ends precisely where another person’s right also begins.
In other words, freedom of speech in democracy does not give me the right to use intemperate language against my political opponent. Neither does it give for example those in government the right to use incumbency position to ensure that its political interests are satisfied by all means. Thus, human as we are, we cannot presume that in democracy, everyone will respect the Rule of Law and behave by certain legal and democratic requirements.
This is especially so in new democracies where the practice of this form of government is barely a century old. It is this lack of the needed legal and behavioural requirements of political actors that has necessitated the need for security agents in elections, at least in most African countries.
In other places on the globe, where the overwhelming majority of the electorate really understand democracy and have practised it for years, elections may not necessarily need the presence of the Police and the Military. In fact, in some advanced countries, it is an anomalous situation to see a large presence of these security agencies fully armed at polling stations. Our situation is not like that. Rather, election becomes a source of conflict hence the presence of security becomes a necessary requirement.
When one is confronted with two evils, it is assumed that one would choose the lesser evil and Africans have chosen the lesser evil of detailing security forces at elections rather than choosing not to have them around and people taking the laws into their hands at elections. Thus in reality, the obvious observation in countries with new or emerging democracy especially those in West Africa is that the situation requires the involvement of security forces to deal with or ensure security during elections. In Africa, in the foreseeable future, we have no option but to continue to make use of security forces to ensure peace at elections.
Interference
Paradoxically however, the mode of involving Security Forces (SFs) and how they carry out their duties while participating in the electoral process are part of the possible sources of insecurity and peace during elections. In fact, observations and scientific study in some parts of Africa reveal that either these forces deliberately interfere in elections in one way or the other, or it is their performance which does not stand up to expectations and/or it is other stakeholders in the process who do not trust them. This is another area that the Electoral Commission needs to pay attention to seriously.
We have had successive success stories in conducting elections in this country, but let us not forget that while acknowledging generally that our security forces by and large have performed professionally over the years in our elections, there are other instances too that the behaviour of some of them in ensuring peace and order appears to be unprofessional, if media reports of some constituencies are anything to go by.
For example, there was a report of so-called ‘machomen’ stealing ballot boxes in the full glare of security forces in the last elections. It is indeed worrying for one political party to call for the resignation of the Inspector General of Police (if this report is true). We read this media report not too long ago.
Already, this raises some questions on the political neutrality of the top administration of the Police Service. This is because the Police play a major role in ensuring a clean electoral process: from this registration period through to the actual elections in December as well as the post elections.
It is the Police that has to ensure the security of buildings where electoral materials are kept, the security of the electoral materials, ensuring that personal security of voters, candidates, representatives of political parties is guaranteed and that no Ghanaian is intimidated in the exercise his or her civic right to vote.
At this pre-electoral phase of biometric registration, it is the security force that must ensure that no security lapses prevent voters from registering or disturb the registration of voters. When the need arises, they can also be asked to help in investigating the eligibility of candidates strictly in accordance with the laws in force. The security force is solicited to control human movements across our borders.
This is especially more compelling as shown concretely by many experiences in our sub-region and especially with the perceived infiltration arms from worn-torn neighbouring countries into Ghana. Thus, the role of the security in ensuring clean elections is incalculable. This role is contingent upon certain behavioural requirements on the part of the security forces.
Behavioural Requirements
One of the basic and in fact pre-eminent behavioural requirements for quality participation of security forces in the electoral process is respecting the values and principles on which the State is founded, especially the respect for the Rule of Law. Thus, the security forces especially the Armed Forces are to behave in total submission to the democratic dispensation and the laws of the land as enshrined in the 1992 Constitution.
This submission of the security forces to the laws of this land is non-negotiable. Once they submit to theses laws, they are enjoined to contribute to ensure the security of the electoral process in total conformity with the laws and regulations in force.
They should, in their behaviour and attitude, respect both electoral laws or electoral code and the laws on elections in general (the constitutional and civil rights, public freedoms etc …) as well as regulations specific to their force and functions. It is obvious that, security agents involved in the electoral process, who adopt behaviours contrary to laws in force, constitute more of a danger for the process than a factor of protection and security. Other democratic values that constitute behavioural requirement expected of the security forces is fairness and neutrality.
Thus, in addition to respecting the Rule of Law, a high level of fairness and neutrality is expected of the security agents as they perform their electoral security functions. The electorate must be treated the same way in the enforcement of law and order with fairness without discrimination and arbitrariness. We must not delude ourselves into thinking that security forces do not have their own partisan affiliation.
What makes them behave professionally is that, this notwithstanding, they are expected to put premium on the Laws of the State at the expense of partisanship. In this respect, irrespective of the group to which a troublemaker belongs during the electoral period, the security forces should be able to ensure strict and full compliance with the law without being bias. This is what it means to behave professionally- behaving in a republican manner rather than partisanship.
Avoiding Partisanship
During this challenging period of pre-election, election and post election, the security forces need to avoid at all cost the allegation of being partisan. They need to be on top of affairs, to be seen to be effective and credible. In fact, during the entire electoral process from pre-election, election and post-election perceptions are as important as reality and it is in the interest of the State especially the Electoral Commission to attend to complaints and perceptions of political parties.
Certainly after many years of holding elections in this country, there must be some legislative and regulatory framework that helps to create atmosphere to encourage members of the security forces to adopt behaviours expected of them. They are expected to be apolitical and neutral so that their actions are not tainted with self-interest and partisanship.
The regulations should go much further to make provisions that will reduce the risks of being influenced by politicians especially those in Government in the performance of their constitutional duties. In addition to this regulatory framework, a certain degree of accountability needs to be enforced in order to pre-empt the culture of impunity which is diametrically opposed to the principles of democracy.
It is necessary to put in place control and sanctions mechanism for lapses attributable to security forces in the exercise of the electoral processes. Yes, our security has been on top of affairs all these years but there is still room for improvement.
To be continued