Youth participation in elections

Siseko Maposa and Philile Dlamini

Indeed, it is not that young people are disinterested in participating in policy making, but rather that they choose to use methods of participation that are not appreciated by the current law-making process.

YOUTH participation is an important underlying premise of democratic governance.

Active youth participation allows young people to cement their voice within politics and the legislative making process.

This is imperative in creating long-lasting democratic virtues and outcomes. Despite the importance of youth participation in democracy, empirical evidence globally indicates that young people are becoming more and more disenchanted with political and electoral processes. South Africa has not been an exception to this.

Although civic participation cannot be reduced to electoral voting alone, elections are a good indicator of the willingness of citizens to actively participate in the democratic system.

Regrettably, youth voter turnout in South Africa remains low. In this way, the current relationship between young people and politics in South Africa, characterised by political apathy and non-participation on the part of the young, can be considered a contemporary crisis of democracy.

Several notional factors, which are not mutually exclusive, explain low voter participation among young people.

Firstly, the habit formation explanation argues that one of the reasons for the prevalence of low voter participation among young people is that they have had fewer opportunities to develop the democratic habit of voting.

Those who have voted have not yet reaped the rewards of voting as still there remains a huge divergence between electoral promises and socio-economic outcomes.

Secondly, the opportunity cost explanation states that it is di cult for young adults to fi nd the time to register and vote due to livelihood security demands which drives them to structure their activities towards fi nancial security rather than voting participation.

Lastly, the alternative participation argument postulates that low electoral participation among the youth is as a result of the rise in alternative forms of democratic participation.

The major reason for the youth opting for alternate methods of participation is that elections are arguably slow and incompatible with addressing matters that require immediate attention.

Ultimately, low political and civic participation among young people in South Africa points to the fact that youth fi nd formal political processes not only frustrating and alienating, but also less likely to yield desired results. This, then, warrants government intervention through appropriate legislative mechanisms to support youth participation.

The recent proposed amendments to the Electoral Bills Act are aimed at reinforcing free and fair elections, the protection of voters and the security of personal information.

The bill also intends to enhance the entire legislative process and make it easier for citizens to participate.

For all its notable intentions, what the bill has failed to recognise is that the legislative process lacks the proper inducements to encourage youth participation by underappreciating technologies, which are employed by young people for political participation.

Indeed, it is not that young people are disinterested in participating in policy making, but rather that they choose to use methods of participation that are not appreciated by the current law-making process.

In our current dispensation, government, civil educators, and political organisers need to take note that technology is one of the most important tools that grab the attention of the youth. The Electoral Knowledge Council has found that globally “technology is being used more and more as a tool to assist voters to cast their votes”.

Given the calamitous challenges faced by young persons, such as unemployment, inequality and a stark rise in unsecured debt, the government needs to quickly realise that a pivotal way it can rebuild its relationship with the youth is by altering the legislative process in ways that appreciate evolving youth interests and technological developments.

A re-imagined public policy making process which caters for youth needs, however, will require careful consideration to prevent potential exclusion due to inability of access and socio-economic status.

Dlamini is a public policy analyst. She holds a Bachelors in Political Science at Pretoria University. Maposa is a political economist. He holds a Masters in International Relations at the UCT. He writes in his personal capacity.