In Namibia’s 2024 presidential and parliamentary elections, massive citizen participation was highlighted as a significant step towards the country’s democratic consolidation. Despite logistical challenges and allegations of irregularities, the Namibian people demonstrated their commitment to the democratic process by turning out in large numbers to vote.
Over one million Namibians, out of 1.3 million registered voters, turned out to vote, demonstrating the importance of citizen engagement in preserving democracy. Long queues in both urban and rural areas typified a collective determination to effect positive change in the country.
However, this tremendous turnout was overshadowed by persistent logistical challenges. The implementation of the ‘vote anywhere’ policy, while intended to improve accessibility, revealed operational shortcomings. Technical malfunctions hampered the electoral process, ballots went missing and some polling stations opened late, prolonging the wait for many voters. These challenges were compounded by the Electoral Commission of Namibia’s (ECN) inability to effectively manage these issues, calling into question its operational competence.
Furthermore, the outsourcing of ballot production to South Africa, despite a prior order, highlighted Namibia’s reliance on external suppliers. This reliance undermined public confidence in the electoral process and underscored the need for Namibia to build local capacity to self-manage its electoral processes.
These failures disproportionately affected voters in rural and marginalized areas, who already face systemic barriers to political participation.
Beyond operational shortcomings, allegations of misconduct and violations of electoral law cast a shadow over the conduct of the elections. Political parties accused each other of spreading misinformation and unfair practices, fuelling public discontent. These accusations highlighted the fragility of Namibia’s political maturity; campaigns often favoured propaganda over substantive policy debates. Some political parties even copied each other’s manifestos, undermining authentic political discourse and complicating the choices available to voters.
Over 15,000 votes, about 1.4% of the total, were rejected. While this percentage may seem small, it represents thousands of citizens whose voices were effectively silenced. Many of these rejections were due to voter error, highlighting a deficit in civic education. The ECN’s outreach efforts have not been sufficient to address this knowledge gap, particularly in rural areas where understanding of electoral processes remains limited.
“Opposition parties” have questioned the fairness of the electoral process, alleging irregularities in vote counting, shortages of ballot papers at polling stations and the tabulation process. While legal mechanisms exist to address these disputes, such as the Electoral Tribunal, the Electoral Court and the Supreme Court, rebuilding public confidence is likely to be much more difficult. Transparent and efficient electoral systems are essential to maintaining credibility, and Namibia must work to rebuild this foundation.
The election results confirmed Swapo’s dominance, retaining the presidency (with future President Netumbo Nandi-Ndaitwah securing 638,560 votes, or 57.31%) and a majority in the National Assembly (583,300 votes, or 54%, – 51 out of 63 seats in 2029). However, the political landscape appears to be changing, as evidenced by the growing influence of opposition parties such as the Independent Patriots for Change (IPC) (20 seats) and the Affirmative Repositioning Movement (AR) (six seats). These parties have capitalized on the discontent of young urban voters, signaling a desire for alternatives to Swapo’s long-standing rule.
The persistence of a single-party dominated political system presents opportunities and risks. Swapo’s experience in governance provides some stability in these uncertain times. However, its overwhelming control risks fostering complacency and slowing down change. Namibia’s challenges – youth unemployment, lack of adequate housing and corruption – require innovative solutions that may not emerge under single-party rule unless strategic plans and rigorous management are put in place.
Parties with fewer seats, despite their electoral gains, may continue to struggle to achieve meaningful representation, as has been observed in the past. Namibia’s proportional representation system, while intended to ensure inclusiveness, has yet to translate into real representation for all citizens.
In conclusion, Namibia’s 2024 elections have seen massive citizen engagement, but also logistical challenges and controversy. These events have highlighted both the willingness of the Namibian people to participate actively in the democratic life of the country and the persistent shortcomings in the functioning of its electoral institutions.To consolidate democracy in Namibia, it is essential to address these challenges, strengthen the transparency and accountability of the electoral process, and foster constructive and inclusive political dialogue.