As in the peacebuilding field, where conflict can be both destructive and productive, conflict is a constant and necessary force in maintaining a healthy democracy. This underscores the fact that there are two major dimensions to democracy: contestation and participation. At its core, democracy is a contest of ideas or competition between different visions of the future. The inherent conflict or competition will ideally play out in democracies through processes of participation, representation, accountability, transparency, and responsiveness to the citizens.
And just below the surface of that uncertain peaceful competition lies more deep-rooted conflict and the potential for violence. And no democratic country is immune from the contestation turning violent, as the world witnessed on January 6, 2021 when rioters, upset at the loss of the presidential election by their preferred candidate, attacked the American Capitol Building.
Kenya is a country that has experienced significant electoral violence over the past 20 years and in the following video, you will see the widespread consequences of political competition turning violent and the political process perceived as unfair, rigged, and non-transparent.
Preventing Electoral Violence is not just a matter of halting or preventing violence, but is actually the concerted efforts to manage political conflict and competition in a non-violent and equitable manner. That is an important consideration when working to prevent violence from erupting before, during, or after elections. Elections themselves are often just the tipping point that turns conflict from productive to destructive. That is especially true when elections and democratic processes are viewed as zero-sum—namely, that if one side wins then the other side must lose. Elections are also often seen as existential contests—that is, the existence of a people or group, or the ability of a group to control its destiny or existence, is at stake. The “losers” don’t feel that their rights will then be ensured or they believe that they will lose power and, as a result, their ability to influence the future.
In 2017, ten years after the large-scale electoral violence of 2007 in Kenya, there was considerable concern for another national election descending into violence. This video story shows how Kenyans and the international community prepared for the 2017 elections.
President Kenyatta won the election with 54% of the vote. But the losing opposition candidate Raila Odinga appealed to the Kenyan Supreme Court claiming that the election was rigged, and the Court subsequently annulled the election results. A new election was then scheduled for October but feeling that this election would also be rigged Raila Odinga boycotted it and Kenyatta won in a landslide because Odinga’s supporters did not vote. While the violence around the 2017 election was far less than occurred in 2007, anti-democratic efforts go far beyond rigging elections or targeting the supporters of the other side before, during, or after an election. Democratic participation, particularly the role of civil society, is under constant threat. In many countries like Kenya, NGOs are tightly regulated by the government. They are often harassed or banned and are increasingly subject to trumped-up charges such as money laundering, tax evasion, illegal bank accounts, funding political parties, or employing foreigners without work permits.
As this course will show, the lack of pluralism and a strong civil society, as well as lack of representation, transparency, accountability, and political participation, lay the foundations for political violence, with elections often becoming the focal point.
