Civil and political strive in Africa is in the main, this is due to an increase in disputes over who won elections. The disputed elections in Kenya, Zanzibar, Zimbabwe, Lesotho, Ethiopia and more recently Ivory Coast to mention but a few, indicate how disputes over election results in Africa have been escalating. ‘Over the last couple of decades, many elections in Africa have been marred by ‘extreme controversy’. Elections ‘rigging and brigandage’, violence and elections invalidation are common phenomena in Africa. The report prepared by the British-Angola Forum (BAF) following a conference on the challenges for free and fair elections in Angola, reveals that many elections in Africa are ‘subject to human error and manipulation’ and this is mainly because those who are in power want to cling onto it especially ‘in countries where there is a perception that politics means money’. Adejumobi argues that in Africa most elections in their current form appear to be ‘a fading shadow of democracy’ jeopardising the frail democratic project itself. According to the African Union Panel of Wise (AUPW), while in some countries elections have built ‘democratic governance and prosperity of citizens’, in others they have led to disputed results and violence among the political actors. / Thesis (LLM (Human Rights and Democratisation in Africa)) -- University of Pretoria, 2011. / http://www.chr.up.ac.za/ / nf2012 / Centre for Human Rights / LLM

In a democracy it is the citizens who choose their leaders. Through elections, the people constitute government to preside over public affairs. However, in several African countries the quality of the elections has been vitiated by fraud, incompetence, unequal playing field and violence. Part of the problem is historical. Within the first decade of attaining independence in the 1950s and 1960s, many African regimes rapidly descended into autocracy and many countries formally recognised one-party regimes. Despite many one-party regimes having been abolished after the democratisation wave of the late 1980s and early 1990s, challenges of holding free and fair elections persist. Several elections held since this democratic wave were generally not considered by independent observers as free and fair. Indeed Africa has become well known for flawed elections, such as was the case in the 2007 elections in Kenya, the 2008 elections in Zimbabwe and the 2010 elections in Ivory Coast. Due to the stifled democratic climate, where even elections had a predetermined outcome, coups became a common and regular method of showing discontent or removing government. While the phenomenon of problematic elections is going on, at the continental level, Africa seems to be making renewed commitment towards democratic governance. With the transformation of the Organisation of African Unity (OAU) into the African Union (AU) through the adoption of the Constitutive Act of the African Union in 2000, the AU, inter alia, committed to promoting “democratic principles and institutions, popular participation and good governance” and seems determined to depart from the legacy of poor governance. It is in view of the foregoing background that this research sought to investigate the challenges the judiciary in Africa has faced in adjudicating presidential election disputes. And, in light of the growing trend towards establishing common African democratic standards and seeking collective solutions, the research also sought to explore the viability of establishing a continental supranational mechanism for resolving disputed presidential elections through adjudication. / Public, Constitutional and International Law / LLD

In a democracy it is the citizens who choose their leaders. Through elections, the people constitute government to preside over public affairs. However, in several African countries the quality of the elections has been vitiated by fraud, incompetence, unequal playing field and violence. Part of the problem is historical. Within the first decade of attaining independence in the 1950s and 1960s, many African regimes rapidly descended into autocracy and many countries formally recognised one-party regimes. Despite many one-party regimes having been abolished after the democratisation wave of the late 1980s and early 1990s, challenges of holding free and fair elections persist. Several elections held since this democratic wave were generally not considered by independent observers as free and fair. Indeed Africa has become well known for flawed elections, such as was the case in the 2007 elections in Kenya, the 2008 elections in Zimbabwe and the 2010 elections in Ivory Coast. Due to the stifled democratic climate, where even elections had a predetermined outcome, coups became a common and regular method of showing discontent or removing government. While the phenomenon of problematic elections is going on, at the continental level, Africa seems to be making renewed commitment towards democratic governance. With the transformation of the Organisation of African Unity (OAU) into the African Union (AU) through the adoption of the Constitutive Act of the African Union in 2000, the AU, inter alia, committed to promoting “democratic principles and institutions, popular participation and good governance” and seems determined to depart from the legacy of poor governance. It is in view of the foregoing background that this research sought to investigate the challenges the judiciary in Africa has faced in adjudicating presidential election disputes. And, in light of the growing trend towards establishing common African democratic standards and seeking collective solutions, the research also sought to explore the viability of establishing a continental supranational mechanism for resolving disputed presidential elections through adjudication. / Public, Constitutional and International Law / LL. D.