Laying the groundwork

Unsubstantiated claims of vote rigging have been credibly linked to the uMkhonto weSizwe (MK) Party, formed in December 2023 by former president Jacob Zuma. The party implied that South Africa’s electoral court was “captured”, shared “evidence” of election fraud, and refused to accept the results over what it called “irregularities”. 

But questions about the integrity of the election were also propped up by other political parties and some news outlets. Social media also played a huge role. Data scientist Kyle Findlay said that his company’s systems detected 150 000 posts about the IEC and vote rigging on social media. As Africa Check found, many of the images and videos shared as “evidence” were taken out of context. 

“Currently, no evidence has been offered to substantiate these alleged rigging accusations”, Boikanyo Moloto, political systems researcher at the non-profit My Vote Counts, told Africa Check. While rigging was possible in any system, she said, “in South Africa, it would have to be a wide scale, concerted and systematic project.” 

“The IEC is mandated with safeguarding electoral democracy. It has a 30-year history of delivering widely credible, free and fair elections. They have been able to legally justify all their positions and decisions…”, Moloto said. 

The potential for harm

The targeting of election management bodies (and judiciaries and journalists) is a tactic we’ve seen across the countries we work in. These institutions are often accused of bias or incompetence, or portrayed as corrupt or unreliable. This undermines their credibility and erodes public confidence, creating fertile ground for discord and confusion. 

Take the 2020 US election for example, which former president Donald Trump and the Republican Party repeatedly claimed was rigged. For months ahead of the vote, Trump cast doubt about the integrity of the election, insinuating that the vote count should not be trusted. When the results showed Joe Biden had won the election, Trump’s supporters, emboldened by this narrative, stormed the legislature, causing more than US$30-million in damage. 

After Myanmar’s 2020 election, claims of “widespread election and voter irregularities” by the National League for Democracy eventually led to a military coup. And during Brazil’s 2022 election, the incumbent president Jair Bolsonaro repeatedly claimed he was up against “the greatest electoral fraud ever seen”, urging his supporters to “go to war” for him. His comments were understood to have encouraged violence committed in his name. 

Is it a stretch to be concerned about similar consequences in South Africa? 

A fragile moment

Prof Jeremy Seekings from the Centre for Social Sciences Research at the University of Cape Town said that he did not know whether allegations of electoral fraud in South Africa could result in the same violence seen in the US.

“The 2021 attack on the [Capitol] in Washington took us all by surprise…but we were taken by surprise by the looting here in July 2021”.

Widespread protests and looting gripped South Africa’s KwaZulu-Natal and Gauteng provinces for almost a week in mid-July 2021. The unrest limited access to many services, including schools, retailers, and healthcare services. Around 150 000 jobs were put at risk while 353 people lost their lives. By October 2021, the South African Special Risk Insurance Association had paid out R5.8-billion to businesses that had filed claims.

The unrest began after Zuma handed himself over to police on 8 July, to begin a 15-month prison sentence for contempt of the Constitutional Court. But this was only after months of attacks against another state institution - the judiciary. Zuma accused the courts of bias and questioned the impartiality of senior judges. 

Echoing Seekings’ comments, Prof David Everatt of the Wits School of Governance said that like the Capitol attack, the July 2021 unrest in South Africa was fuelled by a politician who projected the image of being the victim of a conspiracy. 

“We are in a fragile moment”, he said.

Political rhetoric meets socio-economic realities

The unrest that gripped South Africa in July 2021 may have started as a response to Zuma’s sentencing but the country’s socio-economic reality added fuel to the fire. South Africa is one of the most economically unequal countries in the world, with wealth distribution stratified along racial lines.

According to the South African Human Rights Commission (SAHRC), there were two types of “actors” involved: well-resourced primary actors who directed the widespread destruction of property, and secondary actors who were mobilised to participate in acts of theft at malls and other business premises. 

The SAHRC said that existing tensions created a “fertile ground” for the unrest, which was “opportunistically exploited”.

What the SAHRC called “fertile ground” in 2021, Moloto of My Vote Counts called a “perfect cocktail for violence” in 2024, made up of high levels of inequality, a battle for power among political elites, and the anxiety that came from knowing that South Africa would have a coalition government but not knowing who the country’s leaders would be.

“This is compounded by concerted efforts to undermine the public’s perception of the credibility of institutions charged with safeguarding democracy”, Moloto told Africa Check. Like Seekings and Everatt, she pointed to the July 2021 unrest as an example of how easily things can degenerate into politically motivated violence.

When distrust becomes the norm 

There are other, less obvious, effects of false information shared during an election. 

Research shows that information that suggests voters have no chance to influence the outcome of an election, either because the result is already certain or is rigged, has the potential to affect voter turnout in ways that may affect the election’s outcome and the acceptance of the results.

This is problematic in a country that already suffers from low voter turnout. In 2014, 73% of eligible voters turned up at the polls. This figure fell to 66% in 2019 and 58% in 2024.

False information can also affect social behaviour and attitudes over time. A 2021 research paper conducted in the US found that respondents who were exposed to tweets making claims of election fraud showed a decreased level of trust in the electoral process.

Prof Everatt told Africa Check that, as early as October 2023, he was already “struck by the deep wariness about the IEC and the belief that votes would be stolen”. He said this was a consequence of declining trust in state institutions. Moloto highlighted the same challenge, saying “[these institutions] are considered unresponsive and perceived to not hold leaders accountable".

Compared to other institutions, the IEC enjoys higher levels of trust.  According to the 2024 Election Satisfaction Survey by the Human Science Research Council, 64% of respondents felt that their votes were secret, and 92% felt that the election process was free and fair. However, between 2019 and 2024, the percentage of respondents who were completely confident that their votes would be accurately counted dropped from 60% to 45%. 

Proving the impact of false information on an election can be difficult. But according to Moloto, “such attacks never settle without having done some damage”. 

Claims of vote rigging are likely to upset social cohesion and make people apathetic towards the political system, she told Africa Check. “A people that is not active in its own democracy, not just in elections, would prove detrimental in every way imaginable”.

Meanwhile, Prof Seekings said that the constant repetition of election fraud claims by a large number of politicians and their supporters meant that more people believed them, regardless of whether or not they were true.

Looking ahead

Fact-checking is one way to improve public debate during election season. But even when coupled with pre-bunking and media literacy efforts, there is a limit to how much organisations like Africa Check can achieve on their own. 

The media also has a role to play. In attempting to be neutral, journalists should ensure they are not simply repeating false claims. Politicians too have a duty to truth and must speak up against false allegations when they see them. 

And while electoral management bodies do invest in voter education programmes, collaboration with social media platforms and tech companies is needed to preempt and combat false information online, where it spreads the fastest. 

Perhaps we are still a long way from the type of violence witnessed in the US in 2021. But our experience tells us that using false information to discredit election management bodies is a tactic that is here to stay, and we need to be better prepared next time around.