Politikon
South African Journal of Political Studies
ISSN: (Print) (Online) Journal homepage: https://www.tandfonline.com/loi/cpsa20
How Electoral Integrity Matters in an Era of
Coronavirus (COVID-19) Pandemic: Experience
from Ghana’s Eighth General Election
Emmanuel Debrah & Isaac Owusu-Mensah
To cite this article: Emmanuel Debrah & Isaac Owusu-Mensah (2023): How Electoral Integrity
Matters in an Era of Coronavirus (COVID-19) Pandemic: Experience from Ghana’s Eighth
General Election, Politikon, DOI: 10.1080/02589346.2023.2215027
To link to this article:  https://doi.org/10.1080/02589346.2023.2215027
Published online: 26 May 2023.
Submit your article to this journal 
Article views: 12
View related articles 
View Crossmark data
Full Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at
https://www.tandfonline.com/action/journalInformation?journalCode=cpsa20
POLITIKON
https://doi.org/10.1080/02589346.2023.2215027
How Electoral Integrity Matters in an Era of Coronavirus
(COVID-19) Pandemic: Experience from Ghana’s Eighth
General Election
Emmanuel Debrah and Isaac Owusu-Mensah
Department of Political Science, University of Ghana, Legon, Accra
ABSTRACT
This article examined whether, in the pandemic, the conduct of Ghana’s 2020 general
elections conformed to acceptable international standards or not? Analysing data drawn
from 120 respondents based on face-to-face and telephone interviews, the study
established that the measures for pre-election and polling day activities guaranteed the
integrity of the elections. The electoral laws and system, the mechanics for voter
registration, polling, and balloting were fair, transparent, and inclusive. The fair application
of the electoral laws, openness, and stakeholders’ active participation in the electoral
process obviated fraud. Both domestic and international observers validated the election
result declared by the EC because the processes satisfied the standards for free and fair
elections even though Ghanaian diasporas were disenfranchised, and a few administrative
and technical challenges occurred. Hence, electoral reform targeting efficient
management, enlargement of the franchise to capture diasporas’ votes, and an electoral
system that supports proportional representation albeit a possibility of proliferation of
parties, would improve electoral integrity for deepening democratic development.
Introduction
Ghana is one Sub-Saharan African country that has received much commendation for pro-
moting democratic governance since it returned to constitutional rule in 1992. Apart from
sustaining the functioning of democratic institutions such as parliament, executive, and
independent judiciary, it has institutionalised multiparty politics (Gyimah-Boadi 2001;
Ayee 2017; Debrah 2016). In contrast to the previous culture of regime changes
through coup d’états, elections have become the only game in town (Linz and Stepan
1996). The regularly organised elections have been competitive to the extent that they
have produced power alternations between the National Democratic Congress (NDC)
and the New Patriotic Party (NPP) – two strong political parties, at different junctures.
But the 1992 transition election was never smooth and ended in the opposition
parties’ boycott of the December parliamentary poll after they contended that the
earlier presidential election in November was a stolen verdict (NPP 1992). The opposition
parties alleged that the Interim National Electoral Commission (INEC) that was hurriedly
created by the military regime was biased in favour of the incumbent, Jerry Rawlings,
the presidential candidate of the NDC and leader of the Provisional National Defence
Council (PNDC) who also supervised the transition. In the Stolen Verdict, the opposition
CONTACT Emmanuel Debrah edebrah2001@yahoo.co.uk; edebrah@ug.edu.gh Department of Political Science,
University of Ghana, Legon, Accra
© 2023 South African Association of Political Studies
2 E. DEBRAH AND I. OWUSU-MENSAH
catalogued a number of electoral frauds, and threatened non-cooperation with the gov-
ernment unless electoral reforms were implemented (Commonwealth Secretariat 1992;
NPP 1992; Debrah 2004). The attack on the integrity of the 1992 election was not an iso-
lated case in Africa. Mozaffar and Schedler (2002) have reported how election manage-
ment during transitions in many African countries was characterised by administrative
inefficiency, lack of political neutrality, and accountability, thereby creating uncertainties
about the future of African democratisation. However, the problems with the integrity of
Ghana’s transition election offered the democratic stakeholders the opportunity to over-
haul the electoral process in order to ignite voter confidence in its management (Gyimah-
Boadi 1999; Debrah 2011; Pastor 1999). With support from the International Federation for
Electoral System (IFES), Ghana’s Electoral Commission (EC) worked closely with the politi-
cal parties to promote professionalism in the management of the subsequent elections –
which both the international and domestic election observers have rated as relatively free
and fair (Commonwealth Secretariat 2000, 2012; Gyimah-Boadi 2001; Ayee 1997; CODEO
2012, 2016; Debrah 2016). Yet, in early 2020 when the EC inaugurated the calendar for the
8th general election, it was greeted with negative reactions. The scepticism about the EC’s
decision to implement an electoral timetable was largely informed by the outbreak of the
Coronavirus (COVID-19)1, which by the time the World Health Organization (WHO)
declared it a pandemic in February 2020, had begun to show signs of its capacity to dev-
astate nations – the increased infections and deaths were alarming – by the end of May
2020, the infection in Ghana had reached 7,768 (John Hopkins 2020). Yet, global actions in
the form of lockdowns aimed to kerb its spread led to economic nock-downs of which
developing countries, particularly Africa was the hardest hit by its devastating effect
(World Bank 2020). It was not only on the economic front that COVID-19 wabbled the
world. Democracy too, trembled under its ‘sovereignty’. Countries that had scheduled
elections during the period such as Ghana, faced a dilemma of either postponing or
bravely implementing the election plan.
The dissenting views to the EC’s decision to hold the presidential and parliamentary
elections largely coalesced around how to maintain the integrity of the election in the
pandemic situation. Indeed, the literature on emergency politics has already noted that
pandemics could encourage the exercise of emergency powers by the executive in a
manner that can weaken democratic institutions. For instance, according to Maatsch
(2020) and Afsahi, et al. (2020), pandemics often present potential risks for institutions
of accountability to exercise their oversight powers; embolden the executive to place
restrictions on citizens’ freedoms – silence its critics, and make irrational decisions that
could affect voters (Posner and Vermeule 2006; Gargarella 2020). On the other hand, it
has been contended that during periods of increased threats such as pandemics, well-
motivated institutions such as election management bodies will not renege on their
responsibility to provide adequate safeguards against possible democratic institutional
failure (Posner and Vermeule 2006). Hence, in the wake of popular apprehensions, the
EC assured the stakeholders of developed measures to sustain the rule of law, transpar-
ency, inclusivity, and fairness of the electoral process. The EC’s position suggests that it
is possible to conduct free and fair elections in a pandemic situation (Honig 2009).
Therefore, agreeing with Norris, Frank, and Martínez i Coma (2014) and Mauk (2020)
that electoral integrity lies at the core of democratic procedures, the paper examines
how the conduct of the elections in terms of the implementation of the electoral laws
POLITIKON 3
and system, voter registration, polling, and balloting reflected international norms of
fairness, transparency, and inclusivity. Paying attention to these variables is important
because according to Elklit and Reynolds (2002), a free and fair election has a direct
impact on political legitimacy and democratic consolidation in new democracies.
Why is this study significant when the literature on democratisation in Ghana is
already chocked with election studies (Ayee 1997; Ayee 2011; Boafo-Arthur 2008;
Gyimah-Boadi 1997; Debrah 2004). Although much ink has been poured into the man-
agement of elections in Ghana by the EC (Debrah 2011; Gyimah-Boadi 1999; Ayee
1998); the role of the electoral process in fostering free and fair elections (Debrah
2003); the impact of political parties and manifestoes on the elections (Ayee 2002);
issue-based voting (Debrah 2016; Arthur 2009), analysis of elections’ outcome (Ayee
2017); the role of election observers and the impact of money on the elections
(Ayee 1998; Ayee 2011; Debrah 2019), gauging election integrity has been a forgotten
variable in the bourgeoning literature on democratisation in Ghana. Yet determining
the credibility of elections goes beyond what happens on ballot day to include the
totality of the electoral process (Goodwin-Gill 2006). Therefore, this study endeavours
to fill the void by arguing that election integrity – conducting elections that met inter-
national standards is of paramount importance for nascent democracies, which cannot
be compromised under any circumstance – whether during pandemics or not. This
would illuminate our understanding of the quality of electoral democracy that has
emerged in Ghana and how it represents an important step towards consolidating
its democracy2.
The study is structured as follows: first, the introduction, which encapsulates the review
of the salient literature is followed by the second, conceptualisation of democratic-elec-
tion nexus in order to provide a context for comprehending the relevant issues. Third, it
delineates salient aspects of the electoral process3 and examines whether their
implementation met acceptable international standards of fairness, transparency, and
inclusiveness or not? The fourth section is devoted to the conclusion and lessons that
have been learned from the study.
Conceptual imperative: democracy-election nexus
Until fairly recently, Western scholars who devoted attention to the prerequisites of
democracy settled on the Protestant religion, middle class, economic development,
and culture as the impeccable intervening causative factors (McKinnon 2010; Pastor
1999; Lipset 1994). These democratic theorists contended that the prevalence of
democracy in Western industrialised societies such as the United Kingdom, United
States, and France was the result of the presence of mediating factors. However,
when later empirical evidence proved that societies that had experienced modernis-
ation – economic development did not become democratic – and others that did
receded to authoritarian rule, Lipset (1994, 7–17) was encouraged to conclude that
‘the various factors (old conditions) shape the probabilities, but they do not determine
the outcomes’. Following the demise of the Cold War in 1989 (with the collapse of the
Berlin Wall), the focus of the debate about the environmental factors that precipitate
the emergence of democracy has shifted to the possibility that improvement in the
level of development would lead to the transition phase albeit not enough to
4 E. DEBRAH AND I. OWUSU-MENSAH
guarantee a full entry to democracy (Huntington 1991; Bratton and Van de Walle 1987;
Diamond 1997).
Yet, recent studies have revealed that the most distinguishing factor aiding the tran-
sition zone towards democracy is election (Lijphart 1997; Huntington 1991; Bratton and
Van de Walle 1987; Diamond 1997; Gyimah-Boadi 1997). Thus, the democracy-election
argument has been reinforced by the fact that since the ‘Third Wave’ of democratisation
dismantled the authoritarian infrastructures in much of the developing world, the election
has been the instrument for navigating the transitions to inaugurate new eras of consti-
tutional regimes (Pastor 1996; Elklit and Reynolds 2002). In these societies, democracy has
been understood as ‘a system of government by which people choose their leaders in a
free election’ (Pastor 1999, 5). In contrast to military regimes that capture power through
coup d’états – violence, elections are the institutionalised means by which large numbers
of people (electorate) participate peacefully in the choice and disposal of their govern-
ments. This definition has been affirmed by the United Nations (1996, 352) when it
noted that representative democracy is ‘where citizens participate in the conduct of
public affairs through freely chosen representatives’. Due to its legitimising effect,
some authoritarian regimes have even conducted elections to tie the government to
the people – albeit the elections being a facade. Besides, it has been contended that
no matter the plethora of needs citizens might have, they value their participation in
the political system via regular elections because of their belief that voting reinforces
their self-esteem and self-respect (Lijphart 1997; Diamond 1997). Furthermore, it has
been acknowledged that only through elections do representatives gain legitimacy and
become accountable for the exercise of power. Indeed, many scholars believe that it is
unthinkable to imagine there being democracy without an election (Huntington 1991;
Diamond 1997; Elklit and Reynolds 2002; Gyimah-Boadi 2007). For Diamond (1997), the
election is the lifeblood of democracy. Hence, it is becoming increasing evident that in
much of the developing societies, elections have become a ritual affair, and represent
the singular manifestation of democracy – and largely the means for consolidating it –
two turnovers (Huntington 1991).
While election has led to the flourishing of democracy, at least, in many of the devel-
oping world, there is still a strong challenge to it as the salient indicator that facilitates
democratic consolidation. Consequently, Linz and Stepan (1996) have labelled it as ‘elec-
toralist fallacy’ and other scholars to have dismissed ‘electoralism’ as an ethno-centric
diversion from genuine democracy – because the election is not the only source of demo-
cratic legitimacy (Kaplan 1997; Schmitter and Karl 1991). The objectors to the procedural-
democracy paradigm have explained that democracy should not be just about holding
periodic elections but also promoting electoral governance. Yet, while Mozaffar and Sche-
dler (2002) have emphasised the critical role electoral governance plays in securing the
credibility and continued legitimacy of democratic elections, Pastor (1999) and Elklit
and Reynolds (2002) have insisted that electoral governance alone would not guarantee
free and fair elections (promote the integrity of elections) because of the prevalence of
complex array of socio-politico-economic forces that tend to affect the electoral
process. For instance, according to (Norris, Frank, and Martínez i Coma 2014), countless
reports have revealed astonishing problems relating to electoral fraud including ballot
stuffing, gerrymandering, and voter intimidation (Birch 2011; Norris, Frank, and Martínez
i Coma 2013); irregularities in vote counting (Breunig and Goerres 2011) and popular
POLITIKON 5
perception about the bias of election management bodies (Pastor 1999; Mozaffar and
Schedler 2002) as well as voter suppression laws that target minority voters in many
nascent democracies (Hajnal, Lajevardi, and Nielson 2017; Wang 2012; Mauk 2020). Yet,
the prevalence of these weaknesses is largely the inability of the elections to meet the
threshold of electoral integrity – the management of elections to reflect globally accep-
table laws and conventions (Hyde 2011; Kelley 2012; Norris, Frank, and Martínez i Coma
2014), democratic norms (Birch 2011; Pastor 1999; Elklit and Reynolds 2002) and national
laws (Minnite 2010). Therefore, achieving credible elections requires that the manage-
ment of the electoral process should follow strict democratic principles such as transpar-
ency, fairness, and inclusivity (Goodwin-Gill 2006; Pastor 1999; Elklit and Reynolds 2002;
Norris, Frank, and Martínez i Coma 2014).
The methodology
This paper is based on primary data collected from January 9, 2021 – February 22, 2021,
with follow-ups from March 22–31, 2021 to examine whether or not the conduct of
Ghana’s 2020 election conformed to international standards for credible elections
despite the outbreak of COVID-19. The study employed the qualitative method
because it allows for analysing the interactions among key variables and explaining the
‘how’ and ‘why’ questions to obtain valuable insights into the quality of the conduct of
the election and its outcome. In particular, the in-depth interview approach created
room for flexibility/follow-ups and probing for clarifications of ambiguous responses (Lav-
rakas 2008). For instance, the researcher made follow-up contacts with some key respon-
dents to clarify opinions on issues at various phases of the data collection, processing, and
analysis.
In all, 120 respondents were chosen for the in-depth interviews, comprised of 20
officials, and 100 registered voters drawn from 10 selected constituencies in 3 of
Ghana’s 16 regions, namely Ashanti, Volta, and Greater Accra. These regions reflect
the geopolitics of the country: the Ashanti and Volta regions are the NPP and NDC’s
electoral strongholds respectively while Greater Accra region swings between the
two (See Table 1). Moreover, while Ashanti and Volta regions are predominantly
Akans and Ewes that have consistently voted for the two parties respectively, the
Table 1. Electoral patterns between the NDC and NPP in the three regions.
Issues Region
Ashanti Greater Accra Volta
Voter register
2016 2,872,619 3,063,990
2020 1,282,306
3,013,856 3,509,805
1,282,814
Presidential election NPP NDC NPP NDC NPP
Results NDC
2016 1,640,694 503,497 1,062,157 946,048 135,077
629,398
2020 1,795,824 653,149 1,253,179 326,489 100,481
606,508
Source EC February 2021.
6 E. DEBRAH AND I. OWUSU-MENSAH
Greater Accra region where the capital of the country is located, is a mixture of all
ethnic groups in the country.
The constituencies were selected in proportion to the electoral population in the 3
regions based on the EC’s published voters’ register used in the 2020 elections (See
Table 1). Consequently, the distribution of the 10 constituencies was as follows: Greater
Accra 4, Ashanti 4, and Volta 2. Given the homogeneous electoral characteristics at the
regional level, the choice of constituencies was done randomly. The method, which
involved blindfolding a research assistant to pick a constituency from the gazetted lists
of constituencies in the respective regions available at the headquarters of the EC pro-
duced Shai-Osudoku, Tema East, Ga West and Ayawaso Wuogon (Greater Accra),
Asante Akim South, Oforikrom, Bantama and Kwabre West (Ashanti), and Ho Central
and Anlo South (Volta) regions. The same procedure was followed to pick two polling
stations from each constituency. In each of these two polling stations, 5 voters were
picked from the voter’s register using systematic sampling techniques, which involved
selecting every other fifth name on the register as the respondent. Relying on the District
Assembly member for the locality/electoral area, these respondents were identified, con-
tacted, and interviewed.
On the other hand, the 20 officials, namely EC 6, CODEO 3, Lecturers 3, and Party
Agents 8 were selected purposively because of their in-depth knowledge of the
conduct of the election (they participated in every stage of the electoral process).
While the EC officers were at the centre of the election management, CODEO Officers
and party agents were trained in the election mechanics and monitored the implemen-
tation of the election process, the lecturers from the Department of Political Science, Uni-
versity of Ghana, teach courses in Electoral Politics and Democracy in Ghana and have
conducted election surveys. On the other hand, the 100 were ordinary registered
voters who went through the registration and voting processes (participated and
observed the process) and therefore were well-informed about the electoral procedures
and activities involved.
While the primary information for this study came from direct interactions, face-to-face,
and telephone interviews (aided by semi-structured questions) with the respondents, the
secondary data involved the review of the theoretical and empirical literature on democ-
racy, democratisation, and elections. The semi-structured questions, which directed the
interviews covered critical issues about how the conduct of the elections met acceptable
international standards of fair, transparent, and inclusive election management. The
overall data obtained through the in-depth interviews and field notes (personal obser-
vations/direct contacts) were transcribed and, organised the ideas flowing from them
into salient analytical themes. In order to illuminate our understanding of the nature of
whether the conduct of the elections met international standards for free and fair elec-
tions or not, a synthesis of the primary and secondary data was done. Also, the data col-
lection and analysis have carefully complied with the required research ethical standards
by guaranteeing the anonymity of all interviewees.
Ghanaian electoral laws and system
International norms on elections require states to adopt internal laws, procedures, and
systems that are favourable to the attainment of free and fair elections (Goodwin-Gill
POLITIKON 7
2006). The saliency of legislation as a constituent part of free and fair elections has been
annotated in many scholarly works. In their study about how to promote election integ-
rity, Elklit and Reynolds (2002) have maintained that the effective conduct of democratic
elections requires a legal framework that sets the ground rules to give direction to the
activities of all stakeholders. While the United Nations (1991, 11) acknowledges the preva-
lence of multiplicity of electoral laws, ‘sovereign nations are encouraged to create laws
that are in accord with the will of their people’ as well as ‘meeting acceptable inter-
national standards’ (Goodwin-Gill 2006). According to Elklit and Reynolds (2002),
codified laws (constitutions, statutes, and regulations) that promote fairness and are
easily available to all stakeholders ought to be the first activity to be promulgated prior
to the implementation of the electoral process. The legitimacy of the conduct of the Gha-
naian elections was derived from important legislations, namely the 1992 Constitution
(the parent legislation), statutes (Representation of the People Act 1992, Presidential Elec-
tions Act 1992, Electoral Commission Act 1993, Political Parties Act 2000), and others such
as Public Election Regulations (Constitutional Instrument – C.I 15) 1996, Public Elections
Regulations – C.I 75, 2012, Political Parties Code of Conduct 2012, and Public Elections
(Registration of Voters Regulations – C.I 91), 2016. These legislations that governed the
conduct of the elections are consistent with the standards set by the Inter-parliamentary
Union (IPU) because they ensured that:
Every citizen of Ghana of eighteen years of age or above and of sound mind (had) the right to
vote and (was) entitled to be registered as a voter for the purposes of (the) elections (Republic
of Ghana 1992, 51).
Even though the pandemic ranged on, the EC leaned on the pieces of legislations (which
mandate it to hold elections every 4 years) to implement the electoral procedures to give
voters the opportunity to choose the President and 275 legislators (Members of Parlia-
ment – MPs). The foundation upon which the EC guaranteed fairness of the elections
lay with Article 42 of the 1992 Constitution, which stipulates that the supreme principle
for the conduct of elections is ‘one man one vote’ (Republic of Ghana 1992, 50). Therefore,
when stakeholders were asked to indicate whether the elections conformed to best inter-
national practice, they were unanimous in their remark that, ‘the laws guaranteed the fun-
damental human rights of all adult citizens to participate in the choice of their political
leaders – without discrimination’ even though Ghanaian Diasporas did not participate
(Interview, Party Agents, EC Director, Accra, February 2021).
Similarly, the Ghanaian electoral system – the seat allocation arrangements – the
method whereby the votes of citizens determine the choice of the executives and legis-
lators (Lijphart 1994; Nohlen 1996) syncs with best international practice. For instance, the
electoral system, which is based on the majoritarian principle stresses the importance of a
reasonable link between the electors and the elected even though it is not based on the
proportional representation system. Nevertheless, in consonance with agreed inter-
national standards, the electoral system facilitates the full expression of the will of the
people (Interview, Lecturers in Political Science, Accra, February 2021). This is because
‘the threshold requirements in the electoral laws and system did not deny representation
to smaller parties… . and also, participation in the elections was not conditioned upon
securing a prescribed percentage of votes in previous elections’ (Interview, Party
Agents, EC Officer & Lecturer in Political Science, Accra, February 2021). Indeed, the
8 E. DEBRAH AND I. OWUSU-MENSAH
application of universal suffrage did not disenfranchise any minority ethnic group in the
country. The salient ingredients in the laws are supportive of the principle of ‘equality of
voting power’ to the extent that none of the votes cast in the elections carried more
weight than others. Despite this, it must be emphasised that the existing Ghanaian elec-
toral system and its implementation had a direct effect on the political rights of the citi-
zens. Thus, while the electoral system (the majoritarian system) has evolved a two-party
model within the prevailing multi-party framework with remarkable stability over equity
in representation, the smaller parties and independent candidates were severely disad-
vantaged even though it projected fairness and transparency of the process (See Table 2).
Registering the voters
The centrality of the electoral roll to the organisation of free and fair elections is widely
acknowledged (Goodwin-Gill 2006; Pastor 1999; Elklit and Reynolds 2002). Citizens who
qualify to vote, need to register. Voter registration, the process of cataloguing names
of all citizens who are eligible to vote is an important step to guarantee the integrity of
the vote (Commonwealth Secretariat 1992; Elklit and Reynolds 2002; Debrah 2011). It is
a legitimate act that gives practical meaning to the right to vote. In other words,
without registering, a voter cannot vote in an election. To this end, states ensure that citi-
zens who are eligible to vote are given the opportunity to register (Interview, EC Deputy
Chairperson, Accra, January 2021). Scholars have identified, at least, two typologies of
voter registration, namely self-initiated and the state-initiated system. While the former
is where voters take the initiative to register to vote (voluntary), the latter refers to the
system where eligible voters are registered by states or their accredited agencies at the
national or local government level (Goodwin-Gill 2006). In some jurisdictions with reliable
demographic data and modern technologies such as Denmark, a continuous and update
of the register by the automatic inclusion of new entrants is a recurring feature of their
voter registration system. Yet, in other countries, particularly those where election stake-
holders are distrustful of each other even though not always the case, citizens are
prompted to register through the actions of those with constitutional power to register
voters. Whereas in the United Kingdom and Canada that carry out yearly voter regis-
tration, forms may be issued to eligible voters by enumerators – who may visit homes
to carry out the exercise, in many nascent democracies such as Ghana, the official regis-
tration period may be announced during which citizens submit themselves to registration
officers for their names to be captured on the roll (Goodwin-Gill 2006; Ayee 1998; Debrah
2018).
Ghanaian electoral laws promote the state-centred registration system. The institution
with constitutional mandate to register voters is the EC. Yet, the EC faced an uphill chal-
lenge of having to undertake a comprehensive voter registration at a time when COVID-
Table 2. Performance of smaller parties in the election.
Party GUM CPP ACP LPG PNC GCPP PPP
Votes obtained presidential poll 105,548 12,200 7,138 7,683 10,882 3,564 6,849
Seats obtained in parliamentary poll 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Source: EC, February 2021.
POLITIKON 9
19 infection cases were surging and the opposition NDC had proclaimed its postpone-
ment. The decision by the EC to compile fresh voters’ roll rather than updating the old,
heightened popular fears that voter mobility from the cities – endemic areas to the dis-
tricts would lead to the spread of the pandemic (Interview, EC Official, Accra, January
2021). Notwithstanding the objection from some of the stakeholders because of the pan-
demic, the EC indicated its determination to undertake the exercise. Towards this, it rolled
out a comprehensive programme to compile a fresh voters’ register from June 30, 2020 to
August 6, 2020. Although infections rose from 453 to 761 during the early registration
period, by the end of the exercise, they had plummeted below 200 (John Hopkins
2020). What pragmatic measures did the EC institute that yielded this outcome and pro-
moted the credibility of the election process generally?
First, the EC created conditions that ‘enhanced the health safety of voters in the wake
of the pandemic’ (Interview, EC Officials, Accra, January 2021). A two-day nationwide pilot
to assess the efficacy of the registration mechanics in the pandemic environment was
undertaken – this allowed the EC to design a relatively risk-free registration process. An
innovative approach for the registration was the ‘introduction of electronically generated
queue system that involved the issuance of chits to voters to restrict the number of regis-
trants per day – a crowd control measure geared towards avoiding the spread of COVID-
19 infection’ (Interview, EC Director, Accra, January 2021). In addition, only 700 voters
could register at a single registration centre and banned political parties from mobilising
their supporters to register through the mass rally approach. Instead, they were restricted
to the door-to-door and social media mode of voter education.
Second, it operated within acceptable international standards: the legal requirement to
register was based on citizenship and universal suffrage, namely a ‘citizen of Ghana of
eighteen years of age or above, and of sound mind… ’ (Republic of Ghana 1992, 34).
From the non-discriminatory viewpoint, the statutory stipulation for the registration did
not limit qualification to religion, gender, region, social status, or denied the right of min-
orities and marginalised groups such as women to participate in the elections. Also, unlike
in some countries that maintain residency requirements as a basic condition for register-
ing to vote (Goodwin-Gill 2006), the Ghanaian voter registration regulations only
restrained citizens suffering from a mental disability. The justification for disenfranchising
the mentally unsound has been defended on the grounds that ‘those people cannot make
rational voting decisions’ (Interview, Lecturers in Political Science, Accra, February 2021).
Besides, the disqualification criterion is proportional and not a strategy to disenfranchise a
targeted segment of the population even though elsewhere, the Canadian Courts have
established that a category of the mentally handicapped is constitutionally entitled to
vote (Goodwin-Gill 2006). Also, the principle of inclusivity requires the extension of the
franchise to overseas residents, however, the registration system disenfranchised the
many Ghanaian diasporas albeit the Representation of the Peoples Amendment Act
2006 (Act 699) mandating their inclusion. Therefore, the justification for the non-inclusion
of the diasporas in the election on grounds of logistical and structural difficulties under-
mined the principle of suffrage for all Ghanaians regardless of whether they are at home
or abroad (Interview, CODEO Official & Lecturer in Political Science, Accra, February 2021).
Acceptable international practice requires that a voter registration system should
provide in advance the eligibility criteria (Goodwin-Gill 2006). Hence, in the voter edu-
cation that preceded the exercise, the EC outlined the basic requirements for registration.
10 E. DEBRAH AND I. OWUSU-MENSAH
Also, the detailed eligibility criteria were made part of the content of the published Elec-
tion Manual used for the training of its temporarily recruited staff. The Registration Instru-
ment made Ghanaian passport or national identification card (NIC) the basic criterion for
proof of citizenship. This was in sharp contrast to the previous requirement of a national
insurance card, birth certificate, or an old voter identification card. However, in lieu of a
passport or NIC, two registered persons could guarantee the citizenship status of an appli-
cant (Interview, EC Director (Accra) & Voters (Study Area), January 2021).
An important step towards inclusivity and transparency was the involvement of politi-
cal parties and other stakeholders in the monitoring and auditing of the registration
process. Each political party presented an agent to witness the packaging and distribution
of the registration materials from the EC headquarters to the registration centres. At the
end of each registration day, the agents authenticated the exercise by signing a form
(Interview, EC Director & Party Agents, Accra, February 2021). Prompt publication of pro-
visional voter register and effective procedure to correct errors are fundamental to the
attainment of free and fair elections (Goodwin-Gill 2006). The exhibition of the voters’ reg-
ister was part of the strategy to ensure the accuracy of the voters’ roll. The period was
used to restore names that had been inadvertently omitted and expunge the wrongly
included such as underaged as well as duplications (Interview, EC Director, Party
Agents (Accra) & Voter (Study Area), 2021). The final published list of nearly 17 million
voters was accepted by all stakeholders as ‘accurate, reliable and dependable’ (Interview,
Official of the EC & Executives of Political Parties, Accra, March 2021).
Disputes are inevitable in elections, however, what matters is the availability of
trusted mechanisms of conflict resolution (Goodwin-Gill 2006; Norris 2014). Two issues
generated conflict among the stakeholders during the administration of the registration
exercise, namely, ‘the reduction of proof of citizenship to passport/NIC, and the alle-
gation that some EC officers had issued photo identity cards to some voters without
the involvement of party agents’ (Interview, NDC MPs, Accra, February 2021). Unlike
in other jurisdictions where conflicts emanating from aspects of the electoral process
have led to civil wars, the disagreement over the legal criterion was resolved through
both the consensus approach – the Inter-Party Advisory Committee (IPAC) platform,
and the courts. Since electoral reforms in 1996, the electoral process has institutiona-
lised dialogue and consultation (through the IPAC) as the acceptable framework for
resolving inter-party and EC conflicts. Although IPAC’s intervention diffused tension
over the issue, other groups sought the opinion of the Supreme Court for a final deter-
mination. In the end, the Supreme Court established that ‘the eligibility criterion would
prevent electoral fraud thereby enhancing the acceptability of the final register as
authoritative and dependable for use by the parties’ door-to-door campaigns, the dis-
charge of their agents’ duties and use by the EC on polling day’ (Interview, EC Director
& Party Agents, Accra, February 2021; Also see Commonwealth Observer Group 1992).
Similarly, notwithstanding the occurrence of sporadic violence in some constituencies,
respondents extolled the integrity of the registration process noting in particular ‘the
relatively peaceful and orderly manner and public health safety environment within
which the exercise was carried out’ (Interview, EC Director, Party Agents & Lecturer in
Political Science, Accra, February 2021) – a fact attested to by CODEO (2020, 3) when
it wrote, ‘the registration process was generally orderly, peaceful and devoid of malprac-
tices and fraud’. Thus, the voter registration exercise and the publication of the
POLITIKON 11
verifiable list of the electors contributed to voters’ confidence-building and in turn, fair-
ness of the elections. Thus, the overall voter registration process and its outcome
satisfied the standard set by the IPU (1993, 12–13):
The voters’ roll is inclusive rather than exclusive (when)… it has not been corrupted by the
systematic exclusion of particular voters (and therefore), affords the electorate at large, a
reasonable opportunity to vote (because it is) not a barrier to a free and fair election.
The polling process
Among the critical components of the electoral process that must be effectively managed
for a free and fair election to occur, polling, the organisation, and management of voting,
stands out (Goodwin-Gill 2006; Elklit and Reynolds 2002; Debrah 2011). This is because
what happens on election day has a direct effect on the outcome of elections. Among
other pre-polling activities necessary for confidence building, the presence of election
officials well-versed (competent) in the procedures has been acknowledged (Goodwin-
Gill 2006). This requires the recruitment and training of polling station personnel who
would uphold neutrality to administer the process (Elklit and Reynolds 2002). Against
the backdrop of fraud committed by election staff in previous elections (NPP 1992), the
election stakeholders admonished the strategic recruitment of temporary polling
officials for the election. Consequently, the lists of those recruited were subjected to
public scrutiny: political parties were permitted to raise their objection to the enlistment
of those they suspected not to be neutral. To enhance public confidence in the personnel,
the EC District Officers posted the lists on the notice boards in their respective office in the
275 districts. Although temporary election staffmay be drawn from state institutions and
therefore are competent in their own administrative fields, schooling them on the elec-
tion mechanics has been necessary because in nascent democracies such as Ghana:
(Often) technical problems converge into political ones, threatening the entire process.
(While) technical problems are inevitable, in a polarised environment, one group is likely
to see ‘irregularities’ as politically inspired by the other side (Pastor 1999, 10).
Contrary to claims by some Western scholars that ‘ … poor countries have low levels of
education, and thus the pool fromwhich the country selects its (election) administrators is
very shallow. (And that), the capacity of such an administration to conduct complex
bureaucratic tasks like elections is low’ (Pastor 1999, 10), those recruited and trained
were highly educated and technically competent to manage the polls. Drawn largely
from the Ghana Education Service and other institutions, those who performed the elec-
toral tasks, namely teachers, civil servants, and university students were high-calibre edu-
cated people. Besides, they underwent comprehensive training on the rule application
and interpretation regarding polling and balloting processes (Interview, EC Director &
Party Agents, Accra, February 2021). The decentralisation of the recruitment and training
of the election staff to the district level enhanced their familiarity with the local terrain and
easy deployment to the polling stations (Interview, EC Director, Accra, February 2021).
Each polling station was assigned five personnel with specific tasks to perform on
polling day. The five comprised, a presiding officer as head, and four assistants with
divided responsibilities such as checking of voters’ names on the register, verification
of their fingers on the biometric machine, issuance of ballot papers, and application of
12 E. DEBRAH AND I. OWUSU-MENSAH
indelible ink on their fingers (Interview, EC Officer (Accra) & Voters (Study Areas), January
2021).
A salient issue associated with polling in most developing democracies is the question
of the location of polling stations and their accessibility to voters (Elklit and Reynolds
2002; Goodwin-Gill 2006). The argument has been made that the right to vote is also
about the voters’ ability to access the polling booths on election day to cast their
ballots. The access principle would also mean voters’ ability to locate the polling stations
where they would vote. Ideally, the polling stations should be identifiable to ordinary
voters. In other words, voters must be familiar with the places where the polling stations
have been cited and as much as possible be close to where they reside. This point has
been emphasised by the Commonwealth Observer Group (1992, 14) when it wrote,
‘accessibility, in the sense that polling booths should be so sited that voters do not
have to travel far…more than 5 kilometres to vote’. A key strategy adopted to fulfil
this requirement was the policy to translate registration stations into polling stations so
that voters cast their ballots in the same place where they registered to vote (Interview,
EC Deputy-Chair, Accra, February 2021). Also, the polling stations were cited in popular
state facilities in the communities, which made accessibility (location of polling stations)
easy for the voters. Most respondents confirmed this, ‘it was not difficult to identify and
access the polling station when I went to cast my vote’ (Interview, Voters, Study Area,
January 2021). Furthermore, ‘the polling station accessibility policy extended to include
the ability of the physically challenged persons to enter the stations to cast their
ballots with considerable ease’ (Interview, EC Director, Accra, February 2021).
Transparency of the polling process was one of the key highlights of the elections. One
measure put in place to guarantee this was the acceptance of party representatives to
monitor the process. The EC certified a representative of each of all parties and independent
candidates that took part in the elections to verify the detailed procedures in the polling
stations. These agents underwent intra-party training in the polling and counting procedures.
Their task was to ensure the security of the ballot box by checking that voting was secret, the
officers applied indelible ink to deter double voting, the ballot boxes and their contents were
emptied before voting began. They also monitored the counting of the ballots, declaration of
results, and during transportation of ballot boxes to the collation centres in order to ensure
that there was no tampering with the ballots – this activity was important against the opposi-
tion parties’ claim that ‘substitution of ballots often occurs during transportation of ballot
boxes’ (Interview EC Officer & Party Agents, Accra, February 2021).
Equal suffrage is an established principle that guarantees credible elections. It means
that no vote should have greater value than any other vote. This requires creating
measures to promote proper layout of polling stations and management of voting
streams as well as those that guard against multiple voting, such as those that scrupu-
lously scrutinise voters’ cards and marking voters with indelible ink to distinguish those
who have cast their ballots from those who have not (Goodwin-Gill 2006; Elklit and Rey-
nolds 2002; Pastor 1999). Towards this goal, voters were directed to follow the delineated
step-by-step voting procedures by first joining the orderly queue controlled by an EC-
accredited COVID-19 Ambassador and state security officer (police, custom, fire-service,
or immigration) on arrival at the polling station. Second, the voter submitted the photo
ID card to a polling assistant who crosschecked the name on the voters’ register, and
another authenticated the voters’ identity on the biometric verification device. Third,
POLITIKON 13
the voter was issued with both the Presidential and Parliamentary Ballot papers after an
indelible ink had been applied on one of the fingers – a mark to indicate that the voter has
already cast the ballot – a technique against double voting (Interview, EC & CODEO
Officers (Accra), Voters (Study Area), January 2021).
The secrecy of the ballot is as crucial as the right to vote. Hence in many jurisdictions, it
is protected by law and other electoral rules. Therefore, a system or practice of not using
voting booths has become anachronistic to democratic elections. According to Goodwin-
Gill (2006), one measure that supports the secret ballot principle is adequate screens. In
the fourth voting step, voters were directed to mark their Presidential and Parliamentary
candidates on the ballot papers on separate tables on which have been erected Card-
board Voting Screens to prevent outsiders from viewing the voters’ choice of candidate
(Interview, EC & CODEO Officers (Accra), Voters (Study Area), January 2021). In the final
step, the voter placed the marked and folded ballot papers (presidential and parliamen-
tary) into transparent ballot boxes placed in open spaces respectively, after which the
voter exited the Polling Station and could return to observe counting after the close of
polls at 5 pm (Interview, EC & CODEO Officers (Accra), Voters (Study Area), January
2021). Whereas in previous elections, some elderly illiterate and visually impaired
voters were denied secrete voting (because they received help from the presiding
officers) – a measure that raised suspicion of fraud, care was taken to discourage the
marking of ballots of illiterate voters in the presence of party agents. Also, the designing
of braille ballot papers for use by visually impaired persons guaranteed their independent
voting choices.
Mindful of the need to contain the spread of the pandemic, the EC enforced the WHO-
prescribed methods at the polling centres. Each polling centre had handwashing facilities,
temperature guns, and alcohol-based sanitisers, and wearing of facemasks and social dis-
tancing were made mandatory. The designated EC COVID-19 Ambassador and the elec-
tion security officers received EC instruction to enforce the protocols at all polling
stations even though lapses occurred at several places with the risk of precipitating
high infections, by December 7, 2020, total infection was as low as 705 cases4.
Furthermore, since elections’ integrity is measured by the manner of the counting
process, the kind of arrangements that are established for the counting of votes such
as a transparent tally process can inspire the electorates’ confidence in the election
and its outcome (Elklit and Reynolds 2002; Goodwin-Gill 2006). In addition to observing
the official tallying scheme, the political parties were encouraged to carry their indepen-
dent vote tallies. In compliance with this measure, the party agents marked the voters on
their own register (copies given to them by the EC), which they used to crosscheck the
turnout in the elections. Counting of ballots for both presidential and parliamentary elec-
tions commenced immediately after polls closed. The Presiding Officer sorted both the
presidential and parliamentary ballots from the respective ballot box according to the
order of candidates on the ballots. Witnessed by party agents and external or local obser-
vers, the votes were counted publicly, tallied, and the votes obtained by each candidate
were recorded (Interview, EC & CODEO Officers (Accra), Voters (Study Area), January 2021).
Party agents and observers also conducted their independent vote tallies, which they
used in their calculations to confirm or disprove the EC’s declared results. Haven moni-
tored the polling and voting operations, the party agents were required to sign the
Result Declaration Form to indicate acceptance of the proceedings and could also add
14 E. DEBRAH AND I. OWUSU-MENSAH
their comments. When all stakeholders – party agents, observers, and the general citizens
who have witnessed the counting of ballots) feel satisfied that the process has been hon-
estly executed, there would be overwhelming endorsement to indicate that the polls
reflected the free expression of the will of the voters’ (Interview, Lecturers in Political
Science, Accra, February 2021). Comments on the polling and voting processes by respon-
dents indicate general acceptance of the quality of the election outcome:
The polling station arrangements were correctly done, voters did not impersonate and were
not denied the right to vote, candidates and parties did not engage in campaigning and inti-
midation around the polling stations or in the queues, and disputes over invalid or damaged
ballots were peacefully resolved (Interview, EC Officer, Party Agents (Accra), Voters (Study
Area), January 2021).
Election observation is critical to a free and fair election. It does not only enhance voter
confidence in the conduct of elections but more importantly, ensures the integrity of
their outcome. Aside from the role of partisan actors – representatives of political
parties, participation by non-partisan groups such as international or local observers
has become an integral feature in the election integrity enterprise (Goodwin-Gill 2006;
Pastor 1999; Elklit and Reynolds 2002). International election observation entered the
lexicon of African politics in the early 1990s during the transition elections. The epoch
was marked by regular visitations to developing democracies by international obser-
vation groups such as the Carter Centre, European Union, and Commonwealth Observer
Group whose pronouncements validated the credibility or otherwise of their elections.
But soon, they attracted stern criticisms with some discrediting them as appendages of
Western governments with hidden motives to legitimise the elections of their protegees.
Others ridiculed their activities as ‘superficiality and lacking professionalism in the appli-
cation of democratic standards’ (Geisler 1993, 621), and ‘poll-watchers who come to
witness polling and develop shallow paper-works on the outcome of elections’ (Interview,
Lecturer in Political Science, Accra, February 2021). Goodwin-Gill (2006, 156) has captured
what has been termed, ‘the vagaries of election observation’ (Geisler 1993) more suc-
cinctly, ‘foreign observers run the risk of controversy, either because they are perceived
as interfering, or because they do their job too well, or not at all’. Despite the assault
on their activities, they have played critical role in the consolidation of democracy in
Africa and elsewhere. In particular, they have been responsible for assisting or underwrit-
ing the difficult transitions from authoritarian regimes to democracy in many African
countries. For instance, according to Garber (1992, 112):
When questions arise regarding the quality of the system (elections), governments and non-
governmental organizations should be prepared to sponsor international observer del-
egations that can then determine whether a commitment to free and fair elections exists
and, where appropriate, encourage ways to improve the electoral process.
Since 1992, Ghana has derived much support for its elections from international obser-
vers: their frequent observations of the elections have added significant impetus to the
electoral process. Some respondents noted how ‘the observation reports have served
as vehicles for advancing the course of democratic elections – they formed the starting
point for the post-1992 electoral reforms’ (Interview, EC Director & Lecturer in Political
Science, Accra, February 2021). Undoubtedly, the observation activities of the European
Union, African Union, and Commonwealth Observer Group in the 2020 elections lend
POLITIKON 15
credence to the elections’ outcome (Interview, Lecturer in Political Science, Accra, Febru-
ary 2021).
Similarly, the presence of domestic observers adds to the credibility of elections.
Goodwin-Gill (2006, 156) believes that ‘domestic monitors are key to the fairness of any
election’. If election stakeholders are sceptical about the genuineness of international
observers, they may have faith in home-grown monitors. As Garber (1992, 142) noted,
‘effective local monitors recognised as impartial officials, (may) appear more likely to
satisfy national aspirations for a free and fair’. Thus, complimentary to the work of inter-
national observers, a coalition of local observation groups participating in election moni-
toring has been a prominent feature of recent elections in Ghana and Africa generally. As
they did in the previous elections, the Coalition of Domestic Election Observers (CODEO)
set its monitoring machinery in several polling stations across the 16 regions. Like the
international observers, they drew strength from their non-partisan complexion and per-
ceived neutrality (Interview, CODEO Officers & Lecturer in Political Science, Accra, Febru-
ary 2021). The well-trained volunteers deployed to polling stations in the cities and rural
areas checked against possible errors, misconducts, and frauds by the party activists.
According to respondents, ‘their presence at the polling stations limited opportunities
for wrong-doing’ (Interview, Voters, Study Area, January 2921). Their ‘independent cross-
checking of voter attendance, inspection of ballot boxes and election materials on polling
day, and enforcement of the rules contributed in no small measure to the confidence-
building of the voters and the outcome of the elections’ (Interview, EC & CODEO
Officers (Accra), Voters (Study Areas), Study Area, January 2021). For instance, CODEO’s
Vote Parallel Tabulation (VPT), which affirmed the result of the presidential election
declared by the EC flavoured the integrity of the election’s outcome. Goodwin-Gill
(2006, 157) has argued in support of this more forcefully:
The monitoring of vote counts as part of an overall election-observation effort can boost the
confidence of voters suspicious of possible fraud, permit results to be projected more quickly
than the official results and allow for the identification of actual winners and the consequent
exposure of attempted manipulations.
It has been argued that ‘the acceptance of any election outcome is largely a function of
the quality of its conduct (Pastor 1999; Elklit and Reynolds 2002; Schedler and Mosaffar
2002). Similarly, it determines the extent to which voters would participate in choosing
their leaders – a reflection of the quality conduct of elections – suggesting that it has
conformed to international standards. Hence, the ‘high voter turnout in the election
(78.89%) despite the feared pandemic, compared with 68.25% in 2016 is a testament
of popular confidence in the election’s conduct’ (Interviews, CODEO Officers & Lecturer
in Political Science, Accra, February 2021). The more than two-thirds turnout confirms
the extraordinary managerial competence of the EC in navigating the complex
COVID-19 infection situation to ensure the active participation of voters, parties, and
their candidates in the election. This reality has been noted by the respondents when
assessing the performance of the measures the EC put in place to promote the integrity
of the election, they noted, ‘except for minor administrative challenges such as the late
opening of polls and temporal shortages of voting materials, the conduct of the election
conformed to best international practice – it was orderly, peaceful and even in the pan-
demic, it guaranteed the health safety of the voters’ (Interview, CODEO Officers (Accra),
16 E. DEBRAH AND I. OWUSU-MENSAH
Voters (Study Area), January 2021). The Commonwealth Observer Group affirmed the
popular opinion:
The voting process was conducted in a largely peaceful and orderly manner. The Common-
wealth Observer Group commends the People of Ghana, the institutions involved, the polling
staff and all other electoral stakeholders for the commitment to conducting a successful elec-
tion and for the tolerance exhibited by all stakeholders on Election Day. On Election Day, the
majority of polling stations opened on time, and they were equipped with requisite polling
staff and materials. The procedures for the opening of the polls were generally followed. We
were impressed by the professionalism, confidence, and enthusiasm of polling officials. Issues
that were observed, such as delays or missing materials, were usually resolved efficiently. We
are honoured to have been given this opportunity to observe and support Ghana’s democ-
racy (Commonwealth Secretariat 2020, 2).
Why promoting the election integrity necessary?
Thus far, the findings have revealed that electoral integrity is indispensable for the attain-
ment of democratic consolidation. By managing the electoral process in accordance with
the acceptable international standards, the EC enhanced the incorruptibility, complete-
ness, inclusiveness, and accountability of the election – fundamental tenets for the
drive towards democratic consolidation in Ghana (Elklit and Reynolds 2002; Goodwin-
Gill 2006; Norris, Frank, and Martínez i Coma 2014)
Also, by managing the electoral process in the order of electoral integrity, the EC pre-
vented the election from falling into violence and conflict. This is because the transparent
and inclusive, process enhanced the early detection of errors thereby, reducing the possi-
bility that malpractices and frauds could occur. Indeed, upholding the highest inter-
national standards in the conduct of the elections helped to diffuse inter-party tensions
and the likelihood that the campaign prosses would produce conflicts or violence – the
absence of which has engendered ethnic and civil wars as exemplified by the 2010
Cote d’ Ivoire, 2007 Kenya, and 2005 Togo elections. Indeed, it was the failure of these
elections to pass the integrity test which ended in the street and bush wars.
Also, the debilitating consequences for the EC to fail the integrity test in the ‘pandemic
election’ would have been the heaviest damage to the legitimacy of the regime (Fortin-
Rittberger, Harfst, and Dingler 2017; McAllister and White 2014). Given that many regime
destabilisations in nascent democracies have been caused by elections that end in con-
tention and partisan deadlocks on grounds of lack of transparency and inclusivity,
among others, the legitimacy of the ‘winners’ to govern would have been problematic
(Atkeson and Saunders 2007; Claassen et al. 2013; Elklit and Reynolds 2002; Pastor
1999; Snyder 2013; Norris, Frank, and Martínez i Coma 2014). Moreover, had the pandemic
caused or ‘instigated’ lower voter turnout, it would have been interpreted as an
expression of lack of popular confidence in the electoral process and those elected by it.
Arguably, the successful conduct of the elections even under grave threat from the
pandemic has revealed the robustness of Ghana’s electoral process and the EC, in particu-
lar. By navigating the electoral process against the backdrop of rising infections and
deaths from the pandemic without compromising acceptable international standards,
the EC has established itself as a resilient election authority in Africa. This suggests that
long-term electoral, regime and democratic stability in nascent democracies including
Africa largely depend on electoral integrity (Daniller and Mutz 2019; IFES 2022).
POLITIKON 17
Conclusion and lessons
Fundamental to democracy is that elections should be held periodically, and that, the
accountability of representatives for the legislative and executive offices should take
place within acceptable international rules and principles so that the result represents
the will of the electorates (UN Human Rights Committee 1996; Goodwin-Gill 2006).
Thus, despite the feared COVID-19, the holding of the 2020 election was a move of
major importance to guarantee the rights of Ghanaian citizens to choose their represen-
tatives as prescribed by the 1992 Constitution. At the same time, a key element in the
exercise of democracy is that elections should as much as possible be free, fair, and trans-
parent in order to enable the people’s will to be expressed. This then implies that demo-
cratic elections transcend the realm of voting because the formal act of casting a ballot is
preceded by electoral competition in which rules defining, among other things, the elec-
toral formula, right to vote, eligibility criteria, polling, and participation generally, coordi-
nate the strategic choice by the voters (Lijphart 1994; Cox 1997). Hence, this paper has
argued that electoral integrity is critical for elections to qualify as democratic or credible.
This means that there can be no situational change that must compromise the goal of
attaining election integrity because the conduct of elections that is judged unfair, exclu-
sive, and not transparent by stakeholders can provoke violence and instability to truncate
the process of democratic consolidation.
The findings, therefore, presuppose that consolidating democracy requires institutionalis-
ing electoral process and mechanics that guarantee fair and transparent elections. But critical
among the ingredients necessary for a credible election to occur, competent/knowledgeable
election staff to implement the electoral rules at every stage is of utmost importance. The
capacity of the electoral process to promote the recruitment of a critical mass of bureaucratic
personnel acting neutrally to apply the electoral rules for efficient administration, which
builds stakeholders’ confidence is central to electoral integrity (Elklit and Reynolds 2002). In
developing democracies and poor countries that are financially challenged and therefore
depend more on temporary staff and a motley recruited full-time officers, the recruitment
of civil servants and other educated men and women adequately trained in the detailed
mechanics, laws, and regulations to perform several electoral tasks would enhance the attain-
ment of free and fair elections (Pastor 1999; Mozaffar and Schedler 2002).
The electoral governance approach requires the establishment of a broad institutional
framework in which voting and electoral competition would take place. This principle
maintains that an election management system that promotes a high level of inclusion
is a sine qua non for an election that will be considered free and fair (Goodwin-Gill
2006). Given the experiences in neo-democracies that, the price of exclusion is violence,
the choice of a system that promotes political and electoral inclusion holds immense pro-
spect for credible election and by extension, sustainable political stability. An environ-
ment that stimulates competition of diverse political interests and effective
participation of all stakeholders through transparent processes enhances a unified
avenue for resolving differences among competing interests in the electoral process,
thereby removing the incentive for violence (UN 2001).
Key to democratic election success is that electoral processes must encompass accep-
table institutions and procedures that guarantee effective representation, accountability,
and protection of individuals or groups against arbitrary behaviour, injustice, or
18 E. DEBRAH AND I. OWUSU-MENSAH
oppression by central actors. In this regard, free and transparent election must be
embedded in an electoral process built on the rule of law and respect for human rights
(Goodwin-Gill 2006). Indeed, an essential ingredient in the principle of a democratic elec-
tion is the obligation for states to submit to electoral processes that always foster election
management integrity. At the practical level, independent and neutral election manage-
ment body overseeing the electoral process promotes voter confidence and contributes
to the overwhelming acceptance of election outcomes. Its efficiency may rest on decen-
tralisation of election and administrative responsibilities to its ‘field administration’ (Smith
1985) as a measure of reducing administrative and technical errors to enhance the quality
of election management and its outcome.
The choice of the electoral system and its implementation has a direct impact on citizens’
political rights. Whereas the majority system is relatively straightforward and promotes stab-
ility of the polity, within a multi-party establishment it harms equity in representation by side-
stepping the chances of small parties and independent candidates and also ensuring that
large parliamentarymajorities are won onminor electoral victories (Goodwin-Gill 2006) There-
fore, the proportional representation option, which allows for the allocation of seats to pol-
itical parties in proportion to their electoral strength but based on a framing that ensures
that no single party obtains a majority (a transparent and fair arrangement that fosters
rural-urban balance, and also caters for minority or sectional representation), may be suitable
for the Ghanaian multiparty system albeit a possibility of proliferation of parties.
These measures may provide the core framework for future electoral reforms. Although
Schaffer (2008) has cautioned that election reforms are often complex and difficult to
implement because some stakeholders tend to believe that the process can also harm
their interests. But given that opposition is assumed in any reform effort (Caiden 1982),
the fear of unintended outcomes should not constrain genuine reforms because electoral
reform can potentially stimulate electoral integrity in developing democracies, especially
in Sub-Saharan Africa where there have been progressive improvements in their election
management portfolio and there is a prospect for the added value of power alternation
for democratic consolidation (Huntington 1991). Also, experience of electoral reforms in
Ghana and elsewhere suggest that the choice of a particular reform instrument could
stimulate a transformation of the status quo (fraudulent practices and technical errors)
that have been responsible for most post-election violence to the adoption of the consen-
sual method on rulemaking, rule-application, and rule-adjudication to enhance electoral
integrity in the evolving democracies (Mozaffar and Schedler 2002).
Notes
1. The World Health Organization (WHO) (2020) has defined Coronaviruses as RNA viruses
(SARS) that cause respiratory, hepatic, and neurological diseases in domestic, wild animals
and were first discovered in humans in late 2019 in Wuhan, China and spread rapidly
throughout the globe.
2. Beyond elections as the only game in town, Gunther and Diamond (1995) extend the
definition to include when there has been an adoption of democratic institutions, processes,
and values by the political class and the masses.
3. Elklit and Reynolds (2002) define it as a process comprises a number of basic steps (numerous
elements), which are at the same time constitutive and largely chronological.
4. See Ghana: cumulative coronavirus cases 2020–2022 | Statista.
POLITIKON 19
Disclosure statement
No potential conflict of interest was reported by the authors.
References
Afsahi, Afsoun, Emily Beausoleil, Rikki Dean, Selen A Ercan, and Jean-Paul Gagnon. 2020.
“Democracy in a Global Emergency: Five Lessons from the COVID-19 Pandemic.” Democratic
Theory 7 (2): v–xix. doi:10.3167/dt.2020.070201.
Arthur, Peter. 2009. “Ethnicity and Electoral Politics in Ghana’s Fourth Republic.” Africa Today 56 (2):
44–73. doi:10.2979/AFT.2009.56.2.44
Atkeson, L. R., and K. L. Saunders. 2007. “The Effect of Election Administration on Voter Confidence: A
Local Matter?’.” PS: Political Science & Politics 40 (4): 655–660. doi:10.1017/S1049096507071041
Ayee, J. R. A. 1997. “The December 1996 General Elections in Ghana.” Electoral Studies 16 (3): 416–
427. doi:10.1016/S0261-3794(97)84379-X
Ayee, J. R. A. 1998. “Election Management and Democratic Consolidation: The Electoral Commission
of Ghana.” In The 1996 General Elections and Democratic Consolidation in Ghana, edited by J. Ayee,
53–76. Accra: Department of Political Science University of Ghana.
Ayee, J. R. A. 2002. “The 2000 General Elections and Presidential run-off in Ghana: An Overview.”
Democratization 9 (2): 148–174. doi:10.1080/714000251
Ayee, J. R. A. 2011. “Manifestos and Elections in Ghana’s Fourth Republic.” South African Journal of
International Affairs 18 (3): 367–384. doi:10.1080/10220461.2011.622951
Ayee, J. R. A. 2017. “Ghana’s Elections of 7 December 2016: A Post-Mortem.” South African Journal of
International Affairs 24 (3): 311–330. doi:10.1080/10220461.2017.1378124
Birch, S. 2011. Electoral Malpractice Comparative Politics. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Boafo-Arthur, K. 2008. Democracy and Stability in West Africa: The Ghanaian Experience. Uppsala:
Nordic Africa Institute.
Bratton, Michael, and Nicholas van de Walle. 1997. Cambridge Studies in Comparative Politics:
Democratic Experiments in Africa: Regime Transitions in Comparative Perspective. Cambridge, UK:
Cambridge University Press.
Breunig, C., and A. Goerres. 2011. Searching for Electoral Irregularities in an Established Democracy:
Applying Benford’s law Tests to Bundestag Elections in Unifed Germany.” Electoral Studies 30 (3):
534–545. doi:10.1016/j.electstud.2011.03.005
Caiden, Gerald E. 1982. Public Administration. University of California: Palisades Publishers.
Claassen, R., D. Magleby, J. Monson, and K. Patterson. 2013. “Voter Confidence and the Election-day
Voting Experience’.” Political Behavior 35 (2): 215–235. doi:10.1007/s11109-012-9202-4
CODEO. 2012. Final Report on Ghana’s 2012 Presidential and Parliamentary Elections. Accra: CDD.
CODEO. 2016. Final Report on Ghana’s December 7, 2020 Presidential and General Elections. Accra:
CDD.
CODEO. 2020. Final Report on the December 2000 Elections in Ghana. Accra: CDD.
Commonwealth Observer Group. 1992. The Presidential Election in Ghana, 3 November, 1992: The
Report of the Commonwealth Observer Group. London: Commonwealth Secretariat.
Commonwealth Secretariat. 1992. The Presidential Election in Ghana, 3 November, 1992: The Report of
the Commonwealth Observer Group. London: Commonwealth Secretariat.
Commonwealth Secretariat. 2000. The Presidential and Parliamentary Elections in Ghana,7 December
2000: The Report of the Commonwealth Observer Group. London: Commonwealth Secretariat.
Commonwealth Secretariat. 2012. The Presidential and Parliamentary Elections in Ghana,7 December
2012: The Report of the Commonwealth Observer Group. London: Commonwealth Secretariat.
Commonwealth Secretariat. 2020. The Presidential and Parliamentary Elections in Ghana,7 December
2000: The Report of the Commonwealth Observer Group. London: Commonwealth Secretariat.
Cox, Gary W. 1997. Making Votes Count: Strategic Coordination in the World’s Electoral System. New
York: Cambridge University Press.
Daniller, Andrew. M, and Diana. C Mutz. 2019. “The Dynamics of Electoral Integrity a Three-Election
Panel Study.” Public Opinion Quarterly 83 (1): 46–67. doi:10.1093/poq/nfz002
20 E. DEBRAH AND I. OWUSU-MENSAH
Debrah, Emmanuel. 2003. “Managing Electoral Processes at the Local Levels: The Case of the 2002
District and Unit Committee Elections.” In Local Government in Ghana: Grassroots Participation in
the 2002 Local Government Elections, edited by N. Amponsah, and K. Boafo-Arthur, 99–116. Accra:
Department of Political Science. /Uniflow Publishing Ltd.
Debrah, Emmanuel. 2004. “The Politics of Elections: Opposition and Incumbency Factor and the
Ghanaian 2000 Elections.” African Insight 2/3: 3–15. doi:10.4314/ai.v34i2.22397.
Debrah, Emmanuel. 2011. “Measuring Governance Institutions’ Success in Ghana: The Case of the
Electoral Commission, 1993–2008.” African Studies 70 (1): 25–45. doi:10.1080/00020184.2011.
557573
Debrah, Emmanuel. 2016. “Decentralization, District Chief Executives, and District Assemblies in
Ghana’s Fourth Republic: Decentralization in Ghana.” Politics & Policy (Statesboro, Ga.) 44 (1):
135–64. doi:10.1111/polp.12146
Debrah, Emmanuel., et al. 2018. “Does the use of a Biometric System Guarantee an Acceptable
Election’s Outcome? Evidence from Ghana’s 2012 Election.” African Studies 78 (4): 1–23. doi:10.
1080/00020184.2018.1519335.
Debrah, Emmanuel., et al. 2019. The Cost of Politics in Ghana. London: United Kingdom: Westminster
Foundation for Democracy.
Diamond, Larry. 1997. “Cultivating Democratic Citizenship: Education for a New Century of
Democracy in the Americas.” Social Studies (Philadelphia, Pa.: 1953) 88 (6): 244–251. doi:10.
1080/00377999709603786.
Elklit, J., and A. Reynolds. 2002. “The Impact of Election Administration on the Legitimacy of
Emerging Democracies: A New Comparative Politics Research Agenda.” Commonwealth &
Comparative Politics 40 (2): 86–119. doi:10.1080/713999584.
Fortin-Rittberger, J., P. Harfst, and S. C. Dingler. 2017. “The Costs of Electoral Fraud: Establishing the
Link Between Electoral Integrity, Winning an Election, and Satisfaction with Democracy.” Journal
Election Public Opinion and Parties 27 (3): 350–368. doi:10.1080/17457289.2017.1310111
Garber, L., and E. Bjornlund, eds. 1992. The New Democratic Frontier. A Country by Country Report on
Elections in Central and Eastern Europe. Washington, DC: National Democratic Institute for
International Affairs.
Gargarella, Roberto. 2020. “Democracy and Emergency in Latin America.” In Democracy in Times of
Pandemics: Different Future Imagined, edited by Miguel. Poiares Maduro, and Paul. W Kahn, 66–76.
Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Geisler, G. 1993. “Fair? What Has Fairness Got to Do with It? Vagaries of Election Observations and
Democratic Standards.” The Journal of Modern African Studies 31 (4): 613–637. doi:10.1017/
S0022278X00012271
Goodwin-Gill, G. S. 2006. Free and Fair Elections Inter-Parliamentary Union. Geneva: IPU.
Gunther, R., and L. Diamond. 1995. The Politics of Democratic Consolidation: Southern Europe in
Comparative Perspective. Baltimore: The John Hopkins University Press.
Gyimah-Boadi, E. 1997. “Ghana’s Encouraging Elections: The Challenges Ahead.” Journal of
Democracy 8 (2): 78–91. doi:10.1353/jod.1997.0023
Gyimah-Boadi, E. 1999. “Institutionalizing Electoral Credibility in Ghana.” In The Self-Restraining State:
Power and Accountability in new Democracies, edited by Andreas Schedler, Larry Diamond, and
Marc Plattner, 105–121. Boulder and London: Lynne Rienner Publishers.
Gyimah-Boadi, E. 2001. “A Peaceful Turnover in Ghana.” Journal of Democracy 12 (2): 103–117.
doi:10.1353/jod.2001.0026
Hajnal, Z., N. Lajevardi, and L. Nielson. 2017. “Voter Identification Laws and the Suppression of
Minority Votes.” Journal of Politics 79 (2): 363–379. doi:10.1086/688343
Honig, Bonnie. 2009. Emergency Politics: Paradox, law, Democracy. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
Hopkins, John. 2020. J. Hopkins COVID-19 Dashboard by the Center for Systems Science and
Engineering Retrieved from https://coronavirus.jhu.edu/map.html. Accessed May 4, 2020
Huntington, Samuel P. 1991. The Third Wave: Democratization in the Late Twentieth Century. Norman,
OK and London: University of Oklahoma Press.
Hyden, Goran. 2012. African Politics in Comparative Perspective. 2nd ed. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge
University Press.
POLITIKON 21
IFES. 2022. Electoral Integrity available at.
Inter-Party Parliamentary Union (IPU). 1993. Report of IPU Election Observer Mission, Cambodia, 16
May-4 June, 12-13.
Kaplan, Robert. D. 1997. “Was Democracy Just a Moment?” The Atlantic Monthly 280 (6): 55–80.
Kelley, J. G. 2012. “International Influences on Elections in new Multiparty States.” Annual Review of
Political Science 15 (1): 203–220. doi:10.1146/annurev-polisci-030810-110805
Lavrakas, P. J. 2008. Encyclopedia of Survey Research Methods. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Lijphart, Arend. 1994. Electoral Systems and Party Systems: A Study of Twenty-Seven Democracies,
1945-90. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Lijphart, Arend. 1997. “Unequal Participation: Democracy’s Unresolved Dilemma.” The American
Political Science Review 91 (1): 1–14. doi:10.2307/2952255
Linz, J. L., and A. Stepan. 1996. “Towards Consolidated Democracies.” Journal of Democracy 7 (2): 14–
33. doi:10.1353/jod.1996.0031
Lipset, Seymour. Martin. 1994. “The Social Requisites of Democracy Revisited.” American Sociological
Review 59: 1–15. doi:10.2307/2096130
Maatsch, Aleksandra. 2020. Democracy in pandemics times: A decline or a new form of representa-
tive democracy? Democracy in Pandemics https://ecpr.eu › Events › PaperDetails Accessed
February 8, 2021.
Mauk, Marlene. 2020. “Electoral Integrity Matters: How Electoral Process Conditions the Relationship
Between Political Losing and Political Trust.” Quality & Quantity 56: 1709–1728. doi:10.1007/
s11135-020-01050-1.
McAllister, I., and S. White. 2014. “Electoral Integrity and Support for Democracy in Belarus.” Russia,
and Ukraine. Journal of Election and Public Opinion and Parties 25 (1): 78–96. doi:10.1080/
17457289.2014.911744.
McKinnon, A. M. 2010. “Elective Affinities of the Protestant Ethic: Weber and the Chemistry of
Capitalism.” Sociological Theory 28 (1): 108–126. doi:10.1111/j.1467-9558.2009.01367.x
Minnite, Lorraine. C. 2010. The Myth of Voter Fraud. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.
Mozaffar, Shaheen, and Andreas Schedler. 2002. “The Comparative Study of Electoral Governance—
Introduction.” International Political Science Review 23 (1): 5–27. doi:10.1177/
0192512102023001001
Nohlen, Dieter. 1996. “Electoral Systems and Electoral Reform in Latin America.” In Institutional
Design and Democratization, edited by Arend Lijphart, and Carlos Waisman, 115–131. Boulder,
CO: Westview Press.
Norris, P. 2014. Why Electoral Integrity Matters. Cambridge & New York: Cambridge University Press.
Norris, Pippa, Richard W. Frank, and Ferran Martínezi i Coma. 2013. “Assessing the Quality of
Elections.” Journal of Democracy 24 (4): 124–135. doi:10.1353/jod.2013.0063
Norris, Pippa, Richard W. Frank and Ferran Martínezi Coma, eds. 2014. Advancing Electoral Integrity.
New York: Oxford University Press.
NPP. 1992. The stolen verdict: Ghana, November 1992 presidential election: Report of the New Patriotic
Party. Accra: NPP.
Pastor, Robert A. 1996. “The Centrality of Elections.” New Perspectives Quarterly 13 (4): 4–11.
Pastor, Robert A. 1999. “The Role of Electoral Administration in Democratic Transitions: Implications
for Policy and Research.” Democratization 6 (4): 1–27. doi:10.1080/13510349908403630
Posner, Eric. A., and Andrian Vermeule. 2006. “Emergencies and Democratic Failure.” Virginia Law
Review 92 (6): 1091–1146.
Republic of Ghana. 1992. The Fourth Republic Constitution of 1992. Accra: Assembly Press.
Schaffer, F. C. 2008. The Hidden Costs of Clean Election Reform. Cornell: Cornell University Press.
Schmitter, Philippe C., and Terry Karl. 1991. “What Democracy Is… and Is Not.” Journal of Democracy
2 (3): 75–88.
Smith, B. C. 1985. Decentralization: The Territorial Dimension of the State. London: Allen & Unwin.
Snyder, M. R. 2013. For Want of a credible voter registry: Do problems in voter registration Increase the
likelihood of electoral violence?’. Josef Korbel Journal of Advanced International Studies, Summer.
UN. 1991. General Assembly Resolution 46/130: Respect for the principles of national sovereignty
and non-interference in the internal affairs of States in their electoral processes. NY: UN.
22 E. DEBRAH AND I. OWUSU-MENSAH
UN Human Rights Committee. 1996. The right to participate in public affairs, voting rights and the
right of equal access to public service.’ General Comment 25, 12 July, collected in ‘Compilation of
General Comments and General Recommendations Adopted by Human Rights Treaty Bodies’, UN
doc. HRI/GEN/1/Rev.7, 12 May 2004, 167.
United Nations. 1996. Support by the United Nations System of the Efforts of Governments to Promote
and Consolidate New or Restored Democracies. Report by the Secretary-General, UN docs. A/51/
512, 18 October.
United Nations. 2001. Enhancing the effectiveness of the principle of periodic and genuine elec-
tions: UN doc. A/46/609, 19 October.
Wang, T. A. 2012. The Politics of Voter Suppression: Defending and Expanding Americans’ Right to Vote.
Ithaca, London: Cornell University Press.
World Bank. (2020). The global economic outlook during the COVID-19 pandemic: A changed world.
https://www.worldbank.org/en/news/feature/2020/06/08/the-global-economic-outlook-during-
the-covid-19-pandemic-a-changed-world. Accessed March 6, 2021.