South Africa is ripe for electoral reform

Here’s why.
ANC campaigners at voting station in November 2020. Image: by Darren Stewart/Gallo Images via Getty Images

South Africa adopted its electoral system during the process of making a new constitution in the run up to its transition to democracy in 1994.

The system agreed was proportional representation. This involved parties drawing up lists of representatives which would get seats in legislatures according to the proportion of votes the parties won in the polls. This system was chosen because it was seen as allowing maximum representation of different political opinions and ethnic identities.

The system has worked well to represent minority parties along with recurrent African National Congress majorities in the National Assembly and in most of the country’s nine provinces.

But some now see it as working against accountability. This is because proportional representation hands power to party bosses – which in turn disempowers voters. MPs feel beholden to their parties, rather than to the people who elected them.

The existing electoral system has attracted extensive criticism for rendering elected representatives unaccountable to those who elected them. Correspondingly, calls for electoral reform have been growing louder, with especial demands that voters should be enabled to elect their representatives directly. But attempts at reform have all been stymied by a reluctance on the part of the politically dominant African National Congress which is well served by the current system.

The call for reform was given a significant boost following a ruling by the country’s top court, The Constitutional Court, in June last year. The judgment forced the issue by calling for amendments to the Electoral Act. In the wake of the ruling, an influential lobby group, the Inclusive Society Institute, has recently produced a detailed report setting out recommendations for electoral reform.

Electoral reform

The Constitutional Court judgment of June 2020 declared the current Electoral Act unconstitutional. This is because the act barred individuals, as distinct from parties, from standing for election at national and provincial levels.

Parliament is now obliged to change the law. A bill to allow for the change is in progress. This has opened the door to wider reform of the electoral act, particularly with regard to the idea of blending the right of voters to elect their representatives directly with the constitutional imperative for proportional representation.

The proposals for reform made by the Inclusive Society Institute were drawn up by a committee chaired by Roelf Meyer, who served as the chief representative of the former ruling National Party during the constitution-making process.

The committee’s report makes a number of suggestions. These include:

  • that the National Assembly should consist of the current 400 representatives. Of these, 300 should be elected from multi-member constituencies.
  • A further 100 compensatory seats should be provided to ensure the overall proportionality of the outcome.
  • If a party obtained, overall, 55% of the total national vote, it would receive extra seats (in addition to those it won at constituency level) to provide it with 55% representation in parliament. (Similarly at provincial level.)

To meet the demands of the Constitutional Court, independent candidates would be able to stand in the multi-member constituencies.

Given the number of registered voters, around 26.7 million in 2018, independent candidates would need to receive about 90 000 votes to be elected to the National Assembly.

More voice, greater fluidity

The idea behind multi-member constituencies is that 300 out of the 400 MPs would become accountable not only to parties but also to constituencies. This would be a welcome change, even if it would fall short of the direct accountability that many voters would like.

Such a system opens the door to candidates who want to raise issues that are too often smothered by the established political parties. Concerns about government service delivery and about the environment immediately come to mind.

Such a system would also enable aspirant candidates who have failed to gain nomination by their preferred political party to stand, perhaps as independent members of their parties.

The adoption of the system would, therefore, allow voters greater choice. It would also introduce great fluidity into the electoral system by impressing on MPs that they are accountable to constituents as well as their party bosses.

Given that recent elections have seen a steady decline in the proportion of the votes going to the ANC – there are suggestions that it could lose its majority in the next general election in 2024 – there are even chances that the country would have its first government by coalition in the national parliament.

What next?

The proposals revive the reforms proposed by the task team led by the late former opposition leader Van Zyl Slabbert in 2003. The team was carrying out a constitutional requirement to review the electoral system after five years of democracy.

The team recommended a change that would have introduced multi-member constituencies – whereby each constituency is represented by between three and seven MPs. But the ANC used its majority in parliament to block the proposed reform. What chances are there that this time round the ANC will agree to what would be a far-reaching reform of the electoral system along the lines suggested by the institute?

The party rejected the Slabbert Committee’s recommendations on the grounds that the current system was working satisfactorily. Not least because it was simple and easy to understand. It might now well argue along similar lines. It might suggest that the introduction of multi-member constituencies, with a proportional representation top-up to ensure proportionality, might appear opaque to the majority of the population.

It would be simpler, it might say, to fulfil the Constitutional Court’s ruling by merely allowing individual candidates to stand alongside political parties on the national list. That would enable their election if they garnered the necessary minimum of votes.

While such a minimum change might serve the party’s interests, the sheer difficulties which individual candidates would encounter in attracting nationwide support would effectively gut the reform of content. It will leave MPs as unaccountable in practice as they are today.

There is, within the ANC, a reformist group lobbying for a major change within the electoral system. Likewise, the recent formation of a grouping of “struggle veterans” to defend the constitution and democracy, suggests that momentum for electoral reform might grow.

But, there is real danger that any debate around electoral reform will get caught up in the ANC’s factional politics. Yet, still, the present moment presents a genuine opportunity for a more accountable and truly democratic politics. It will be to South Africa’s great detriment if that opportunity for change is missed.The Conversation

Roger Southall, Professor of Sociology, University of the Witwatersrand

This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.


Sort by:
  • Oldest first
  • Newest first
  • Top voted

You must be signed in and an Insider Gold subscriber to comment.


However SA is unfortunately not ready for voter reform.

It’s beyond ripe. There was a massive stuff up at codesa.

They never thought that something similar to evil apartheid would ever happen again yet what we are experiencing is far worse… They know the very mistakes which were made yet they are hell bent on repeating the same.

No politician will ever do something “In Good Faith” for his fellow country man, the epitome of corruption is his enslavement of fellow brethren by the vary laws which are made to protect them. – PurgeCoin

So far backwards have the politicians put ordinary folk that to live in 1st world SA, you are better of emigrating to a 1st world country where there are pools of 1st worldness that cost reasonable amount not small pockets of excellence that expensive and tax burdensome.

Oh, I certainly remember Codesa in the 1990’s

“Conference Of Dictatorship Ensuring a Socialist Azania” a friend of mine used to say.

We mocked his comment back in the 1990’s. Today we realised he had true vision after all 😉

Its more like the Rule of the Jungle in RSA !

“Given the number of registered voters, around 26.7 million in 2018, independent candidates would need to receive about 90 000 votes to be elected to the National Assembly.”

This all falls short of real and meaningful democracy:
Firstly, never has voter turn out passed even 22millions, the last election in 2019 only had 17,671,616 votes cast, almost 10million shy. This should rather be a proportional number if anything, bringing down the number to around 59,567 or better put 0.34% of the total votes cast.

Secondly, True democracy would focused on individualism rather than either collectivism or as per the above part collectivism 75% & part individualism 25% when selecting true representation through voting.

Explained as:
1) 19 of the closed eligible voters should meeting and vote amongst them for a representative, we tend to live in home nearest to a place that both we can individually afford and that suites our needs.
2) Once elected, the individual will group together with the 18 others who have been elected until the reach the all the members of their neighbourhood and vote again until the neighbourhood has selected 2 people with the highest number of votes.
3) The highest elected representative will reconvene with the closed 19 neighbourhoods and elect a representative and deputy.
4) The process will continue until representatives from provinces are elected whereby they will choose a president with 8 counsel members.
5) The counsel members will interview ministers to represent the various departments, the departments are to make submissions are every decision taken which will be voted on by the Counsel Members and President. This same process for enacting laws at local level will be followed to ensure that the representatives make a democratic vote with regards to all decisions.

Not only will this process be truly democratic, it will also equally representative of the voter through the various election stages.

No Party, Means not corruption or very little thereof

I don’t think that a change in the electoral system will change the current reality in SA. The mindset of the voters will remain the same.

We need a similar solution to Kgetlengrivier and Koster where the court ruled that the voters were irrational and a danger to themselves. In a democracy, an uneducated collectivist voter without any property on his name is like a child with a loaded shotgun in his hands. A disaster waiting to happen.

The disaster is happening in SA. The courts should protect these voters against themselves by privatising all service delivery. Alternatively, all the choices of voters should be scrutinised by the court.

It is for this reason that China is a one-party state.

At the municipal level the current system is absolutely at its worst. The parties put forward persons that are not grounded in their wards at all.

To compound that error, the more senior ones from party lists also get departments (carry fatter salaries) – whether they know anything about the department or not.

Back in the old days people that stood for council did so as public service. Hardly any pay, certainly not a job / career whereas now it seems getting on party list is a ticket to embedded career and advancing the party policy.

Local solution if have say 20 wards?

Voters vote directly for persons that represent wards whether associated to a party or not. Winner takes the ward. So that sorts wards though must expect that a DA/ANC/EFF reps will have a bigger machine behind them. If Mary was the DA rep for ward 9, gets the most votes, then Mary represents and answers to ward 9 regardless of party lists. The DA would have to pick Mary carefully and not based on internal party office politics though. Putting Mary from Cape Town forward as ward X candidate in Worcester could backfire if John from ward X stands against her.

Then have say 10 seats that are filled by proportional but these persons have no wards. They are political votes on council.

The heads of departments should be technocrats selected on merit, and have a seat at mayoral committee.

The only “reform” would be within the ANC to ensure they remain in power, no matter how many service delivery protests come their way.

The ANC has been learning a lot from its revolutionary brother, the ZANU-PF.

Are they running out of T shirts and food parcels?????????????

The only reform I would want is that you need to pay tax to vote.

The government has one job, to govern. They do this by spending the money tax payers give them.

So why do people that don’t pay taxes get to vote ? Sure, if you are a citizen you should be allowed basic rights. Voting shouldn’t be one of those. You need to be well informed and make an extremely important call on what is best for SA. We are giving that huge responsibility away by simply giving away free T shirts once every 4 years.

End of comments.




Instrument Details  

You do not have any portfolios, please create one here.
You do not have an alert portfolio, please create one here.

Follow us:

Search Articles:
Click a Company: