Herramientas Personales
|
|
Focus on HIV/AIDS and Elections
HIV/AIDS poses a major challenge to many developing countries. Besides constituting a tremendous medical emergency, countries already saddled with poverty, are caught up in a vicious circle of lower capacity, loss in human resources and poor growth. Nevertheless, besides being a threat to socio-economic development and human well-being, HIV/AIDS also poses major challenges to democracy and good governance. South Africa is the country worst stricken by the HIV/AIDS pandemic. Currently, more people are infected with HIV/AIDS in South Africa than in any other country. There are 4.7 million South Africans affected by the pandemic, which makes up to 20% of the adult population (HIV/AIDS, Democracy and Citizenship p. 2). In November 2004, IDASA (The Institute for Democracy in South Africa) published the report HIV/AIDS and Democratic Governance in South Africa - Illustrating the Impact on Electoral Processes (IDASA 2004) by Kondwani Chirambo , which studies how HIV/AIDS can and does impact on electoral democracy in South Africa.
The key findings of the report by IDASA's Governance and AIDS Programme (GAP) are highlighted in the following sections of this Focus On:
Selected Articles:
Electoral management and administrationElectoral Management Bodies (EMBs) are vital for accrediting the election result with the stamp of approval that the elected regime needs to win national and international legitimacy. In order to successfully carry out its mandate, an EMB needs both qualified and experienced staff as well as accurate demographic statistics to feed into the national voters’ roll. Where the HIV/AIDS epidemic reduces the availability of such appropriately qualified staff and where increased mortality is not accurately reflected in the voters’ roll, the risk of electoral fraud increases manifold (ibid.: 29). In general EMBs which rely on public service workers for support during elections are vulnerable to the pandemic’s effects that might compromise its institutional capacities. This vulnerability is aggravated by the fact that most temporary staff are from the public service, particularly the teaching profession, which is one of the hardest hit by the HIV/AIDS pandemic. As the conduct of elections requires experienced staff, the vulnerability of support personnel to the disease is likely to reduce the EMB’s ability to rely on them to bring their accumulated experience and skills to bear on future elections.” (ibid.:14). Mattes notes that besides decimating the number of public servants, the pandemic could severely harm the processes of political institutionalism. A shrinking body of civil servants will have been at their position long enough to develop the specialised skills, expertise, and professionalism needed to do their work. Furthermore, there will be fewer experienced officials available to train younger personnel in key formal skills, or pass on more informal standard operation procedures or norms (Maanda David Nelufule, AIDS and democracy: what do we know, 2004:19). Next: Electoral systems and power shift Electoral system and power shiftsThe electoral system in a democracy is the crucial institutional device While much analytical attention has been spent on exploring how electoral systems differ in their construction and in terms of what democratic principles they entrench, little if any attention has been given to how sensitive they are to the effects of an epidemic such as HIV/AIDS (ibid.: 28). The report suggests that the Westminster electoral model, or First-Past-the Post (FPTP), is more vulnerable to HIV/AIDS than the Proportional Representation (PR) system. The effects are felt in the process of replacing Members of Parliament who succumb to the disease (ibid.: 15). The FPTP has serious cost implications for sustainability; this system is particularly vulnerable as in most cases by-elections must be held in order to replace any members who die. Preliminary evidence of by-elections generated by increased deaths and the cost of holding them is provided from three Southern African countries to underline this fact. While South Africa uses the PR method at national level, it does operate a hybrid system (FPTP and PR) at local level and might yet endure the effects of the disease. Conversely, a pilot study by IDASA undertaken in 2003 in Zambia – which uses the FPTP electoral method – indicates that between 1964 and 1984 (the 20-year period before the advent of HIV/AIDS) a total of 46 by-elections were held, and 14 of those were a result of death by illness and accidents combined. While over an 18-year period (from 1985, the year the first case of AIDS was documented in Zambia, to February 2003) 102 by-elections were held and 59 of those were due to death by disease. The majority of the 59 by-elections, a total of 39, were held between 1992 and February 2003, which coincidentally are the years in which the HIV/AIDS pandemic peaked in Zambia While there may be no specific information on the nature of the illnesses that led to the deaths of representatives, trend analyses can be indicative of the influence of the pandemic.” (ibid.: 15f). The report notes that disease in general, and especially HIV/AIDS, will contribute to power shifts in countries operating the FPTP electoral model. The effect of illness, combined with vacancies generated by expulsions, resignations or floor crossing by members, has compelled Zimbabwe to hold 13 (+1) by-elections since the 2000 legislative polls. Eight of the by-elections arose because parliamentary representatives had died prematurely of “illness”. The sum effect is that the opposition parties have lost the majority of the by-elections, partly perhaps due to their inability to perpetually compete with a well-resourced ruling party.” (ibid.: 16) Next: Political parties Political partiesGiven the overwhelmingly representative nature of democracy in the world today, the political parties that contest elections to win seats in legislative assemblies are of course absolutely essential for the democratic process. While Members of Parliament (MPs) win personal mandates from electoral constituencies in countries like Botswana and Zambia, these nevertheless co-ordinate their parliamentary work under direction from their respective political parties. Under the alternative electoral system, where voters can only vote for parties and not individual MPs, as in South Africa and Namibia, the parties are all the more important for the electoral process and the legislative work in parliament. Where the HIV/AIDS epidemic undermines parties’ capacity to campaign in elections and to effectively represent its voters during parliamentary sessions – through the loss of leaders, MPs and active members to AIDS-related illnesses and death – parties will be less representative of the electorate and less effective in shaping legislation in accordance with the mandate they have been given by their voters (HIV/AIDS and Democratic Governance in South Africa - Illustrating the Impact on Electoral Processes, 2004: 29). Additionally, HIV/AIDS has put some strain on party structures by creating an increased need to replace cadres who have succumbed to illness or who have died. Although no severe functional defects have arisen in party structures, the loss of seniority and experience nevertheless is reported to have reduced parties’ capacities and ‘intellectual memory’ somewhat. (ibid.: 17f). Next: Public opinion Public opinionThe report suggests that there is a general increase in public awareness of HIV/AIDS as a political and social problem. There is, however, no basis to argue that HIV/AIDS is shaping public opinion in a consistent fashion Willan notes that the high HIV/AIDS prevalence in South Africa has generated high mobilisation around the issue from civil society, as in the case of the Treatment Action Campaign (Samantha Willan, “HIV/AIDS, Democracy and Governance in South Africa”, African Civil Society Governance and Aids Initiative, Issue Brief No. 1 May 2004). Next: Special vote Special voteCaesar stresses the correlation between low voter turnout and HIV/AIDS related issues. Voters too ill to cast a vote or people pre-occupied HIV/AIDS related demands are often disenfranchised (Chirambo & Caesar “Emerging Theories and Perspectives” Aids and Governance, v 1(1), march 2003). In the IDASA report it is acknowledged that the “special vote” is a very useful institutional arrangement to ensure, as far as possible, that people are not disenfranchised by being ill, disabled or pregnant. The mere fact that it exists and was delivered to more than 650 000 voters in the last election is a powerful indication of the commitment of the South African authorities to making democratic participation through the vote as inclusive as possible. However there is a need to categorically state to the public whether people suffering from debilitating or chronic illnesses qualify for this facility. The report finds for instance that some People Living with HIV/AIDS (PLWHA) who might wish to have access to the special vote lack sufficient information on whether they are eligible or not. This is likely to have implications for participation by people who are infected by diseases such as HIV/AIDS that are accompanied by stigma and discrimination (HIV/AIDS and Democratic Governance in South Africa - Illustrating the Impact on Electoral Processes, 2004: 17). Next: Stigma and discrimination Stigma and discriminationStigma and discrimination has been found to be the single most dominant determinant for lack of participation in elections by PLWHAs and care givers.
The respondents’ opinions correlate with the findings of studies on stigma and discrimination, particularly South Africa’s Department of Health study of 2002, that HIV/AIDS remains a taboo amongst some South African communities, especially in the rural enclaves. The sense of stigma, it seems, would be strongest amongst people who are symptomatic; respondents argued that most members of the communities would not stand in the same queue with someone with visible signs of disease e.g. body rashes or sores. Based on these discussions, the report concludes that people who have visible signs of illness from HIV/AIDS, and those who have publicly declared their status, are more likely to eschew from public voting, particularly if they are located in a rural area. There is nothing to suggest in the main that PLWHAS have lost the will to participate in political life. Quite the contrary. The majority of respondents expressed a desire to participate but were constrained by attitudinal and structural factors. These results are not representative of the opinions of all PLWHAs as only 68 people participated in the focus groups, but they are indicative of such attitudes and may have external validity.” (HIV/AIDS and Democratic Governance in South Africa - Illustrating the Impact on Electoral Processes, 2004: 18) Voter MortalityNAIDS, the United Nations body responsible for the coordination of the UNs efforts to fight the HIV/AIDS pandemic, estimates that 5.3 million South Africans of all ages were infected with HIV at the end of 2003. The IDASA analyses of deaths between 1999 and 2003 among voters registered on the voters’ roll strengthen the argument that critical segments of the South African electorate are dying from AIDS. Overall, between 1999 and 2003 nearly 1.5 million South African registered voters died of various causes. The report argues that the unusual mortality profiles in the electorate to a large extent can be explained by AIDS. This argument is based on the strong correspondence found between the profiles that the analysis generated and those that have been described by the expert demographers in the field of HIV/AIDS, as well as on the report’s statistical analyses (Ibid.: 15). With a start to the epidemic in the early 1990s, South Africa has only more recently entered the phase when devastating effects will become increasingly clear and painful in terms of sharp increase in AIDS-related morbidity and mortality. That is unless a quick and extensive treatment campaign can effectively halt this tragic development (ibid.: 27). Next: Contributors to this Focus On ContributorsContributors to Focus on HIV/AIDS and ElectionsThe HIV/AIDS Focus On is based on a report developed by Kondwani Chirambo at IDASA (The Institute for Democracy in South Africa). It was compiled and further enriched with external sources by Johan Lindroth, whilst on secondment to International IDEA. Since HIV/AIDS was first discovered in 1981 more than 20 million people have died from AIDS, and today one person is infected with HIV every five seconds. Africa is the continent worst stricken by HIV/AIDS, and Asia and Eastern Europe are experiencing a terrifying increase in the number of persons infected with the virus. The IDASA research project had the objective of investigating the probable impact of HIV-AIDS on electoral processes as a key facet of the democratisation process in Africa. The rationale is that democracy requires strong institutions and the full participation of citizens in political, social and economic life to be sustainable. The main message from the research report is that the legitimacy and effectiveness of the South African democracy and its electoral processes risk being undermined by the HIV/AIDS epidemic. On behalf of IDASA we would like to thank the following persons and institutions for their cooperation and support: the Rockefeller Brother Fund, the Ford Foundation, the Independent Electoral Commission of South Africa, Citizen Surveys, the Electoral Institute of South Africa, Derek Davids, Mary Caesar, Marietjtie Myburg, Vasanthie Naicker, Shaila Gupta, Paul Graham, and People Living with HIV/AIDS and care givers who supported the project.
|
More than two decades after the Acquired Immunodeficiency Syndrome (HIV/AIDS) was first identified, HIV/AIDS has become one of the most devastating diseases mankind has ever faced. Since the breakout of the disease, more than 39.4 million people are living with the disease worldwide, and 2.3 million have died in Africa only (
through which opinions among the electorate are translated into seats and power in legislatures. 
across the Southern African region. South Africa is an exception though as statistical patterns indicate that people who suffer personal loss are more likely to prioritise HIV/AIDS in their demands on government interventions. There is nothing, however, that suggests at this point in time that people affected by HIV/AIDS would change their choice of political party as a result of this disaffection. (ibid.: 17). 
Focus group discussions held in urban and rural areas of KwaZulu- Natal with PLWHAS and care givers who were all registered voters for the 2004 election yielded seemingly well-founded fears that communities will ostracise or marginalise those infected and affected further, if they exposed themselves to the major public events. 