Electoral Authoritarianism and Election Rigging in Relation to Human Rights Violations: The Role of Revolutionary Political Parties in Four SADC Countries (Zimbabwe, DRC, Tanzania, and Mozambique)

Electoral Authoritarianism and Election Rigging in Relation to Human Rights Violations: The Role of Revolutionary Political Parties in Four SADC Countries (Zimbabwe, DRC, Tanzania, and Mozambique)

*¹Mr. Chidyausiku Weston, ²Dr. Webster Chihambakwe, ³Mr. Taruvinga Muzingili

¹Department of Social Work Lecturer, Eswatini Medical Christian University

²Department of Psychology, Eswatini Medical Christian University

³Department of Social Work, Midlands State University

*Corresponding Author

DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.47772/IJRISS.2025.9020324

Received: 12 February 2025; Review 20 February 2025; Accepted: 22 February 2025; Published: 21 March 2025

ABSTRACT

This study examined the phenomenon of electoral authoritarianism in Zimbabwe, the Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC), Tanzania, and Mozambique, focusing on how revolutionary political parties maintain power through manipulative electoral practices and human rights violations. It highlighted the historical context of these parties, which emerged from liberation movements, and their subsequent shift towards authoritarianism. The researchers used desk review methodology. The research identified key strategies employed by these regimes, including electoral manipulation, suppression of dissent, and control of media narratives. Furthermore, the study emphasized the detrimental effects of these practices on democratic institutions and civil society, leading to widespread human rights abuses. From a social work perspective, the findings underscore the importance of community empowerment and advocacy for social justice as essential components in combating electoral authoritarianism. The study concluded with recommendations for strengthening democratic governance, enhancing civil society engagement, and promoting human rights protections, emphasizing the collaborative role of social workers and international actors in fostering resilient democracies in the region.

Keywords: Electoral Authoritarianism, Human Rights, Democratic Governance; Civil Society, Social Justice, Community Empowerment

INTRODUCTION

Electoral authoritarianism has emerged as a significant concern in many African nations, particularly within the Southern African Development Community (SADC) region. This form of governance is characterized by the manipulation of democratic institutions and processes to sustain authoritarian rule, often under the guise of legitimate electoral practices (Schedler, 2006). In countries such as Zimbabwe, the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC), Tanzania, and Mozambique, revolutionary political parties have been implicated in employing election rigging and other forms of electoral manipulation to maintain their grip on power while simultaneously suppressing dissent and violating human rights (Levitsky & Way, 2010).

Revolutionary political parties in the SADC region, such as Zimbabwe African National Union- Patriotic Front (ZANU-PF) in Zimbabwe, the People’s Party for Reconstruction and Democracy (PPRD) in the DRC, Chama Cha Mapinduzi (CCM) in Tanzania, and the Liberation Front of Mozambique (FRELIMO) in Mozambique, have historical roots in liberation movements that fought against colonial rule. However, once in power, these parties have often resorted to authoritarian practices to consolidate their control. The historical context of these parties is crucial for understanding their current electoral strategies and the implications for democracy and human rights.

Freedom House (2017) posits that the strategies employed by revolutionary parties in Southern African Development Community (SADC) region to maintain power frequently involve election rigging, voter suppression, and the use of violence against opposition parties. Reports from various electoral observation missions have highlighted significant irregularities in elections across these countries, indicating a systematic undermining of democratic principles (EUEOM, 2018; EUEOM, 2019). The implications of these practices extend beyond the electoral process, leading to widespread human rights abuses, including torture, arbitrary arrests, and suppression of free speech (Amnesty International, 2020; Human Rights Watch, 2020).

International actors, including regional organizations like SADC and global entities such as the United Nations, play a critical role in either perpetuating or challenging electoral authoritarianism in the SADC region. While SADC has established principles aimed at promoting democratic elections (SADC, 2019), its effectiveness is often hampered by the lack of political will among member states to implement reforms. Conversely, international organizations have provided technical assistance and capacity-building programs to support democratic governance, although their influence is frequently limited by the cooperation of local governments (Adebajo, 2013; UNDP, 2020).

Our research aimed to answer the following central question: How do revolutionary political parties in Zimbabwe, the DRC, Tanzania and Mozambique employ election rigging and human rights violations to sustain authoritarian rule? To address this aim, we explore:

• The historical evolution of these political parties from liberation movements to authoritarian regimes.
• The specific election manipulation strategies they employ.
• The impact of electoral authoritarianism on democratic institutions and human rights.
• The role of international actors in either reinforcing or mitigating these trends.

METHODOLOGY

The study employed a comprehensive desk literature review methodology to investigate the intricate relationship between revolutionary political parties and electoral authoritarianism in Zimbabwe, the Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC), Tanzania, and Mozambique. This approach was rooted in a commitment to understanding how election rigging and human rights violations are intertwined with the perpetuation of authoritarian regimes. By focusing on these elements, the study aimed to illuminate the mechanisms through which revolutionary political parties influence electoral processes and contribute to the entrenchment of authoritarian governance.

Research Design

A desk review methodology was chosen as the primary research design. This decision allowed for the synthesis of existing knowledge and insights from various sources, providing a robust framework for analysis. The desk review approach was particularly suitable for this study as it enabled the gathering of a wide range of perspectives and data without the constraints of fieldwork, which can be challenging in politically sensitive environments.

Data Sources

To ensure depth and reliability, a diverse array of primary and secondary data sources was utilized, including:

• Election observation reports: Reports from local and international election monitoring bodies, such as the European Union Election Observation Mission (EUEOM) and the Southern African Development Community Election Observer Mission (SEOM), were analyzed to gather evidence of electoral manipulation and irregularities.
• Human rights reports: Reports from organizations such as Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch provided critical insights into the human rights violations associated with electoral authoritarianism.
• Government and opposition party documents: Official government policies and reports were examined alongside opposition party documents to understand the official stance on electoral processes and to capture counter-narratives.
• Academic and scholarly literature: Peer-reviewed journal articles and reports from reputable organizations, such as International IDEA, were reviewed to contextualize findings within existing theoretical frameworks.
• Media reports: Investigative journalism and news articles from local and international media outlets were reviewed to offer additional evidence of voter suppression and electoral violence.
• Social media and online forums: Social media posts and online discussions were reviewed to identify patterns of disinformation and public sentiment regarding elections in the selected countries.

Data Collection

The data collection process was systematic and iterative, ensuring comprehensiveness and relevance. A search strategy utilizing keywords such as “electoral authoritarianism,” “election rigging,” and “human rights violations” was employed to search academic databases and organizational archives. Inclusion criteria were established for documents published between 2000 and 2024 that focused on the countries of interest and addressed themes of electoral manipulation and governance. Documents unrelated to the SADC region or lacking verifiable sources were excluded to maintain the accuracy and relevance of findings. To enhance the credibility of the research, data triangulation was implemented, cross-referencing data from multiple sources to ensure consistency and validity. This process helped minimize biases and strengthened the overall reliability of the findings.

Data Analysis

Qualitative content analysis was utilized as the primary analytical framework, supplemented by thematic and discourse analysis techniques. A coding scheme was developed to classify data into relevant categories, such as “electoral manipulation” and “human rights abuses.” This process was guided by the research objectives and existing theoretical frameworks. Thematic analysis was employed to examine the identified themes in relation to key research questions, following a rigorous six-step framework as proposed by Braun and Clarke (2006) to ensure systematic analysis. Additionally, discourse analysis was applied to scrutinize the language and narratives present in government policies and media reports, uncovering power dynamics and ideological underpinnings in the electoral processes.

Ethical Considerations

The study adhered to ethical standards by ensuring the credibility and integrity of the research process. Only verified and credible sources were utilized to avoid misinformation, and sensitive information was handled with care to protect the identities of individuals involved. All sources were properly cited to ensure intellectual honesty.

Validity and Reliability

To enhance the validity and reliability of the findings, several measures were implemented, including triangulation of data from multiple sources and the use of established analytical frameworks. A detailed record of the analytical process was maintained to provide a clear audit trail, ensuring transparency and rigor in the research.

Limitations

While the study is comprehensive, it does have limitations. The reliance on documentary sources limits the ability to capture firsthand experiences of electoral manipulation. Future research could address this limitation by incorporating primary data collection methods. Additionally, some sources may reflect partisan perspectives; however, this was mitigated through triangulation and cross-referencing.

Conceptual Framework

We adopted the electoral authoritarianism framework which is a complex phenomenon that combines democratic and authoritarian elements, often featuring elections marred by irregularities, fraud, and violence (Karl, 1986; Schedler, 2006; Freedom House, 2017; International IDEA, 2023). In Southern African Development Community (SADC) countries, revolutionary political parties have used various strategies to maintain power, including election rigging, voter suppression, and electoral violence (Levitsky & Way, 2010; Freedom House, 2017). These regimes legitimize their power through electoral processes, while systematically undermining democratic principles and human rights (Schedler, 2006). The use of democratic institutions and procedures to legitimize authoritarian rule is a hallmark of electoral authoritarianism (Schedler, 2006; Freedom House, 2017). Revolutionary parties with strong organizational presence and willingness to use coercion often perpetuate electoral authoritarianism, using democratic institutions to legitimize their rule while undermining the democratic process (Levitsky & Way, 2010; Schedler, 2006). This can include practices such as voter intimidation, manipulation of electoral laws, and control of the media (Schedler, 2006; Freedom House, 2017; International IDEA, 2023). In the SADC region, several countries exhibit features of electoral authoritarianism, including Zimbabwe, Mozambique, and Tanzania (Levitsky & Way, 2010; Freedom House 2018; International IDEA, 2023). These countries have held elections, but they have been criticized for being unfree and unfair (EUEOM, 2018; EUEOM, 2019). The SADC Principles and Guidelines Governing Democratic Elections aim to promote democratic practices, but their effectiveness is limited by the lack of robust institutions and the dominance of liberation-movement ruling parties (SADC, 2019).

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

General overview of electoral authoritarianism in the SADC region

Electoral authoritarianism has increasingly become a defining feature of governance in many Southern African Development Community (SADC) countries, particularly Zimbabwe, the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC), Tanzania, and Mozambique. While elections are conducted regularly in these states, they fail to meet democratic standards due to systemic manipulation by ruling parties. As Schedler (2006) argues, electoral authoritarian regimes use democratic institutions as facades to legitimize their rule while simultaneously undermining genuine political competition.

The electoral processes in these countries are consistently marred by irregularities, fraud, and violence (EUEOM, 2018; Freedom House, 2017). Zimbabwe’s 2018 and 2023 elections, for example, faced widespread criticism for lacking fairness and transparency (EUEOM, 2018; SEOM, 2023). Similarly, the DRC’s 2018 presidential election was marred by allegations of fraud and voter suppression (Freedom House, 2018; International Crisis Group, 2019). The same trends are observable in Tanzania and Mozambique, where ruling parties have engaged in systematic harassment of opposition figures, suppression of civil liberties, and manipulation of state institutions to maintain their grip on power (Freedom House, 2017; Stiftung, 2024; Freischlad, 2024).

This study argues that electoral authoritarianism in the SADC region is not merely a political strategy but a deeply entrenched governance crisis that has eroded democratic institutions, legitimized human rights abuses, and rendered international interventions ineffective. While previous studies provide extensive documentation of electoral manipulation, this study extends the analysis by examining the evolving tactics of electoral authoritarianism, particularly the increasing role of social media in disinformation and propaganda.

Historical context of revolutionary parties and their shift to authoritarian regimes

Revolutionary political parties in the SADC region, such as Zimbabwe’s ZANU-PF, the DRC’s PPRD, Tanzania’s CCM, and Mozambique’s FRELIMO, trace their origins to anti-colonial liberation movements. Initially, these parties championed nationalist ideals and sought to dismantle oppressive colonial structures. However, their transition from liberation movements to ruling parties saw them gradually adopt authoritarian governance styles.

In Zimbabwe, ZANU-PF emerged from the Zimbabwe African National Union (ZANU) and consolidated power after independence in 1980. Despite its liberation credentials, the party quickly resorted to electoral manipulation and political violence to entrench its dominance (Levitsky & Way, 2010; Africa Center, 2023). Similarly, the PPRD in the DRC, which emerged from the political turmoil following Mobutu Sese Seko’s regime, has consistently undermined electoral integrity through fraud, coercion, and manipulation of state institutions (EUEOM, 2019; Vlassenroot & Vermeersch, 2018).

Tanzania’s CCM, which was formed through the merger of the Tanganyika African National Union and the Afro-Shirazi Party, initially promoted socialist policies but later adopted increasingly repressive tactics to maintain power (Africa Center, 2017; Stiftung, 2024). Likewise, Mozambique’s FRELIMO, which played a key role in the country’s independence from Portuguese colonial rule, has entrenched its rule through electoral fraud, suppression of opposition parties, and control of state resources (Freischlad, 2024; Juma, 2021).

This study argues that the historical legitimacy of these revolutionary parties has enabled them to justify authoritarian practices under the guise of maintaining national stability and resisting external interference. However, their continued reliance on coercion and manipulation undermines the very democratic principles they once claimed to uphold.

Electoral manipulation strategies used by revolutionary parties in the SADC region

The study identifies several key electoral manipulation strategies employed by ruling parties in Zimbabwe, the DRC, Tanzania, and Mozambique. These include election rigging, voter suppression, intimidation at polling stations, manipulation of voter rolls, and control of media and information.

Election rigging is a consistent feature of elections in these countries. ZANU-PF in Zimbabwe, for instance, has been accused of orchestrating large-scale voter suppression and electoral violence to maintain its dominance (Kujenga, 2023). Similar allegations have been made against the PPRD in the DRC and FRELIMO in Mozambique (EUEOM, 2019).

Voter suppression tactics, such as intimidation at polling stations and manipulation of voter rolls, have been widely documented in Zimbabwe and the DRC (Kujenga, 2023). The presence of security forces at polling stations creates a hostile voting environment, discouraging opposition supporters from participating in elections. Additionally, the systematic removal of opposition supporters from voter rolls and the inclusion of fictitious names further undermine electoral integrity.

Control of media and information is another critical strategy. State-controlled media in Zimbabwe, Tanzania, Mozambique, and the DRC overwhelmingly favor ruling parties while censoring opposition voices. More recently, ruling parties have also engaged in disinformation campaigns via social media, spreading propaganda to manipulate public perception (Sleight of Hand, 2009; Kujenga, 2023).

Human rights violations

The study finds a direct correlation between electoral authoritarianism and human rights abuses. Ruling parties in the SADC region have consistently used state security forces to suppress opposition, curtail civil liberties, and silence dissent.

In Zimbabwe, arbitrary arrests, torture, and enforced disappearances are common tactics used to intimidate opposition figures (Amnesty International, 2020). The DRC exhibits similar patterns, with reports of violence and intimidation against activists and opposition leaders (Human Rights Watch, 2020). Tanzania’s government has systematically harassed opposition parties and civil society organizations, while Mozambique has seen increasing reports of political violence, particularly during election periods (Freedom House, 2018).

The erosion of civil liberties further exacerbates the crisis. Zimbabwe’s “Patriotic Bill,” for instance, criminalizes dissent and restricts freedom of assembly and expression. Tanzania and Mozambique have implemented similar restrictive laws that stifle political opposition and limit press freedom. This study argues that these human rights violations are not incidental but are integral to the survival of electoral authoritarian regimes in the region.

Weakening of democratic institutions

Electoral authoritarianism has significantly weakened democratic institutions in the SADC region. Electoral commissions, judicial systems, and legislative bodies have been systematically co-opted by ruling parties, undermining checks and balances.

The manipulation of electoral laws in Zimbabwe and the DRC has severely compromised the credibility of elections (EUEOM, 2008, 2013, 2018, 2023). Similarly, Tanzania’s restrictive laws have limited the ability of opposition parties to campaign effectively (Africa Center, 2020), while Mozambique continues to experience orchestrated election fraud and a climate of intimidation (EUEOM, 2019).

Judicial independence is another major casualty. Courts in Zimbabwe, the DRC, Tanzania, and Mozambique have been compromised by political interference, making it nearly impossible for opposition parties to challenge electoral outcomes (Freedom House, 2018). This lack of accountability fosters a culture of impunity among ruling elites, further entrenching authoritarian rule.

Role of international actors and their limitations

The study finds that international actors, particularly SADC and the United Nations (UN), have been largely ineffective in addressing electoral authoritarianism in the region.

SADC, despite its principles on democratic elections, has failed to hold member states accountable for electoral malpractices. The lack of political will among member states and the inconsistent application of democratic principles have rendered SADC’s electoral observer missions largely symbolic (Freedom House, 2022).

The UN, while playing a role in monitoring elections and promoting human rights, is often constrained by the unwillingness of local governments to cooperate and by resource limitations (Ginsburg, 2020). This study argues that without stronger enforcement mechanisms and greater collaboration with local civil society organizations, international interventions will remain ineffective.

Social Work Perspective

This study has several important implications, particularly when viewed through a social work perspective. This perspective emphasizes the importance of social justice, human rights, and community empowerment, which are critical in addressing the challenges posed by electoral authoritarianism.

Impact on democratic institutions

From a social work perspective, the erosion of democratic institutions due to electoral authoritarianism is concerning. The manipulation of electoral processes undermines the principles of fairness and justice, which are foundational to social work practice. Social workers advocate for transparent governance and accountability, and the decline of public trust in electoral systems can hinder community engagement and participation in democratic processes.

Human rights concerns

The study highlights significant human rights violations associated with electoral authoritarianism, such as suppression of dissent and arbitrary arrests. Social work emphasizes the protection of human rights and the dignity of individuals. The environment of fear and repression not only affects political opposition but also stifles civil society, limiting the ability of social workers to advocate for vulnerable populations and promote social change.

Regional stability

Electoral authoritarianism can lead to broader regional instability, which has direct implications for social work practice. Social workers often engage with communities affected by conflict and instability, providing support and resources to those in need. The potential for unrest in these countries underscores the importance of social work interventions that promote peacebuilding, conflict resolution, and community resilience.

Role of international actors

The mixed effectiveness of international actors in addressing electoral authoritarianism suggests a need for more robust strategies that align with social work values. Social workers can advocate for international policies that prioritize human rights and democratic governance, emphasizing the importance of community involvement in these processes. This advocacy can help ensure that the voices of marginalized populations are heard and considered in decision-making.

Future of democracy in the region

The entrenched nature of electoral authoritarianism raises critical questions about the future of democracy and social justice in these countries. Social workers play a vital role in advocating for systemic change and empowering communities to demand their rights. This involves fostering civic engagement and promoting education about democratic processes, which can help counteract the effects of authoritarianism and support the development of a more just society.

RECOMMENDATIONS

To address electoral authoritarianism in Zimbabwe, the Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC), Tanzania, and Mozambique, it is essential to incorporate a social work perspective that emphasizes social justice, human rights, and community empowerment. Here are several recommendations that align with these principles:

Strengthening electoral institutions

• Reform electoral commissions: Ensure that electoral commissions operate independently and transparently. This can be achieved by involving civil society organizations (CSOs) and opposition parties in the appointment process, fostering trust in electoral outcomes.
• Implement electoral reforms: Establish clear guidelines for campaign financing and media access to ensure that all political parties can compete fairly. This promotes a level playing field and enhances democratic engagement.

Enhancing civil society engagement

• Empower Civil Society Organizations: Provide training and resources to CSOs to enable them to effectively monitor elections and advocate for electoral integrity. Social workers can play a crucial role in mobilizing communities to participate in these efforts.
• Foster Partnerships: Encourage collaboration between CSOs and international organizations to amplify their advocacy efforts. This partnership can help ensure that marginalized voices are heard and considered in the political process.

Promoting human rights and freedoms

• Advocate for Human Rights Protections: Support legal reforms that safeguard freedoms of expression, assembly, and association. Social workers can engage in advocacy to protect these rights, ensuring that individuals can express dissent without fear of reprisal.
• Hold Violators Accountable: Encourage international actors to impose targeted sanctions against those who perpetrate human rights abuses. This accountability is essential for restoring trust in governance and protecting vulnerable populations.

Encouraging political participation

• Civic Education Initiatives: Develop programs that educate citizens about their rights and the importance of political participation. Social workers can facilitate workshops and community discussions to empower individuals to engage in the democratic process.
• Support Grassroots Movements: Promote and fund local political organizations that represent marginalized groups. Ensuring diverse voices in political discourse is crucial for a representative democracy and aligns with social work values of inclusivity and empowerment.

Regional and international cooperation

• Strengthen Regional Organizations: Enhance the role of regional bodies like the Southern African Development Community (SADC) in monitoring elections and promoting democratic governance. Social workers can advocate for these organizations to take a more active stance against electoral misconduct.
• Engage International Partners: Seek technical assistance and resources from international partners to support electoral reforms and capacity-building initiatives. This collaboration can help strengthen democratic institutions and promote social justice.

By integrating a social work perspective into these recommendations, stakeholders can work towards mitigating the effects of electoral authoritarianism and fostering a more democratic and participatory political environment in Zimbabwe, the DRC, Tanzania, and Mozambique. Social workers play a vital role in advocating for systemic change, empowering communities, and promoting human rights, which are essential for building resilient democracies.

CONCLUSION

Thi study reveals critical insights into the interplay between governance, human rights, and social justice. It highlights how revolutionary political parties, originally formed to combat colonial oppression, have increasingly resorted to authoritarian practices to maintain power. This shift has significant implications for democratic institutions and the protection of human rights in these countries. Key findings indicate that electoral manipulation, suppression of dissent, and human rights violations are prevalent across these nations. The erosion of democratic norms not only undermines public trust in electoral processes but also stifles civil society and limits the ability of individuals to advocate for their rights. The study emphasizes the need for comprehensive electoral reforms, enhanced civil society engagement, and the promotion of human rights to counteract the effects of electoral authoritarianism. From a social work perspective, the findings underscore the importance of community empowerment and advocacy for social justice. Social workers can play a vital role in mobilizing communities, promoting civic education, and advocating for systemic change. By fostering inclusive political participation and protecting human rights, social workers can contribute to building resilient democracies in the region. Addressing electoral authoritarianism in Zimbabwe, the DRC, Tanzania, and Mozambique requires a multifaceted approach that integrates democratic reforms, human rights protections, and community engagement. The collaboration of civil society, international actors, and social workers is essential to create a political environment that upholds democratic values and promotes social justice.

REFERENCES

1. Adejumobi, S. (2010). Regional Organizations and Conflict Resolution in Africa. Journal of Conflict Resolution, 54(2), 279-306.
2. Africa Center (2017) The Troubled Democratic Transitions of African Liberation Movements https://africacenter.org/spotlight/troubled-democratic-transitions-african-liberation-movements/
3. Africa Center (2020) Once a Beacon of Hope, Tanzanians Now Resist Growing Authoritarianism. Africa Center for Strategic Studies. Retrieved from https://africacenter.org/spotlight/once-a-beacon-of-hope-tanzanians-now-resist-growing-authoritarianism/
4. Africa Center. (2023). SADC Attempts to Navigate Zimbabwe’s Disputed Election. Retrieved from https://africacenter.org/analysis/sadc-attempts-to-navigate-zimbabwes-disputed-election/.
5. Akinkugbe O. D (2025). The Challenge to the Rule of Law and Democracy in Contemporary West and Central Africa. In: Shaffer G, Sandholtz W, eds. The Rule of Law under Pressure: A Transnational Challenge. Cambridge University Press; 2025:380-409.
6. Amnesty International. (2020). Annual Report 2020.
7. Bennett, W. L. (2016). News: The Politics of Illusion. University of Chicago Press.
8. Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 3(2), 77-101.
9. Bryman, A. (2016). Social Research Methods. Oxford University Press.
10. Carothers, T. (1997). The Observers’ Dilemma. Journal of Democracy, 8(3), 16-32.
11. Denzin, N. K. (1978). Sociological Methods: A Sourcebook. McGraw-Hill.
12. Electoral Institute for Sustainable Democracy in Africa and Electoral Commission Forum of SADC Countries. (2003). Principles for Election Management, Monitoring, and Observation in the SADC Region. Johannesburg: Electoral Institute of Southern Africa.
13. EU EOM (European Union Election Observation Mission). (2019). Mozambique General Elections 2019.
14. EUEOM (European Union Election Observation Mission). (2015). Tanzania General Elections 2015.
15. EUEOM (European Union Election Observation Mission). (2018). Zimbabwe Harmonised Elections 2018.
16. EUEOM (European Union Election Observation Mission). (2019). Democratic Republic of Congo Presidential, Legislative and Provincial Elections 2018.
17. Fairclough, N. (2013). Critical Discourse Analysis: The Critical Study of Language. Routledge.
18. Freedom House (2022) Freedom in the World 2022: The Global Expansion of Authoritarian Rule. Washington, DC: Freedom House. Retrieved from https://freedomhouse.org/report/freedom-world/2022/global-expansion-authoritarian-rule
19. Freedom House (2022) Freedom in the World 2022: The Global Expansion of Authoritarian Rule. Retrieved from https://freedomhouse.org/report/freedom-world/2022/global-expansion-authoritarian-rule
20. Freedom House. (2017). Breaking Down Democracy: Goals, Strategies, and Methods of Modern Authoritarians. Washington, DC: Freedom House. Retrieved from [https://freedomhouse.org/report/special-reports/breaking-down-democracy-goals-strategies-and-methods-modern-authoritarians].
21. Freedom House. (2018). Democracy in Crisis: Freedom in the World 2018. Washington, DC: Freedom House. Retrieved from Freedom House website.
22. Freischlad, M. (2024) Mozambique after the Elections: Civil Protests and the Risk of Escalation. Retrieved from https://www.swp-berlin.org/publikation/mta-spot43-mozambique-after-the-elections-civil-protests-and-the-risk-of-escalation
23. Ginsburg, T. (2020). How Authoritarians Use International Law. Journal of Democracy 31(4), 44-58. https://dx.doi.org/10.1353/jod.2020.0054.
24. Gladwell, M. (2010). Small Change: Why the Revolution Will Not Be Tweeted. The New Yorker.
25. Grindle, M. S. (2017). Politics and Policy Implementation in the Third World. Princeton University Press.
26. Hartmann, C. (2017). Electoral Observation and Democratic Development in Africa. Journal of Modern African Studies, 55(2), 257-278.
27. Hsieh, H. F., & Shannon, S. E. (2005). Three approaches to qualitative content analysis. Qualitative Health Research, 15(9), 1277-1288.
28. Human Rights Watch. (2020). World Report 2020.
29. Human Rights Watch. (2021). World Report 2021: Events of 2020. New York: Human Rights Watch.
30. International Crisis Group. (2019). Democratic Republic of the Congo: The Road to Elections. Brussels: International Crisis Group
31. International IDEA. (2023). The Global State of Democracy 2023: The New Checks and Balances. Stockholm: International IDEA. Retrieved from https://www.idea.int/publications/catalogue/global-state-democracy-2023-new-checks-and-balances.
32. International IDEA. (2024). The Global State of Democracy 2024: Strengthening the Legitimacy of Elections in a Time of Radical Uncertainty. Stockholm: International IDEA. ISBN: 978-91-7671-576-5. Retrieved from [https://cdn.sanity.io/files/2e5hi812/production-2024/0134f4cc56156db21ee23cf1072ab6d71704cd51.pdf].
33. Juma, A. (2021). Electoral Politics in Mozambique: The Role of FRELIMO.
34. Karl, T. L. (1986). Imposing Consent: Electoralism vs. Democratization in El Salvador. In P. W. Drake & E. Silva (Eds.), Elections and Democratization in Latin America, 1980-1985 (pp. 9-36). Center for U.S.-Mexican Studies.
35. Krippendorff, K. (2013). Content Analysis: An Introduction to Its Methodology. Sage Publications.
36. Kujenga, A. (2023). Zimbabwe’s Disputed Elections and the SADC Observer Mission. Retrieved from [https://kujenga-amani.com/zimbabwes-disputed-elections-and-the-sadc-observer-mission].
37. Levitsky, S., & Way, L. A. (2010). Competitive Authoritarianism: Hybrid Regimes After the Cold War. Cambridge University Press.
38. Lincoln, Y. S., & Guba, E. G. (1985). Naturalistic Inquiry. Sage Publications.
39. Marara, L (2009) A Lesson for South Africa? Zimbabwe’s Path to Multi-Party Rule. Retrieved from https://origins.osu.edu/read/south-africa-zimbabwes-multi-party-rule#page-content
40. Mattes, R. (2015). The Limited Impact of International Election Observation in Africa. Journal of Modern African Studies, 53(3), 371-395.
41. Miles, M. B., & Huberman, A. M. (1994). Qualitative Data Analysis: An Expanded Sourcebook. Sage Publications.
42. Miles, M. B., & Huberman, A. M. (1994). Qualitative Data Analysis: An Expanded Sourcebook. Sage Publications.
43. Rwinyai, A. (2020). Elections in Tanzania: A Study of the 2020 General Elections.
44. SADC (Southern African Development Community). (2019). SADC Principles and Guidelines Governing Democratic Elections.
45. SADC (Southern African Development Community). (2023). SADC Election Observer Mission Report.
46. Schedler, A. (2006). Electoral Authoritarianism: The Dynamics of Unfree Competition. Boulder and London: Lynne Rienner Publishers. Available at: http://works.bepress.com/andreas_schedler/9/.
47. Silverman, D. (2013). Doing Qualitative Research. Sage Publications.
48. Sleight of Hand (2009) Repression of the Media and the Illusion of Reform in Zimbabwe. Retrieved from https://www.hrw.org/report/2010/04/20/sleight-hand/repression-media-and-illusion-reform-zimbabwe
49. Soderbaum, F. (2004). The Political Economy of Regional Integration in Southern Africa. Journal of Southern African Studies, 30(1), 135-154.
50. Southern African Development Community. (2023). SADC Observer Mission Report: Zimbabwe 2023 Elections. Gaborone: Southern African Development Community.
51. Stiftung, B. (2024). BTI 2024 Tanzania Country Report. Gütersloh: Bertelsmann Stiftung. Retrieved from https://www.bti-project.org/en/reports/country-report-TZA-2024.html.
52. Vlassenroot, K., & Vermeersch, P. (2018). The Politics of Electoral Authoritarianism in the DRC.
53. Wikipedia (2025) Former Liberation Movements of Southern Africa https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Former Liberation Movements of Southern Africa
54. Yin, R. K. (2014). Case Study Research: Design and Methods. Sage Publications.