It is both fair and essential for all political parties and voters to have confidence in the Malawi Electoral Commission (MEC). One of the most effective ways to build this trust is by allowing independent experts to inspect and audit the Smartmatic voting machines used during national elections.
MEC Chairperson Anabel Mtalimanja has stated that there are “security issues,” which is why independent checks are not permitted. However, this rationale is unconvincing.
In democratic systems, security and transparency are not conflicting goals; they reinforce each other. True security comes from a system that can withstand scrutiny. If external experts are barred from examining the machines, how can the public and political stakeholders be certain that the electoral process is truly fair, secure, and free from manipulation?
A lack of transparency only fuels suspicion. Blocking independent verification may be interpreted as an attempt to hide flaws or bias, even if none exists. This undermines the MEC’s credibility and damages public confidence in the election results.
If the Smartmatic machines are genuinely secure and accurate, an independent audit will confirm this, and such confirmation would only enhance public trust in the MEC. Openness to review is not a threat to election integrity; it is a safeguard.
Around the world, concerns about Smartmatic’s technology have surfaced. In Venezuela, the company’s former executives admitted to vote tampering during the 2017 election.
In the Philippines, Smartmatic has faced repeated scrutiny, with allegations of irregularities and questions about software updates during vote counting.
Uganda and the Democratic Republic of Congo have also reported operational failures, delays, and a lack of transparency involving Smartmatic systems. Even Mozambique, which adopted biometric voter registration provided by the company, reported system flaws and inadequate training.
These international cases are not accusations against the MEC but serve as important reminders: electoral technology must always be subject to rigorous and transparent checks.
Malawi cannot afford to ignore lessons from other nations, especially in a climate where trust in public institutions is already fragile.
In a strong democracy, it’s not enough for the electoral commission to be impartial; it must also appear impartial. Allowing independent experts, including local tech professionals, civil society groups, and international observers, to assess the Smartmatic machines would go a long way toward proving that the MEC is committed to credible and transparent elections.
The public deserves reassurance that the tools used to determine leadership are not only modern but trustworthy. By embracing transparency, the MEC can demonstrate leadership and strengthen democracy in Malawi. Rather than resisting oversight, it should welcome it.
Trust must be earned, and transparency is the first step.
