3.3 Democracy
3.3.1 Electoral Democracy
Electoral democracy is the rule of the people in which a government is elected through elections, depending on the historical political context and the electoral system (Cawthra et al., 2007). In this type of democracy, it is imperative that the electoral system is chosen (this is key to democratic governance, though not enough by itself) that will ensure
representation, legitimacy and accountability in free, regular elections. Cawthra et al. (2007) argue that Proportional Representation (PR), where votes are translated into seats, is mostly preferred because its benefits are that it is more inclusive, gender sensitive and socially diverse, and it is more representative for even the minority political parties. The authors
71 also outline the disadvantages of the PR system as promoting the instability of coalition government, and providing room for small insignificant political parties, but leave aside the independent candidates. This supports what is reflected in the Lesotho context, where the PR system resulted in the establishment of a coalition government after the 2012 elections, which is currently unstable (see Chapter One).
With regard to the First Past the Post (FPTP) electoral system, Cawthra et al. (2007) have shown that the advantages of its use are: a clear choice of electorates; the system favours broad political parties; and the voters vote for the candidates representing those parties.
There is a clear link between the electorates and their elected representatives. Some disadvantages of FPTP are that the system excludes minority parties (who do not receive large numbers of votes) that are then not represented in parliament, which was the case in Lesotho after 1998 elections when Lesotho experienced political turmoil (see Chapter One);
also, representation from women is marginalized and it creates divisions among the electorates (Cawthra et al., 2007).
Kabemba (2003), Maathai (2009) and Morrow (2009) point out that in an electoral
democracy, a country may manage to hold regular, inclusive, clean competitive elections, but this may not successfully be able to provide the material benefits of democracy to its people, due to the latters’ incapacity to influence government via public participation.
Hence, people remain silent and inactive as a result of oppression. Jarvis (2008) highlights the problem that leaders, too, do not represent the interests of citizens, therefore, representative democracy becomes a lip service form of representation. Electoral
democracy is termed procedural democracy, because the democratic norms and institutions that form the basis of a reasonable political system are established (Kabemba, 2003).
However, Dahl, quoted in Kabemba (2003, p. 3), asserts that a country is said to be
democratic once it has attained “civil and political rights plus fair, competitive and inclusive elections.” Kabemba notes that a country that has reached these criteria is deemed to be a liberal democratic country. Electoral democracy is considered to be minimal democracy that dwells on elections of political elites, who are put in to rule and manage the country. It is characterized by regular, competitive elections with multiple parties or many candidates rather than seats.
72 Kabemba (2003) puts forward another argument that electoral democracy is also linked to procedural democracy in most Southern African countries including Lesotho. The author shows that in most African countries, Lesotho included, there has been progress in
institutionalizing electoral democracy through the holding of regular multiparty elections.
Kabemba’s opinion is that electoral democracy has not transcended into substantive democracy that is accountable governance that is responsive to the needs of its people.
According to his evaluation findings, Lesotho has shown the “lowest levels of support to democracy over other types of governance” (Kabemba, 2003, p. 13).
A perception of low levels of democracy also suggests a high level of political apathy, one of the problems that propelled me to conduct this study in order to find out what the terms democracy and citizenship mean to the people. This also indicates that democracy, in terms of value, process and practice, is not well entrenched in the popular consciousness of
Basotho, and also that the latter may not properly understand how democracy works. This is supported by Matlosa (2008), Makoa (2014) and Kabemba (2003, p. 26), who note that political party leaders have done little to institutionalize democratic practice in Lesotho;
instead they have focused on “entrenching personality cults.” Further support of this view is shown by Abdi (2008), where he indicates clearly that with the move to democracy by African countries, Lesotho included, people cannot be expected to comply and adhere to new systems of governance without critically understanding the character of those systems.
This study, therefore, sought to gain a deeper understanding of the levels of critical understanding among citizens in one urban and one rural district with a view to making recommendations for appropriate civic education.
Furthermore, Bank and Minkley (2005) note that the transition to democracy has, in most African countries, including Lesotho, not broken the powers of chiefs and traditional
authority in the rural areas. These have remained influential and politically organized locally, nationally and regionally. An electoral democracy is a state or country whose government is technically determined by popular sovereignty (Bank & Minkley, 2005; Kabemba, 2003). In a country like Lesotho, where electoral democracy is practiced, the people decide who will govern them, and they have the right and ability to vote. Bank and Minkley (2005) argue that, in most African countries, these are democracies by name only, because elections are
73 sometimes rigged or there may be political competition or ineffective opposition parties, while other democracies have the elements of autocratic behaviour.
According to Kabemba (2003) Lesotho is experiencing a weak, young democracy due to the underdevelopment of political parties, evidenced by schisms and floor-crossing, which is an obstacle to its democratisation. Kabemba (2003, p. 49) comments:
Lesotho’s democracy is still weak in terms of participation of people in politics and holding their parties accountable. A challenge for Lesotho’s democracy right now is to have an electorate that is democratically oriented.
This suggests that Lesotho has to overcome the structural rigidity of party politics based on personalities and factionalism (see Chapter One). These questions raise the issues that need to be investigated: How has democracy in Lesotho been introduced? Were there clear strategies to produce change in the treatment of citizens? Electoral democracy alone cannot, however, bring about what is perceived as a liberal democratic state. Therefore, liberal democracy is discussed in the following section.