Tanzania’s recent presidential election, in which president Samia Suluhu Hassan was declared the winner with nearly 98% of the vote, is not an electoral triumph but a tragedy for democracy.
It is a symptom of the creeping authoritarianism and democratic regression now taking hold across the African continent.
What makes this moment even more disheartening is not merely the scale of manipulation in Dar es Salaam, but the shameful acquiescence of regional and continental institutions that have chosen silence over principle.
When a sitting head of state secures almost all the votes in an election where leading rivals were excluded, harassed, or imprisoned, the outcome cannot be mistaken for a legitimate expression of the people’s will. It is, instead, the cynical choreography of power masquerading as democracy.
Yet the African Union (AU) and regional observers have offered validation for this farce, cloaking it in the rhetoric of “peaceful elections” and “stability”. This ritual of empty praise betrays not only Tanzanians but also the democratic aspirations of millions across Africa who still dare to believe in the promise of self-government.
Opposition parties were systematically weakened long before election day. The state wielded the criminal-justice system and administrative decrees to exclude potential challengers. Independent media were muzzled, civic organisations intimidated, and digital platforms throttled to silence dissent.
By the time voters arrived at polling stations, the outcome was already ordained. To then record a 97–98% “victory” was simply to complete the script – one written not in the language of legitimacy but of domination. This is not democracy; it is electoral theatre staged to confer the illusion of consent.
In any credible democracy, margins of victory so lopsided would invite investigation, not applause. Yet the AU’s observer mission, together with several heads of state, hurried to congratulate Hassan, lauding the process as “orderly” and “peaceful”. It is a cruel irony that the absence of overt violence – achieved largely through the repression of protest – has become the new benchmark of “success” in African elections.
The African Peer Review Mechanism (APRM), conceived two decades ago as a bold experiment in self-monitoring, has degenerated into a polite club of mutual indulgence. Its founding purpose – to hold one another to account on governance, democracy, and human rights – has been hollowed out by political expediency.
Today, the APRM issues perfunctory reports while autocrats tighten their grip on power. When leaders who subvert constitutions, jail opponents, and rule through fear can still chair or endorse these mechanisms, we have reached the outer limits of hypocrisy.
The Tanzanian episode exposes the APRM’s impotence more starkly than ever. Its silence is not neutrality; it is complicity. It sends a dangerous message that as long as incumbents maintain a façade of order, the continent will look away.
If left unchallenged, this pattern will normalise electoral autocracy – a system where elections occur regularly but without genuine competition or accountability. Citizens are reduced to spectators while power circulates among elites through managed succession, often sanctified by regional observers. Such systems breed disillusionment, discourage participation, and invite instability.
It is unconscionable that African leaders, many of whom themselves owe their mandates to liberation struggles or democratic movements, should now collude in democracy’s quiet burial. By congratulating Hassan on her “landslide”, they betray the very principles they once espoused.
Africa’s institutions – particularly the African Union, the Southern African Development Community, and the APRM – must recover their moral compass. Their legitimacy rests not on protocol but on principle. The AU’s credibility cannot survive the perception that it serves as a diplomatic shield for incumbents rather than a guardian of democratic standards.
Concrete reforms are overdue. Election observation missions must be independent, professional, and transparent – not ceremonial delegations dispatched to rubber-stamp predetermined outcomes. The APRM should be overhauled to include civil society participation, public reporting, and enforceable consequences for violations of democratic norms. Without accountability, peer review is merely peer protection.
Tanzania’s people deserve better, and so does Africa.
Africa stands today at a crossroads. One path leads toward renewed democratic vibrancy, grounded in constitutionalism and respect for human rights. The other descends into the familiar abyss of strong-man rule, cronyism, and despair. Tanzania’s 98% “victory” is not an isolated event; it is a flashing red warning light along that dangerous road.
The question is whether Africa’s leaders – and its people – will heed the alarm.
The future of African democracy will not be determined by the rhetoric of communiqués but by the resolve to confront impunity. The continent’s peer-review mechanisms must regain their teeth – or make way for a new generation of institutions that will not confuse politeness with principle.
Tanzania has shown us the cost of complacency. The rest of Africa must decide whether to pay the same price.
- Khaas is the chairperson of Public Interest SA, a civil society organisation promoting ethical governance, transparency, and democratic accountability.
Would you like to comment on this article?
Sign up (it's quick and free) or sign in now.
Please read our Comment Policy before commenting.