What made the 2005 elections in Liberia unusual amongst post-conflict elections in Africa? What factors determined how Liberians voted in the elections? This article from the Journal of Modern African Studies analyses the 2005 presidential and legislative elections in Liberia. It finds that the virtual absence of transformed rebel forces or an overbearing incumbent gave the elections extraordinary features in an African setting. Another unusual feature in the context of African elections was the fragility of party loyalty.
The absence of an incumbent or transformed rebel forces meant that the 2005 Liberian elections took place amongst civilians on a relatively level playing field. Although government resources were used illegally, they were not used in support of one particular party. The absence of rebel forces prevented insecurity from having a large influence on the election results. These positive features of the elections were largely a result of the 2003 Comprehensive Peace Agreement (CPA) and the National Transitional Government of Liberia (NTGL). The CPA and NTGL did not allow for an incumbent party and effectively ‘bought off’ rebel leaders rather than threatening them with war crimes tribunals.
The election results show definite patterns, indicating an electorate that voted with a purpose and applied a range of rationales in making its decision. Factors which affected how people voted include:
- The political and commercial records of the presidential aspirants – Ellen Johnson-Sirleaf emphasised her reputation for standing up to repression, while George Weah highlighted his football career and absence from past corrupt governments.
- Regional divides – while regional voting patterns stand out, however, large home county victories for candidates only contributed to national results to a limited extent.
- The ‘Congo-country’ divide between Americo-Liberians and the indigenous population – while Weah probably benefited from his image as an indigenous man of the people, the effect of this factor should not be overestimated.
- Local factors – patterns in the Senate and House election results and the success of independent candidates suggest that local factors played a significant role.
- The educated and political-uneducated and apolitical divide – in the run-off, Johnson-Sirleaf appealed to those believing Liberia needed an educated president, while Weah appealed to those who felt educated leaders had failed Liberia.
The crucial question for Liberians is whether the government can provide a platform for reconciliation and economic recovery. The results of the 2005 election have a number of implications in this regard:
- President Johnson-Sirleaf is a member of the established political elite, but has demonstrated autonomy in her pronouncements. She will need consummate political skills to deal with pressure from various actors and interests.
- Having different leaders in the Presidency, Senate and House could lead to deadlock, while local power holders may also be able to block government action.
- The legislative bodies represent a diversity of interests that could prove advantageous for reconciliation. They could also serve as a check on the executive and nurture a culture of compromise, balancing and coalition-building.
- Opposition parties’ poor political capacity and weak party loyalty could undermine the advantages of the diversity of interests represented in the legislature. Political parties could, however, be open for much-needed capacity building.
- While a formal power-sharing government might be seen as too similar to the NTGL, an inclusive Unity Party-led government would likely be beneficial.
