Low voter turnout is a valid litmus test for democracy

Fundamentally, a vibrant democracy should start at the grassroots level – and also be an all-compassing ideology. True democracy should involve a majority of the people from all walks of life, with people in villages, towns and cities being part and parcel of the democracy processes.

Is holding regular elections and passing the wheel in the helm-house of the Ship of State to newly-elected leaders a true reflection of democracy in action?

After all, even dictators hold elections!

So, true democracy is when registered voters turn up to exercise their constitutional right to vote in elections.

If the turnout is below 50 per cent of the registered voters, then something isn’t quite right within the democratic processes.

Some nations have rules that render an election invalid if too few people vote – such as Serbia, where three successive presidential elections were declared invalid in 2003.

Also, voting is mandatory by law in Australia, but that remains a dream in Tanzania.

The recent parliamentary by-elections in the Kinondoni and Siha constituencies had extremely low turnouts.

In general, low turnouts are attributed to disillusionment, indifference or a sense of futility on the part of the electorate – including the perception, right or wrong, that one’s vote won’t make any difference to the outcome.

When socioeconomic development isn’t people-centred – if, for example, only a few elite benefit, or when the government-driven economy doesn’t tangibly benefit the hoi polloi – then there will be a feeling of hopelessness and indifference to voting.

Another valid reason is if there is potential unrest – riots and violence at the time of voting – people won’t come out to vote.

Mass media organs play an important role in the engagement of democratic processes. Independent media has the responsibility to educate people about elections, and what each political party or individual candidate represents in terms of future policy and vision.

When media freedom is curtailed, or there is undue censorship, voter turnout will be low. Thus, when government controls news content, citizens will shy away from the polls.

Systematic efforts to intimidate the media or politicize the civil service, the military, and security agencies will create unresponsiveness and apathy among voters.

Politics is a complex game, and when citizens feel that the outcome of an election is pre-determined – that, for example, such-and-such a candidate representing the ruling party or such-and-such opposition party must win the election – then they see no point in casting their vote since it won’t make any difference.

When law is enforced in favour of one side – and there is evidence of rigging, instilling fear, demonizing the opposition or when opponents are treated with contempt, disregard and blatant hostility – voters will prefer to remain at home.

Thus, a thorough post-mortem needs to be done as to why there was such a low voter turnout in Kinondoni and Siha. Failure to do so will further fuel failure of democracy.

Democracy is an opportunity, and a “lost” electoral vote is a terrible thing.

Indeed, government legitimacy is called into question if less than a majority of the eligible voters cast their votes.

Democratic governance provides the best practical check on domination by the elite few. Undoubtedly, the citizenry has numerical superiority; but, unfortunately, the wealthy, the military and religious elite virtually atomize and render the people powerless, ineffective. Thus the persisting narrow oligarchy and autocracy throughout recorded history.

However, democratic institutions such as elections, the law and the free press – along with their ideals of political equality and individual freedom – can facilitate citizens’ efforts to coordinate their actions, draw upon their collective strength and force their elite competitors to agree to some sort of cooperative relationship.

In a functioning democracy, everybody – even billionaires, generals and bishops – must obey laws made by all citizens.

It’s certainly true that democratic governance often breeds contentious public discourse. It can lead to terrible – even disastrous – outcomes from time to time. But it’s far better to endure those drawbacks than to endure the horror of being forced to bow down to a tyrant with no hope of betterment for oneself or for one’s children.