Independent Electoral Commission: briefing

Meeting report

FOREIGN AFFAIRS PORTFOLIO COMMITTEE
2 March 2005
INDEPENDENT ELECTORAL COMMISSION: BRIEFING

Chairperson: Mr D Sithole (ANC)

Documents handed out:
IEC presentation

SUMMARY
The Independent Electoral Commission (IEC) gave a presentation to the Committee on the election process in the DRC and Burundi. In the DRC, elections were scheduled for July 2005, but there were many legal, logistical and resource challenges facing the new DRC Electoral Commission. South Africa had offered technical and capacity building assistance. In Burundi, South Africa was less involved, but had donated polling booths and boxes. Members were interested in providing as much assistance as possible, through the IEC, the South African government, SADC and the AU. Discussion surrounded questions of feasibility of the DRC timeline and the role of South African and African organisations in political issues on the continent.

MINUTES
The Chairperson of the IEC, Dr Brigalia Bam and the Chief Electoral Officer, Adv Pansy Tlakula, gave a presentation on elections in Burundi and the DRC. Dr Bam said that the situation in the DRC was very difficult and complex. As the IEC is an independent body, not a government department, it was difficult to arrange a Memorandum of Understanding with the DRC, but this had been done. The SA IEC had offered technical and logistical assistance in the form of capacity building and training, but could not give funds. The elections were scheduled for July, but the IEC felt that it was unlikely that this timeline would be achieved. The interim constitution, which would pave the way for the elections, was still being negotiated and a referendum to adopt it must be held very soon. The DRC had established an Electoral Commission, but its commissioners were appointed from the various factions and were not independent. Other difficulties included the lack of infrastructure, making many areas inaccessible, the size of the country, the large number of voters to register and the large number of political parties registered. At the time of elections there would be over 400 parties registered, necessitating co-operation and co-ordination. Protection of staff, equipment and voters was also important and the police force was undergoing special training. In Burundi, the government was managing on its own, so the IEC was not so much involved, but South Africa did make a donation of its ballot boxes and polling stations.

Adv Tlakula said that there were many legal issues that had to be resolved in order to establish a legal framework for the elections. A law establishing the Electoral Commission, a citizenship law to determine who was entitled to vote and a law on the registration of voters had already been passed. The Electoral Law must be passed and a referendum must be held to adopt the constitution and determine the type of electoral system and type of government to be established. A staff of 600 000 must be hired and trained to register voters and conduct the referendum and the election. A ‘first past the post system’ would be used and three separate elections would be held for President, Parliament and local government. The budget required for elections was US$500 million, and many foreign countries had offered assistance, but few of the pledges had come through. These countries provided funding through the UN to be used for technical assistance. There was, however, a lack of presence of African countries. The IEC had established a niche for itself helping to strengthen the DRC Electoral Commission through capacity building and logistics, recruitment, training, conflict resolution, results collection and IT. The IEC required funding of about R10 million in order to carry out these activities.

Discussion

The Chairperson said that the Committee was willing to support the IEC and would try to assist in getting funds. The DRC provided the biggest challenge and South Africa had a responsibility to engage with them.

Mr B Holomisa (UDM) said that judging by the quick timetable of the elections, South Africa would need to be able to call for tenders quickly. They should not automatically use the same companies that South Africa used in order to ensure impartiality. He asked if the UN was willing to allocate funding to the DRC Electoral Commission.

Ms M Njobe (ANC) said that she was concerned about the cost of the election and how little had been pledged, and asked whether the IEC felt that the international community was assisting as expected and what the reasons could be for the low contribution. The election depended on the passage of the Electoral Law, and Ms Njobe asked when this was expected to happen.

Dr S Pheko (PAC) said that the difficulties and instability that the DRC faced were understandable in light of its history. He asked what the MOU entailed, what its implications were, what the referendum was meant to achieve and if the lack of involvement of African states was because of lack of financial capability or apathy. The stability of the DRC was key to the prosperity of Africa as it had much to contribute economically to the continent.

Mr L Joubert (IFP) asked if the three elections would be held at the same time, and if not, in what order and in what timeframe they would be held.

Mr K Bapela (ANC) asked if there would also be voter education to complement registration and asked whether registration would be able to reach those in impenetrable areas.

Dr Bam said that the expectations of the DRC were very high. Some countries in the international community would have liked to give funding but would like to channel it through the UN out of fear of corruption and lack of infrastructure of other organisations in the country. The South African government had been trying to influence the DRC Parliament to process the necessary laws very quickly. The July elections timetable was the one favoured by the most political parties, and changes to it would create much controversy and tension even though it was very unlikely to succeed. The amnesty law was delaying proceedings, as it was a sensitive matter. African states did not have a history of assisting with elections, and in other regions, organisations had budgets for elections, but the AU did not. The AU had sent observer teams, but not money. The IEC was working to bring SADC members together to assist, but was mostly relying on the UN for funding because it was difficult for African countries to provide a financial contribution. Instead of financial contributions, however, these counties could provide assistance in the form of personnel and expertise. The DRC was looking to NGOs for voter education, and the church was quite strong and active, but civil society was less active. Some areas were impossible to access, so it would be difficult to conduct voter registration, as a method would have to be devised.

Adv Tlakula said that tenders for the voter registration system were not the responsibility of the IEC. The UN was the body that called for tenders and would adjudicate them, but there were two South African companies who had shown interest in bidding. The funding the IEC needed was for capacity building and technical assistance within the DRC Electoral Commission only and did not require tendering. The timetable for the election was far behind, but it was very difficult to know when the laws would be passed. The first thing that had to happen was the constitutional referendum, and only after that had been adopted could the electoral law be passed. An MOU was signed between the South African Minister of Home Affairs and the DRC Minister of Foreign Affairs. That MOU stated that the two IECs could sign their own MOU to determine the type of assistance to be given. There was an Electoral Commissions forum in SADC that was looking at ways to strengthen electoral collaboration and was very strong on voter education. The UN planned to distribute from a central body to the one hundred forty-four administrative districts but it would still be difficult to reach all of the areas. Until recently, the DRC Electoral Commission had no budget, but the DRC government had pledged US$28 million, of which only US$1 million had been paid. The three elections were to be held separately. The South African IEC suggested combining them, but the agreements between various bodies have specified that they would be separate, and it would be difficult to try to change the agreements.

Mr Pheko asked what particular issue would be settled in the referendum.

Ms Thakula said that it was to adopt the constitution.

Dr Bam said that it would also determine the type of electoral system that would be used. It would be very expensive because the registration costs as much as the election itself, so the budget might be much higher than expected. Someone had been sent by the UN to oversee the election, but there had been problems with the behaviour of the UN army, so hopefully he would be able to stay and finish the work.

A Member asked if the war in Ituri had a negative impact on the elections and if all eleven provinces were participating and receiving resources evenly.

Mr L Greyling (ID) said that there were social and economic networks in remote places already and that it may be necessary to utilise creative African methods to reach people. He asked whether the political parties recognised the fact that the election would not run perfectly and whether they were willing to accept this or if there was a threat of fighting. He was also concerned that the UN may want to run the election through their offices and methods and felt that African involvement was key.

Mr W Seremane (ANC) asked how tensions between the political parties were being dealt with in terms of the role of defence forces and the police.

Adv Z Madasa (ACDP) said that the advantage to involving African countries was not to do with money, but with understanding the languages and issues, so the IEC should work to involve the AU. There were some South African companies involved in the DRC and he suggested that they could make donations towards the elections, as stability would be in their own interests.

The Chairperson asked what the role of the Committee could be in assisting with the election.

Dr Bam said that the funding for the IEC would come through the Department of Foreign Affairs, but Cabinet had not actually approved the funding yet. She asked the Committee to ensure that the funding did come through. The IEC did not have international political clout and it would be more effective if suggestions and activity came to the AU and other African countries through the Ministry of Foreign Affairs. Working together, governments and the AU would be better able to organise assistance. In a recent meeting in the DRC with provincial representatives, the representative from the East said that registration would be impossible without dealing with the fighting in that region, but that was an internal issue that must be dealt with by the DRC government. The South African Army was in that area attempting to integrate the five armies there, but could not do much else. Tensions between groups had not been resolved by the agreement, and although the parties were talking, the trust and goodwill necessary to speed up the process did not exist. Most of the parties were based in Kinshasa, but there were many in the provinces that might not be fully aware of the registration process, but the South African IEC could not work independently of the DRC Electoral Commission to try to reach specific provinces. As an impartial mediator, South Africa could not show preference for any party. Ethnic tensions were as strong as political tensions, but since Kinshasa was composed of people of various backgrounds, most of the parties were represented there. The South African Ambassador had suggested developing a railway line that could be used for voter education, and later, for business.

Ms Thakula said that the police and the army were excluded from registering and voting, which the IEC found problematic. The IEC had to be careful in giving advice because solutions had to be home-grown, so their concern was mostly with the transfer of skills and capacity building. The UN would not be there for the next election, so the Congolese must be given the space to run the election themselves.

A Member asked what would happen if the deadlines were not met.

Dr Pheko said that South Africa committed to more than it could handle and should not cultivate the image of being the saviours of Africa. It might be better to assist as part of SADC because there was already some resentment in some circles, which was a policy matter and not the problem of the IEC.

Mr D Gibson (DA) asked how rigid the deadlines were, whether the deadlines were unrealistic and destined for failure and whether the agreement should be amended to set a new date. He said that the training role of the IEC was the role they should be filling but asked why they seemed so unconcerned with becoming involved in Zimbabwe.

Dr Bam said that many of the previous remarks were more comments than questions. The deadline was a very political issue, and the whole group must agree to modify the agreement. Attempts were being made, but it must be done with great sensitivity. The UN, the IEC and other organisations must keep trying to prepare for the elections the best they can. The change had to be made by Parliament, not the Electoral Commission.

The Chairperson said that the Committee should address what contribution they could make to the DRC. The Committee must address the issue of funding in order to enable the IEC to do its work. The engagement of the AU structures and the Pan-African Parliament was also important.

Mr S Huang (ANC) said that a delegation should be sent to the DRC.

Mr Gibson said that the NEPAD Secretariat should have been involved in funding and that it should have been an international effort working through the national Electoral Commission.

Mr Madasa said that in the budget speech, an amount of money had been given to the African Donations Fund and asked if that was one place to channel South African funds to the DRC. There should have been correspondence through the Ministry of Foreign Affairs to the AU Commission and the Pan-African Parliament.

The Chairperson said that the Committee should communicate formally with the Departments of Home Affairs and Foreign Affairs asking them to follow up on the issues the IEC had raised and to ask about the funding for the IEC. The Committee would also ask to be kept informed on progress and ask that the issue of the DRC be raised in the AU and SADC. The Committee could also explore the possibility of visiting the DRC in conjunction with the Department of Defence.

Mr P Ditshetelo (UCDP) said that it might be best to communicate with the Minister of Foreign Affairs who could take the issue to the Minister of Home Affairs.

The Chairperson agreed that the letter should go to the Department of Foreign Affairs first.

The meeting was adjourned.