Should South Africa be concerned about election violence as daily protests intensify, ask Ciara Aucoin and Jakkie Cilliers
As major political parties position themselves for the municipal elections in a week’s time, protests against the economic and political situation have continued across the country.
The increase in protests – combined with a history of violence, structural inequality and growing frustration with the ANC – leads many to question whether we can maintain our tradition of peaceful elections.
Apart from threats directed at the IEC during the 2014 poll, election violence does not have deep roots in South Africa. That said, protest has become a part of daily life, increasing since 2010, and linked to service delivery, demarcation, labour, university fees and staffing – and, since last year, directly calling for the resignation of President Jacob Zuma.
The mobilisation of protest and its coverage are increasingly politicised, and protesters are by nature more easily co-opted by politicians and the media; which has been and still is, a cause for concern in the pre-election period.
Analysis of the Institute for Security Studies’ Public Violence Monitor data from January 2013 to December suggests we see an average of three protests per day (including strikes).
Election-related violence occurs frequently in many African democracies. Electoral processes are more likely to turn violent in settings characterised by latent conflict, systemic grievances and tension surrounding political competition and power-sharing. Another driving factor is when governments are actively factional in favouring one ethnic group.
The 2007 national elections in Kenya were some of the most violent on the continent. More than 1 200 people were killed and over 350 000 were displaced. These events showed politicians can and do mobilise citizens to engage in illegal and violent behaviour in order to bolster support.
This has also been evident in South Africa, where instigation by local councillors was apparently behind the burning of more than 25 schools in Limpopo over a rezoning dispute.
Some analysts are concerned the elections could be the most violent in our history. A recent study by the University of Georgetown in the US suggests historical conflict factors, structural risk factors, as well as election-specific factors can help to explain a country’s risk of experiencing election-related violence.
Given our history of apartheid, violence is a learned expression of grievance. Looking at the crime data since 2000, murder rates – a common measure of overall crime levels – peaked in 2001/2002, then reached their lowest levels in 2011/2012, but have been increasing since. Armed robberies have increased since 2011/2012, while vigilantism and xenophobia are ongoing challenges.
We have the highest inequality in the world and a unemployment rate of nearly 25 percent. In addition, 53 percent of the country was defined as "poor", or living on less than R779 per month in 2011.
The movement calling for Zuma’s removal and an end to corruption has seen up to 10 000 protesters gather. The Nkandla scandal showed the president’s intention to ignore his constitutional obligations.
The Afrobarometer 2015 survey findings show a steady decline in trust of public institutions over time, with trust in the executive experiencing the steepest drop. Only a third of South Africans are said to trust Zuma "somewhat" or "a lot"; down from a near two-thirds positive response rate to the same question in 2011.
It is evident change is wanted. Whether people will participate in a peaceful and constructive way next week remains to be seen. – www.issafrica.org
* Ciara Aucoin is a researcher and Jakkie Cilliers head of the African Futures and Innovation Section at the Institute for Security Studies