Four Questions Following Sierra Leone’s Recent Election

At the end of June, millions of Sierra Leoneans cast votes in the nation’s presidential election. Twelve candidates ran against incumbent President Julius Maada Bio, SIS/MIS ’01, including Sierra Leonean politician Samura Kamara.
Bio was declared the winner by the nation’s chief electoral commissioner, but concerns about the transparency of the tabulation process were quickly raised by international election observers and officials. In a joint statement, ambassadors from the US, United Kingdom, Ireland, Germany, France, and the EU Delegation said they shared “the concerns of national and international observation missions about the lack of transparency in the tabulation process.”
As of last week, the US Department of State said concern remains regarding “irregularities in the election results announced by the Electoral Commission for Sierra Leone (ECSL).” The State Department is now calling on the government of Sierra Leone to begin an independent, outside investigation into the nation’s election process to “improve electoral modalities” for future elections.
We asked SIS professor Susan Shepler to answer a few questions about the concerns raised over Sierra Leone’s recent election and discuss how the democratic process has evolved in the nation over the last two decades.
- At the end of June, Sierra Leone’s incumbent President Julius Maada Bio was declared the winner of the election by the nation’s election commission after winning 56% of total votes cast; however, observers have voiced concern about the lack of transparency in the tabulation process. Where are these concerns over transparency stemming from?
- Concerns are coming from a number of directions. First, observers have pointed to a number of irregularities in the results released by the ECSL, including some polling places reporting vote counts at 130% of registered voters, some reports of ballot boxes arriving with broken seals and pre-marked ballots, and long delays in opening some polling locations. Second, there were concerns with the transparency of the ballot counting process, with observers calling for results to be projected on the wall so everyone could count along. Third, parallel vote counts held by various civil society organizations had markedly different results from what was announced by ECSL.
- Furthermore, in the year or so leading up to the election, opposition supporters have pointed to various irregularities they say were meant to sway the election results, including a dubious census exercise and a new proportional representation voting act.
- The National Election Watch (NEW) compared parliamentary election results released by the nation’s Electoral Commission with district-level presidential results and found “large inconsistencies” in turnout in the data. What was the response to this report by the nation’s Electoral Commission, President Bio, and Sierra Leonean voters?
- National Election Watch is a coalition of civil society organizations who carry out election monitoring and other activities to support democratic governance in Sierra Leone. When they released the report you mention, unfortunately, they were subject to anonymous threats, but also, the state security apparatus posted a somewhat threatening notice against them. The electoral commission has stood by its results, despite concerns raised by US and European diplomats in Sierra Leone.
- President Bio said that Western observers should mind their own business and was promptly sworn in. The response of Sierra Leonean voters varied by party affiliation, with supporters of President Bio’s party—the Sierra Leone People’s Party (SLPP)—defending the ECSL results and supporters of the opposition All People’s Congress (APC) crying foul.
- This year marked the fifth election since the nation’s 10-year civil war, which killed more than 50,000 people. How has the democratic electoral process in Sierra Leone evolved over the last two decades? How has participation in the democratic process grown among Sierra Leonean voters?
- Sierra Leone has been rightly proud of its post-war democracy. There have been several peaceful transfers of power between the two main parties. Sierra Leone has seen high engagement in politics and high voter turnout in this and previous elections. I think many people see truly democratic governance as essential to addressing the issues that led to the civil war and therefore are quite concerned that their democracy seems to be under threat. Though, again, public opinion varies depending on which of the two main parties one is affiliated with.
- Heading into the election, Sierra Leonean was facing an economic crisis that sparked deadly riots last year, according to Voice of America. What role did the economic crisis play in driving voters to the polls, and what challenges lie ahead for Sierra Leone’s president?
- The economic crisis was certainly on voters’ minds heading into the election, but honestly, they would have voted no matter what (see my response above about high voter participation in the country). President Bio now faces the possibility of Western countries withdrawing aid in the face of these disputed elections results. For example, there is a rumor circulating on WhatsApp that the Millennium Challenge Corporation will withdraw $400 million in US aid. President Bio recently announced a new slate of government ministers and has said his priorities in his second term will be food security and job creation, in many ways more reactive to the economic concerns of Sierra Leoneans.