South Africa's 2014 National and Provincial Elections
←
→
Page content transcription
If your browser does not render page correctly, please read the page content below
Background Report Elections 2014
South Africa’s 2014 National and Provincial Elections
Dr Collette Schulz-Herzenberg
Introduction
South Africa’s fifth general elections, held on 7 May 2014, concluded the country’s
second decade of democracy. Following a competitive campaign the African National
Congress (ANC) was returned to power with a reduced majority at 62% of the vote share at
the national level, and continues as the majority party in eight of the nine provinces.i The
character of the 2014 election was distinctly competitive. Several provinces were platforms
for fiercely fought campaigns, with outcomes less than certain. Some predicted that the ANC
might lose its majority in South Africa’s richest province, Gauteng. The Northern Cape and
Western Cape were electoral battlegrounds for the largest opposition party, the Democratic
Alliance (DA); and the newcomer Economic Freedom Fighters (EFF) led by former ANC Youth
League (ANCYL) leader Julius Malema, posed a tangible threat in northern provinces that
have traditional ties to the ANC. In the months preceding the elections a troubled economy,
labour unrest and a series of governance scandals threatened public trust in government and
raised questions about whether the ANC’s margin of victory might be significantly reduced.
Yet, the 2014 elections confirmed what many suspected; that the party’s hold over the
electorate withstood the increasing challenge posed by a revitalised opposition block. The
largest opposition party, the DA, increased its vote share by from 17% to 22% at the national
level yet it was unable to unseat the ANC in any legislature. The EFF made its presence felt by
establishing itself as the third largest national party at 6%, and positioning itself as main
opposition in two of the ANC’s provincial strongholds.
Trends in electoral participation
Registration
The Electoral Commission of South Africa (IEC) registered 25.3 million South African
voters for the May 2014 national and provincial elections.ii The IEC claim that with over
Hanns Seidel Foundation !Johannesburg Office !P.O. Box 41451! Craighall 2024 !Johannesburg !South Africa 1
Phone: +27 11 325 0589 !Fax: +27 86 512 5300Background Report Elections 2014
25,3 million registered the overall registration level in South Africa has increased to 81% of
all eligible voters (citizens aged 18 years and over who constitute the voting age population,
or VAP). The IEC base its calculations on Statistics-South Africa’s 2011 Census figures.
According to these population figures there were 31,4 million eligible voters in that year. Yet,
the 2013 population estimates suggest that the VAP is slightly larger at 32,7 million people
(table 1).iii A recalculation of registered voters as a proportion of all eligible voters, with 25,3
million registered and 32,7 million eligible to vote, instead shows that 78% of the VAP was
registered in 2014.
The 2013 population estimates show 10.9 million eligible voters between 18-29
years in South Africa, comprising 34% of the voting age population. Yet, only 6,4 million are
registered, comprising a fifth of all eligible voters, or a quarter of registered voters. Among
the youngest age group between 18 and 19 years, only 33% of eligible voters are registered.
Moreover, registration levels among 18-29 year olds are noticeably lower at 59% than the
older counterparts (table 1). So, at the time of the election, many eligible young voters
between 18-29 years remained unregistered, which inevitably decreased overall levels of
registration and turnout of the eligible voter population.
Registration levels among eligible voters at provincial level show the largest voter
populations are found in Gauteng, KwaZulu-Natal (KZN), the Eastern Cape and the Western
Cape (table 2). The highest registration levels are in the Free State, the Eastern Cape and the
lowest are in the provinces of Gauteng, Mpumalanga, and Western Cape. Thus, some of the
most populous provinces have the lowest level of registered voters (Gauteng and Western
Cape).
Table 1: VAP % registered: Census 2011 and 2013 population estimates compared – Age
Age group Registered VAP % voter VAP 2013 % voter
voters 2011 Census registration estimates registration
18-19 646,313 1,926,127 33.6 1,959,900 33.0
20-29 5,759,236 9,481,294 60.7 8,994,600 64.0
30-39 6,180,534 6,895,947 89.6 7,740,800 79.8
40-49 5,007,501 5,301,005 94.5 5,810,100 86.2
50-59 3,796,131 3,867,469 98.2 4,105,900 92.5
60-69 2,264,714 2,255,911 100.4 2,508,000 90.3
70-79 1,160,499 1,172,634 99.0 1,236,500 93.9
Hanns Seidel Foundation !Johannesburg Office !P.O. Box 41451! Craighall 2024 !Johannesburg !South Africa 2
Phone: +27 11 325 0589 !Fax: +27 86 512 5300Background Report Elections 2014
80+ 575,222 533,647 107.8 331,800 173.4
Total 25,390,150 31,434,035 80.8 32,687,600 77.7
Table 2: VAP % registered: Census 2011 and 2013 population estimates compared – Provinces
Registered VAP % voter VAP 2013 % voter
Provinces
voters 2011 Census registration estimates registration
Eastern Cape 3,240,059 3,794,352 85.4 3,915,700 82.7
Free State 1,449,488 1,685,198 86.0 1,728,500 83.9
Gauteng 6,063,739 7,860,280 77.1 8,268,000 73.3
KwaZulu-Natal 5,117,131 6,096,509 83.9 6,251,200 81.9
Limpopo 2,440,348 3,004,795 81.2 3,227,300 75.6
Mpumalanga 1,860,834 2,389,406 77.9 2,475,500 75.2
North West 1,669,349 2,120,381 78.7 2,193,500 76.1
Northern Cape 601,080 711,843 84.4 733,700 81.9
Western Cape 2,941,333 3,771,271 78.0 3,894,200 75.5
Out of country 6,789
Total 25,390,150 31,434,035 80.8 32,687,600 77.7
While the number of registered voters has increased in South Africa, registration has
not always increased at the same rate as population growth. Eligible voters rose from 23
million in the first democratic election, to 27,4 million in 2004 with 6 million unregistered in
that election. Then again to 30 million in 2009 elections, with 6.7 million eligible citizens
unregistered. The population growth trend continued into 2013, where the VAP was
estimated to be approximately 32,7 million. Yet, with 25,3 million registered to vote in
2014, 7,3 million voters remain unregistered. Thus, registration as a proportion of the VAP
decreased slowly from 80% in 1999, to 75% in 2004, and begins to rise again to 77% in
2009, and to 78% in 2014.
Voter Turnout - National
Across South Africa’s five elections voter turnout as a proportion of registered voters
remained relatively high and stable over time. While there are no official voter turnout
figures for first democratic elections (since most voters were unregistered), in 1999 turnout
reached 89% of all registered voters, then 77% in 2004 and in 2009 (table 4). In the 2014
election turnout suddenly declines by 4% to 73%, presenting a discontinuity from the
previous two elections. When turnout is examined as a proportion of the eligible voting age
population turnout is less impressive and confirms a decline in participation, from 86% in
Hanns Seidel Foundation !Johannesburg Office !P.O. Box 41451! Craighall 2024 !Johannesburg !South Africa 3
Phone: +27 11 325 0589 !Fax: +27 86 512 5300Background Report Elections 2014
1994, to 72% in 1999, to 58% in 2004, rising slightly to 60% in 2009, and then dipping
again to 57% in the 2014 elections (table 3). It appears that there are an increasing number
of eligible voters who do not cast a vote.
Voter Turnout - Provincial
KZN had the highest turnout among registered of all provinces in the 2014 elections,
followed by Gauteng, Mpumalanga and the Western Cape. The lowest is found in Limpopo,
North West and the Eastern Cape respectively (table 3). Furthermore, across the three most
recent general elections, provincial turnout levels show a marked decline in every province
except KZN, which increases slightly (table 4). When all eligible voters are taken into account
in the 2014 national ballot, turnout drops to its lowest points in Limpopo at 48%, and 52%
in the North West. The highest level of mobilisation among eligible voters is found in KZN at
63% and Free State at 61%.
Moreover, there is a clear shift in turnout patterns across provinces. In the 2004
elections, provinces with the largest rural populations show higher rates of turnout (Eastern
Cape, Mpumalanga and Free State) but by 2014 the highest turnout rates are to be found in
the more populous provinces with the country’s large urban centres (Gauteng, KZN and the
Western Cape). Reasons for the shift are largely attributed to a decline in the ANC’s rural
support base (as increasing disillusionment results in higher rates of abstentions), and on the
other hand, the relatively higher exposure of urban voters to more competitive election
campaigns and a wider variety of political options which mobilised these voters to turn out in
higher proportions than they had done in previous elections.
Table 3: Turnout, 2014 national ballot by province
Provinces Registered VAP 2013 Votes cast Turnout Turnout-VAP %
voters estimates registered %
Eastern Cape 3,240,059 3,915,700 2,278,555 70.3 58.2
Free State 1,449,488 1,728,500 1,051,027 72.5 60.8
Gauteng 6,063,739 8,268,000 4,638,981 76.5 56.1
KwaZulu-Natal 5,117,131 6,251,200 3,935,771 76.9 63.0
Limpopo 2,440,348 3,227,300 1,543,986 63.3 47.8
Mpumalanga 1,860,834 2,475,500 1,408,269 75.7 56.9
North West 1,669,349 2,193,500 1,147,786 68.8 52.3
Northern Cape 601,080 733,700 443,714 73.8 60.5
Hanns Seidel Foundation !Johannesburg Office !P.O. Box 41451! Craighall 2024 !Johannesburg !South Africa 4
Phone: +27 11 325 0589 !Fax: +27 86 512 5300Background Report Elections 2014
Provinces Registered VAP 2013 Votes cast Turnout Turnout-VAP %
voters estimates registered %
Western Cape 2,941,333 3,894,200 2,188,236 74.4 56.2
Out of country 6,789 18,446 - -
National 25,390,150 32,687,600 18,654,771 73.5 57.1
Table 4: Turnout % registered voters, 2004, 2009 and 2014 national ballot by province
Provinces 2004 2009 2014
Eastern Cape 81.1 76.7 70.3
Free State 78.9 76.9 72.5
Gauteng 76.4 79.0 76.5
KwaZulu-Natal 73.5 79.9 76.9
Limpopo 77.1 69.6 63.3
Mpumalanga 80.3 80.4 75.7
North West 77.4 72.6 68.8
Northern Cape 76.0 75.9 73.8
Western Cape 73.1 77.8 74.4
National 76.7 77.3 73.5
The national results
By all accounts the ANC won decisively with 62% of the national vote (table 5). Its
national margin of victory over its closest competitor was 40%, and it retained all eight
provinces it previously ruled after the 2009 elections. From the vantage of twenty years,
while the ANC’s vote share increased from 63% in 1994 to 70% by 2004, it declined
thereafter to the extent that the party holds its lowest percentage of support yet at 62%. In
2014, the party also failed to match the number of votes it achieved in 2009, achieving
213,827 fewer voters. This is despite a 10% increase in registered voters in 2014, and a 4%
increase in turnout levels. Moreover, the proportion of eligible voters voting for the ANC
decreased steadily since its peak at 54% in 1994 to 35% by the end of the second
democratic decade. Despite its continued electoral dominance in the 2014 elections, the
party has suffered significant losses over twenty years of democracy.
Hanns Seidel Foundation !Johannesburg Office !P.O. Box 41451! Craighall 2024 !Johannesburg !South Africa 5
Phone: +27 11 325 0589 !Fax: +27 86 512 5300Background Report Elections 2014
Table 5: National election results, 2014
Seats in National
Party Votes Percentage
Parliament
African National Congress 11,436,921 62.15 249
Democratic Alliance 4,091,584 22.23 89
Economic Freedom Fighters 1,169,259 6.35 25
Inkatha Freedom Party 441,854 2.40 10
National Freedom Party 288,742 1.57 6
United Democratic Movement 184,636 1.00 4
Freedom Front Plus 165,715 0.90 4
Congress of the People 123,235 0.67 3
African Christian Democratic
104,039 0.57 3
Party
African Independent Congress 97,642 0.53 3
Agang South Africa 52,350 0.28 2
Pan Africanist Congress 37,784 0.21 1
African People’s Convention 30,676 0.17 1
United Christian Democratic
21,744 0.12 *
Party
Minority Front 22,589 0.12 *
Azanian People’s Organisation 20,421 0.11 *
Others 111,306 0.60 *
Total 18,402,497 100 400
Table 6: National vote for ANC by province: 2014 national elections
Provinces ANC votes All votes Per cent
Eastern Cape 1,587,338 2,243,497 70.8
Free State 721,126 1,034,337 69.7
Gauteng 2,552,012 4,592,219 54.9
KwaZulu-Natal 2,530,827 3,874,833 65.3
Limpopo 1,202,905 1,523,169 78.9
Mpumalanga 1,091,642 1,385,407 78.8
North West 763,804 1,126,691 67.8
Northern Cape 278,540 436,065 63.9
Western Cape 737,219 2,168,147 34.0
Out of country 1,508 18,132 8.3
Total 11,436,921 18,402,497 62.2
Hanns Seidel Foundation !Johannesburg Office !P.O. Box 41451! Craighall 2024 !Johannesburg !South Africa 6
Phone: +27 11 325 0589 !Fax: +27 86 512 5300Background Report Elections 2014
By comparison the largest opposition party, the Democratic Alliance (DA), shows
steady growth in terms of vote share rising from a paltry 2% in 1994 under the banner of its
predecessor the Democratic Party (DP), thereafter gaining greater popularity in subsequent
elections, and increasing its support by 5% in each of the last two elections to 17% in 2009
and to 22% in 2014. In 2009, the DA improved on its 2004 performance (albeit from a very
small vote base) by just over 1 million votes, a 53% increase compared with the 2004
election. Again, in 2014 the party attains another 1,1 million votes, a 39% change from its
2009 vote count. The DA won 89 seats in National Parliament in 2014, an increase from the
67 seats it secured in 2009 (table 5). Yet, in spite of continued growth and the fact that it
remains the only opposition party to have increased its vote share, support among all eligible
voters grew slowly during the twenty years and sits at only 13% of the VAP in 2014.
Table 7: National vote for DA by province: 2014 national elections
Provinces DA votes All votes Per cent
Eastern Cape 356,050 2,243,497 15.9
Free State 167,972 1,034,337 16.2
Gauteng 1,309,862 4,592,219 28.5
KwaZulu-Natal 517,461 3,874,833 13.4
Limpopo 100,562 1,523,169 6.6
Mpumalanga 139,158 1,385,407 10.0
North West 141,902 1,126,691 12.6
Northern Cape 101,882 436,065 23.4
Western Cape 1,241,424 2,168,147 57.3
Out of country 15,311 18,132 84.4
Total 4,091,584 18,402,497 22.2
The EFF fell far short of its ambitious targets to win the North West and Limpopo
provinces at the 2014 elections. It nevertheless made a strong showing in its first election,
and established itself as the third largest political party nationally with 6% of the vote share
in less than a year after the party was formed by leader Julius Malema, who was previously
expelled from the ANC. The EFF’s largest bases of national support came from the North West
(13%), Gauteng (10%) and Limpopo (10%). The EFF attracted sufficient votes to earn itself
seats in National Parliament where the party will hold 25 (or 6%) of the 400 seats (table 5).
In many respects the EFF’s performance reflects that of COPE in the 2009 elections, an ANC
splinter party that dented the ANC’s position in some provinces and secured 7% nationally.
Hanns Seidel Foundation !Johannesburg Office !P.O. Box 41451! Craighall 2024 !Johannesburg !South Africa 7
Phone: +27 11 325 0589 !Fax: +27 86 512 5300Background Report Elections 2014
The party faces various challenges – namely to establish functioning party structures; grow
its support base; and uphold the party’s anti-establishment and revolutionary image where it
holds seats in various legislative institutions.
Table 8: National vote for EFF by province: 2014 national elections
Provinces EFF votes All votes Per cent
Eastern Cape 84,783 2,243,497 3.8
Free State 81,559 1,034,337 7.9
Gauteng 471,074 4,592,219 10.3
KwaZulu-Natal 76,384 3,874,833 1.9
Limpopo 156,488 1,523,169 10.3
Mpumalanga 85,203 1,385,407 6.2
North West 141,150 1,126,691 12.5
Northern Cape 22,083 436,065 5.1
Western Cape 50,280 2,168,147 2.3
Out of country 255 18,132 1.4
Total 1,169,259 18,402,497 6.4
People registered to vote outside of South Africa overwhelmingly supported the DA.
Of all 18,132 overseas votes cast, 84% (15,311) opted for the DA, 8% (1,508) voted for the
ANC, 2% (328) for Agang-SA, 1% (255) for the EFF, with the remainder to smaller parties.
The Sidikiwe! Vukani! Vote ‘No’ Campaign was launched weeks before Election Day
by well-known ex-ANC stalwarts, Ronnie Kastrils and Nozizwe Madlala-Routledge. The
campaign was intended to encourage dissatisfied ANC supporters to spoil their ballots in
protest against the ANC government, or vote tactically in ways that would ‘challenge the huge
power and hold of the ANC over the electorate’, by voting for an opposition party. The
campaign received ample media coverage but failed to capture the imagination of the
electorate. In 2014, only 252,274 voters (or 1.3% of all votes cast) spoilt their ballots
although it is unclear whether these ballots were intended as part of the campaign.
The provincial results
The ANC maintained a clear majority in eight of the nine provinces that it previously
secured in the 2009 elections. The party increased its vote share in the Eastern Cape, KZN,
Northern Cape and Western Cape by one or two percentage points, most likely as result of
Hanns Seidel Foundation !Johannesburg Office !P.O. Box 41451! Craighall 2024 !Johannesburg !South Africa 8
Phone: +27 11 325 0589 !Fax: +27 86 512 5300Background Report Elections 2014
IFP supporters moving to the ANC in KZN, and COPE supporters returning to the ANC
elsewhere. The ANC lost percentage vote share in the Free State, Gauteng, Limpopo,
Mpumalanga and the North West, partly due to relatively lower voter turnout among its
supporters, and to voters in all likelihood moving their support to the EFF and to the DA. The
DA expanded its majority and control in the Western Cape from 51% in 2009 to 59% in
2014, increased its vote share in all provinces and became official opposition in six. The EFF
replaced COPE as the official opposition in the two provinces of Limpopo, party leader Julius
Malema’s home province, and the North West. It is in these provinces, and in Gauteng, that
the newcomer’s presence will be mostly felt. COPE lost the status of ‘official opposition’ that
it had secured in five provinces in 2009, and was reduced to a remnant. Its best performance
in 2014 being the miserly 4% it obtained in the Northern Cape.
Table 9: Provincial election results, 2014
Party Eastern Free Gauteng KZN Limpopo Mpumalanga North Northern Western
Cape State West Cape Cape
ANC 70.1 69.9 53.6 64.5 78.6 78.2 67.4 64.4 32.9
DA 16.2 16.2 30.8 12.8 6.5 10.4 12.7 23.9 59.4
EFF 3.5 8.2 10.3 1.9 10.7 6.3 13.2 5.0 2.1
COPE 1.2 * * * 0.9 * * 3.6 *
UDM 6.2 * * * * * * * *
IFP * * 0.8 10.9 * * * * *
NFP * * * 7.3 * * * * *
MF * * * 1.0 * * * * *
AIC 0.8 * * * * * * * *
FF+ * 2.1 1.2 * * * 1.7 * *
ACDP * * * * * * * * 1.0
BRA * * * * * 1.2 * * *
Others 2.0 3.6 3.3 1.6 3.3 3.9 5.0 3.1 4.6
100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100
* Parties that did not win provincial seats. The ‘Others’ category includes parties that obtained
percentage vote share but no seats.
Perhaps the most fundamental shift at provincial level is in Gauteng where the ANC’s
vote share dropped significantly from 64% to 54%, only retaining the province with a slim
margin of victory. The DA’s support base grew substantially from 22% to 31% and the EFF
took 10% of the vote. Gauteng is South Africa’s economic hub. It is the smallest of the nine
provinces but is the most diverse, populous and urbanised province. It is home almost 25%
Hanns Seidel Foundation !Johannesburg Office !P.O. Box 41451! Craighall 2024 !Johannesburg !South Africa 9
Phone: +27 11 325 0589 !Fax: +27 86 512 5300Background Report Elections 2014
of the country’s population and 22% of all eligible/registered voters. Gauteng’s victor would
certainly hold the psychological upper hand in South African politics. While the ANC has
dominated regional politics since 1994, the indication was that the 2014 elections would be
a closely contested match between the ANC, the DA and the newly formed EFF. The battle for
Gauteng intensified in the months preceding the election with the two major political parties
showcasing their governance and service delivery track records in the province (the DA
governed the key Midvaal municipality). It is possible that the forthcoming 2016 municipal
elections may see the ANC’s results drop below 50% in several urban metropolitan areas like
Johannesburg and Port Elizabeth.
Table 10: Seat allocation in provincial legislatures, 2014
Party Eastern Free Gauteng KZN Limpopo Mpumalanga North Northern Western Total
Cape State West Cape Cape Seats
ACDP 1 1
AIC 1 1
ANC 45 22 40 52 39 24 23 20 14 279
BRA 1 1
COPE 1 1 1 3
DA 10 5 23 10 3 3 4 7 26 91
EFF 2 2 8 2 6 2 5 2 1 30
IFP 1 9 10
MF 1 1
NFP 6 6
UDM 4 4
FF+ 1 1 1 3
Total 63 30 73 80 49 30 33 30 42 430
The 2014 elections seat allocations show only three political parties with a presence
in all nine provincial legislatures. The ANC holds the majority with 279 seats of the 430
available provincial seats. The DA holds 91 and the EFF 30 seats. The remaining nine parties
have limited appeal, albeit with nodes of support in particular provinces. COPE retained only
three provincial seats in total, one seat each in the Eastern Cape, Limpopo, and Northern
Cape, an astounding decrease from the 36 provincial seats won in 2009. The ACDP holds one
seat in the Western Cape, as does the AIC in the Eastern Cape, BRA in Mpumalanga, and the
MF in KZN. The UDM gained an additional seat in the Eastern Cape with a total of four seats,
but has no bearing elsewhere. The FF+ maintained its small but stable support bases with
Hanns Seidel Foundation !Johannesburg Office !P.O. Box 41451! Craighall 2024 !Johannesburg !South Africa 10
Phone: +27 11 325 0589 !Fax: +27 86 512 5300Background Report Elections 2014
one seat in the Free State, Gauteng, and North West provinces respectively. The NFP gained
six new seats in the KZN provincial legislature, but the IFP lost half its seats in KZN and now
holds only nine (and one in Gauteng). No more than 5% of votes cast in the provinces were
unrepresented by seats in the respective legislatures.
The 2014 party campaigns
The ANC’s 2014 manifesto, ‘Together we move SA forward’, argued that ‘South Africa
is a much better place than it was before 1994,’ and retained most of its old policies. It also
focused on what the ANC had achieved over the past two decades, essentially offering voters
a retrospective campaign message. The DA’s election manifesto, ‘Together for change,
together for jobs’ focused on the premise that the party could remedy unemployment and
create jobs through broadening the country’s skills base and by removing barriers to further
investment and growth. Moreover, the manifesto emphasized the delivery of social services
in a manner that would match its delivery record in the Western Cape. The EFF’s manifesto,
entitled ‘Now is the time for economic freedom!’, was audacious in its promises to the voter.
It promised the expropriation of land without compensation for equal redistribution; the
nationalisation of mines, banks, and other strategic sectors of the economy, without
compensation; and included a doubling of social grants, as well as a 50% increase in wages
for public servants such as teachers and nurses. These assertions were criticised on the basis
that they were largely idealistic and unrealistic objectives.
Voter participation was stimulated by competitive elections campaigns and the
broader array of partisan choice in certain provinces and urban centres. Turnout figures (in
table 3) show higher turnout rates in KwaZulu-Natal (where the ANC conducted a fierce
campaign against the IFP, DA, and NFP), in Gauteng, and the Western Cape (two provinces
with intense campaigns to win the two largest urban centres), and Mpumalanga, a province
that the ANC and EFF both regard as strongholds. In these cases, and especially in urban
centres, opposition parties had relatively better success reaching and persuading undecided
voters through campaigns and media coverage. In contrast, rural and semi-rural voters
appear to have withdrawn from the polls at higher rates. A telling example is Limpopo, which,
as previously mentioned, has the lowest turnout rate of all provinces, well below national
average, with only 63% of registered voters (or 48% of the VAP) casting a national ballot
(table 3).
Hanns Seidel Foundation !Johannesburg Office !P.O. Box 41451! Craighall 2024 !Johannesburg !South Africa 11
Phone: +27 11 325 0589 !Fax: +27 86 512 5300Background Report Elections 2014
The impact of young voters
Rapid population growth has transformed the age distribution of the eligible
electorate with the introduction of a significant proportion of young voters in recent
elections. The largest age cohort is the one born in the mid to late 1980’s who reached their
twenties at the time of the 2014 elections. An important question for the 2014 election was
the extent to which younger voters would turn out and leave an indelible mark on the
electoral landscape. As mentioned earlier, 6,4 million young people between ages of 18-29
years were registered, comprising a quarter of registered voters. Yet, registration levels
among 18-29 year olds are noticeably lower at 59% than the older counterparts (see table
1). Moreover, as proportions of all registered voters, 18-29 year olds comprise 25% while
the 30-39 year olds comprise 24%, 40-49 year olds comprise 20%, and together 50 years
and older comprise roughly 31%. Therefore, in terms of their actual numbers, 18-29 year
olds hold about as much influence at the polls as the next oldest cohort. At the time of
publication of the report, the IEC had not yet released its turnout figures disaggregated by
age groups, making is impossible to know whether young voters turned out to vote in similar
proportions to older voters. Nevertheless, lower registration levels among younger cohorts
invariably limited their electoral imprint. This probably had repercussions for political
parties that appealed specifically to a younger audience, such as the Economic Freedom
Fighters (EFF). An IEC Voter Participation survey conducted before the 2014 election found
that 73% of respondents believe that the youth should take a lead in voting and 82% felt the
youth needed to be encouraged to participate in elections.iv Despite these positive
sentiments, which were also held by the youngest respondents, only 50% of the same
respondents believe the youth are interested in politics. Moreover, the survey also revealed
that the intention to vote in the 2014 election was lowest among the youngest cohorts. It
appears that young voters recognise their duty to vote but are the least likely to do so.
Not only do younger voters have important implications for the overall participation
levels, they can also affect election outcomes because they are more responsive to short-term
political events and changing political contexts than their older counterparts Yet it is far from
clear that ‘the youth’ found a particular expression in the 2014 election. It may therefore be
that socio-political diversity within this age group dilutes the effects of a ‘youth vote’.
Perhaps in future elections the increasingly younger electorate will bring new partisan
attitudes to bear on the outcomes.
Hanns Seidel Foundation !Johannesburg Office !P.O. Box 41451! Craighall 2024 !Johannesburg !South Africa 12
Phone: +27 11 325 0589 !Fax: +27 86 512 5300Background Report Elections 2014
The quality of the electoral process
South Africa’s electoral body, the Electoral Commission (IEC), was established in
1997 and has overseen the administration of credible general elections. It is widely regarded
as an efficient, politically independent body and remains one of the country’s most trusted
institutions. In 2011, 69% of Afrobarometer respondents thought the IEC was trustworthy,
compared to 62% who expressed trust in the president, 56% in the National parliament, and
49% in the police. Of the 2009 election, 71% of survey respondents believed the elections to
be fair and fair, with only minor problems. A separate IEC Voter Participation Survey
conducted by the HSRC in December 2013, found that the IEC remained one of the country’s
most trusted institutions, but that trust had fallen from 72% in 2009 to 63%, possibility as a
consequence of a series of scandals that the IEC confronted in the two years before the 2014
elections (see below). v
Given the competitive nature of the 2014 elections, concerns mounted in the months
before the election of likely clashes between party supporters especially as political parties
ventured their campaigns into areas dominated by competitors. Yet pre-election partisan
unrest in the months before the election was minimal. Rather, conflict was related to a sharp
increase in community protests across the country regarding service delivery issues. Voting
day was successfully concluded without major problems. The IEC reported that the number of
incidents during the 2014 elections was significantly lower than in previous elections.
According to the IEC, the most significant logistical challenges on the day related firstly, to
unexpectedly high voter turnout in urban areas that led to a shortage of ballots in isolated
cases, and secondly, to approximately 22% of polling stations opening late. The shortage of
ballot paper stock in some voting stations, large crowds and long waits for voters raised
questions about the IEC’s administrative preparedness on the day. The IEC was quick to
respond by assuring voters that people in the queues at closing time of nine pm would be
permitted to vote.
However, opposition parties, including the EFF, Agang-SA, the NFP, and the DA, were
more circumspect and raised numerous concerns about possible irregularities during the
electoral process. Two days before the election, an ANC party agent was found to have stored
ballot papers at her home in Springs on the East Rand. This led to the commission
quarantining the ballots. The IEC dismissed an election official involved, while the ANC
replaced its local party agent. On election day in Phillipi, Cape Town, leader of Agang-SA,
Hanns Seidel Foundation !Johannesburg Office !P.O. Box 41451! Craighall 2024 !Johannesburg !South Africa 13
Phone: +27 11 325 0589 !Fax: +27 86 512 5300Background Report Elections 2014
Mamphela Ramphele, lodged a complaint after witnessing what appeared to be open ballot
boxes in the polling station, and ballot papers being passed through windows. A voting
station in Alexandra, Johannesburg, was closed in the early afternoon due to allegations by
the EFF of rigging and collusion between officials of the IEC and the ANC, who were
suspected of moving voters between stations to cast multiple ballots. In a separate incident,
DA party leader, Helen Zille, voiced concerns over what appeared to be dumped ballot papers
in Pretoria the day after the election. The ballot papers, which showed a majority vote for the
DA, had already been counted but this and other incidents raised concerns about the IEC’s
ability to adhere to international standards regarding the security of and transportation of
ballot papers. The IEC confirmed that the body would hold an investigation into the various
irregularities. Opposition parties agreed that the incidents were not sufficiently widespread
as to undermine the integrity of the overall process and outcome.
While the overall quality of the electoral process of the 2014 national and provincial
elections was highly acceptable, for the first time, pertinent questions arose relating to the
IEC’s ability to conduct an impartial and transparent election. Of particular concern, was an
incident that implicated several senior IEC officials in unethical behaviour, including Chief
Electoral Officer at the time, Advocate Pansy Tlakula. A 2013 Public Protector report, and
subsequent National Treasury report in March 2014, found that a procurement deal to lease
office premise in Pretoria to accommodate the IEC’s Head Office was highly irregular. The
controversy threatened public trust in the institution and called its impartiality into question
by raising the impropriety of involvement between senior IEC officials tasked with
administering free and fair elections and members of political parties. Yet, the electoral body
maintained a stable front ahead of elections and in a sign of a maturing democracy all key
political actors, including political parties, delinked the internal processes and issues facing
senior members from the IEC’s overall ability to manage the electoral process.
Finally, the integrity of any electoral process also depends on the ability of voters to
make informed choices about their partisan preference on voting day without exposure to
manipulation or intimidation. Generally, political party members adhere to the strict rules
that prohibit any party campaigning or materials around election polling stations. However, a
subtle process of persuasion can occur months and weeks before an election takes place. A
report published by the Community Agency for Social Enquiry in April 2014 pointed to
various forms of intimidation and manipulation of voters in the build up to the 2014
elections. In particular, respondents in the report asserted that ANC campaigners were
Hanns Seidel Foundation !Johannesburg Office !P.O. Box 41451! Craighall 2024 !Johannesburg !South Africa 14
Phone: +27 11 325 0589 !Fax: +27 86 512 5300Background Report Elections 2014
presenting voters with inaccurate information by informing voters in poorer communities
that opposition parties will remove social grants (including pensions), food parcels and
housing if voted in. Numerous media accounts also report anecdotal evidence of government
officials warning poorer voters during the campaigning period that they would not receive
grants if they don’t vote ‘the right way’.
The improper use of public resources also provides another method for parties to
manipulate people’s economic situations and needs, as well as being an indication of the
extent to which the elections provided a relatively level playing field for political contenders.
As with most parties in government the ANC was always likely to benefit by virtue of its
incumbency. Yet in the weeks leading to the elections opposition parties alleged the blatant
abuse and misappropriation of public resources by the ANC. Key concerns related to the
efforts of government departments to support the ANC’s election campaign by using state
events to circulate party materials to voters, and especially food parcels and blankets to
vulnerable voters. The DA concluded that in many instances ‘government events that have
been hijacked by ANC leaders and turned into nothing more than election rallies’. However, a
study by the Centre for Social Development in Africa at the University of Johannesburg before
the election suggested that this approach by the incumbent party to securing support may
not be particularly effective - 95% of poor people they interviewed knew they were entitled
to grants by right, whoever they voted for; while 70% rejected food parcels as an attempt to
buy votes.
Implications for the future
At first glance, the aggregate outcomes are reminiscent of earlier South African
elections and suggest little that is new. However, a closer analysis of the results point to
significant shifts in the electoral landscape. First, South Africa has witnessed a steady
decline in electoral participation during its first twenty years of democracy. Second, as in
previous contests, the apparently stable results for the ANC at national and provincial levels
obscure significant losses. Third, within opposition ranks, there was, one the one hand, a
shift in voter support towards the DA, and on the other, a movement of votes towards the
EFF, both to the considerable cost of smaller and regional parties. Finally, the losses incurred
by the ANC and the shifts towards the more viable opposition suggest that many voters are
increasingly discerning towards the governing party’s performance and are motivated by
competitive provincial election campaigns, where they exist. Moreover, some voters shifted
Hanns Seidel Foundation !Johannesburg Office !P.O. Box 41451! Craighall 2024 !Johannesburg !South Africa 15
Phone: +27 11 325 0589 !Fax: +27 86 512 5300Background Report Elections 2014
their support away from traditional political homes to a new party in this election. The 2014
elections, specifically the decline in the ANC’s majority status, the continued consolidation of
the DA, and the rise of the militant EFF, have set the scene for further political competition in
future electoral contests.
As younger voters enter the electorate in bigger proportions, lower turnout among
these members will in all likelihood continue in subsequent elections, causing aggregate
turnout levels to fall. Globally, young voters are predisposed to lower turnout rates. Young
people have the most potential to change politics. Assuming for a moment that all eligible
people in the youngest cohort (18-29 years) had registered and voted in the 2014 elections
their combined vote would have comprised a considerable 37%, or over a third of all
registered voters, up from their current representation at a quarter of registered voters. From
a numerical perspective, therein lies the power of a ‘youth vote’ in South African politics.
The ANC’s weaker performance in the 2014 elections, and the continued losses in
VAP support over the years, is likely to cause introspection among senior ANC members
about measures that need to be taken to stem the loss of electoral support in time for 2016’s
municipal elections. The ANC’s loss of power relative to its previous majorities should also
urge its representatives to show greater accountability and responsiveness. Greater political
competition and uncertainty at future elections bodes well for accountability and
responsiveness by both government and political parties.
Although South Africa retains the characteristics of a dominant party system in the
2014 election, with the ANC at 62% of the vote, multiparty competition has strengthened.
The largest opposition party, the DA, has expanded its support base across the electorate and
the EFF effectively dented the ANC’s traditional support base in many provinces. The DA will
undoubtedly be encouraged by a mandate from a more representative electorate –the party
claimed after the 2014 election that 20% of its new support came from black African voters -
and will focus on positioning the party as a serious contender for government. A stronger
opposition presence in legislatures should also serve the public interest by broadening
representation, and strengthening oversight of incumbent behaviour. In addition, the
inclusion of the radical EFF into South Africa’s representative institutions confirms that an
important social class cleavage to emerge in South Africa has expression in its formal
democratic institutions. Partisan conflict is effectively channelled through the institutions of
democracy where actors, including the EFF’s leaders, have incentives to regard the
Hanns Seidel Foundation !Johannesburg Office !P.O. Box 41451! Craighall 2024 !Johannesburg !South Africa 16
Phone: +27 11 325 0589 !Fax: +27 86 512 5300Background Report Elections 2014
democratic rules of the game as legitimate. This reduces extra-institutional political conflict
and bodes well for the institutionalisation of the party system as a whole.
Finally, these elections demonstrated the country’s continuing commitment to
regular, free and fair elections. Repeated elections in African countries where outcomes are
considered widely legitimate are rare events and in this regard South Africa stands out as
one of the few on the continent that can lay proper claim to free elections as an
institutionalised feature of its politics, and hence an on-going consolidation process of
democracy.
Hanns Seidel Foundation !Johannesburg Office !P.O. Box 41451! Craighall 2024 !Johannesburg !South Africa 17
Phone: +27 11 325 0589 !Fax: +27 86 512 5300Background Report Elections 2014 Abbreviations ACDP African Christian Democratic Party Agang Agang South Africa ANC African National Congress ANCYL ANC Youth League APC African People’s Convention AIC African Independent Congress BRA Bushbucksridge Association COPE Congress of the People DA Democratic Alliance EFF Economic Freedom Fighters FF+ Freedom Front Plus HSRC Human Sciences Research Council IEC Electoral Commission of South Africa IFP Inkatha Freedom Party KZN KwaZulu-Natal MF Minority Front NFP National Freedom Party UDM United Democratic Front VAP Voting age population i The election results are sourced directly from official figures provided by the Electoral Commission (IEC). The figures quoted in-text are rounded to the nearest whole number and in tabular form are rounded to one decimal place. ii Figures for registered voters are based on the IEC’s certified voters roll released on 5 March 2014. See IEC website for 2011 VAP figures www.elections.org.za iii Stats SA’s 2013 population estimates are sourced from Stats SA’s National office by the author. The figures exclude foreign nationals. iv Benjamin Roberts et al., Ibid. v Benjamin Roberts, Jare Struwig, Steven Gordon, Yul Derek Davids, Jenna Lee Marco, 2014, IEC Voter participation survey 2013/14: Key Findings. Report prepared for the Electoral Commission of South Africa. Pretoria: Human Sciences Research Council. Hanns Seidel Foundation !Johannesburg Office !P.O. Box 41451! Craighall 2024 !Johannesburg !South Africa 18 Phone: +27 11 325 0589 !Fax: +27 86 512 5300
You can also read
