Voters' Registration Drive Risks Eroding Public Trust

.

The electoral process is again inviting uncomfortable questions, not about logistics, but about procedure, principle and trust. What ought to be a routine civic exercise is increasingly viewed with suspicion, as reports surface of coercive voter mobilisation and public disengagement, revealing a system struggling to inspire voters' confidence.

The credibility and legitimacy of the electoral environment are being weakened not only by institutional shortcomings but also by practices that blur the line between a citizen’s right and quiet intimidation. Instead of encouraging voluntary participation, reports are surfacing of a climate in which compliance is being imposed by local officials and sometimes pressured through informal yet unsettling channels. That could be counterproductive for an election already facing dwindling voter interest.

On April 2, 2026, the National Election Board of Ethiopia (NEBE) released an update on the status of voter registration, disclosing that 36.9 million voters had been registered, fewer than the total number registered in the last national elections. Chaired by Melatwork Hailu, the Board warned of alarming incidents that violated the process and urged local officials to refrain from pressuring voters to register without their free consent. The warning mattered because it showed the process was already being strained by conduct that had no place in a lawful exercise.

A strong and independent electoral system will help determine whether voters see elections and their outcomes as credible and legitimate. Electoral institutions alone have the mandate to monitor and conduct elections. When violations appear, the first strain falls on the electoral system itself, testing its impartiality and authority.

However, the task cannot be left to the electoral officials alone. The media, civil society, political parties, citizens and local and international observers all have to remain vigilant. Elections are sensitive processes. Violations risk eroding public trust in the process and the result, with potentially negative repercussions and damage to efforts to build a civic political culture.

The incumbent party carries a double responsibility. It is a stakeholder with an interest in the contest and a government mandated to make the adjustments needed to establish a fair and credible electoral system. That conflict of interest sharpens its duty rather than easing it. Instead of manipulating citizens' rights, its leaders should focus on voter awareness and electoral education. Ideally, informed citizens are more likely to stand up for their rights and help sustain an independent electoral system.

In the end, not only the success or failure of an electoral process but also the essence of legitimate rule rests on citizens' watchful engagement. It is often a hard, though peaceful, struggle that produces results of a governance structure accepted by the majority as legitimate. Sadly, the question of legitimacy to rule remains at the core of the political crisis haunting successive ruling parties that have held political power in Ethiopia.

Recent accounts from several regional states, including in Addis Abeba, help explain why public confidence appears so fragile. Individuals reportedly linked to local administrative structures, especially the woreda office, went door to door urging residents to obtain voter registration cards. The method may seem passive-aggressive, but the meaning is clear. Some residents fear that failure to comply could jeopardise their access to essential public services from government offices. Intended or not, such perceptions would damage public trust.

More troubling are reports from regional states where armed local authorities have allegedly accompanied such efforts. There are recurring allegations that residents are not only encouraged but also compelled to register and contribute financially. If proven true, this further entangles civic participation with coercive overtones and widens the gap between the outward appearance of electoral normalcy and the experience at the grassroots level. Sadly, the damage to the integrity of the electoral process could already be done, with such claims becoming more frequent.

Nonetheless, the problem goes beyond a few isolated abuses. It signalled a widening disconnect between the principle of individual rights, whether to register or decline, and participation and the reality on the ground. Elections depend on public confidence, political contestations and the assurance of free choice. Public perception has already formed the view that erosion is occurring in all three. That has an immediate and direct effect on public trust and confidence in the election result, which lies at the centre of any free, fair and credible voting process.

The incidents could have occurred in the guise of a voter education and awareness campaign. That could be understandable, but except for civil society groups mandated by NEBE to provide voter education and awareness, no other entity, lest individuals affiliated with contesting parties or local officials, has the right to bully citizens into registering to vote. The purpose of voter education is to equip citizens with information and encourage them to exercise their constitutional rights through peaceful means that can influence their respective political destinies.

The rules are equally clear for both opposition and incumbent political parties. They are expected to issue their respective electoral codes of conduct, imposing self-rule on their members, requiring them to behave in good faith and within the bounds of the law. Their responsibilities and rights lie in campaigning, debating in public and presenting alternative policies.

Depressingly, the broader political environment gives little reassurance. Major opposition parties appear largely passive in their campaigns, with low visibility and inadequate engagement with voters, except for the debate broadcast, primarily on Fana and EBC stations, which do commendable work. Robust and energetic campaign activities are so subdued, verging on their absence, leaving voters with limited alternatives and even fewer reasons to feel excited about the upcoming polls. The result is a vacuum that undermines voters' active and enthusiastic participation.

Administrative signals reinforce the same apathy. Melatwork has decided to postpone voters' registration by two weeks, for the third time. Repeated delay does more than disrupt the calendar, and deprives the process of urgency and momentum. These postponements risk being read not as technical setbacks, but as signs of a disengaged electorate and an unmotivated institutional apparatus, while also leaving room for manipulation and compromising the schedule.

As the public opinion poll conducted by this newspaper a few months ago revealed, confidence in the electoral process, particularly among the youth, remains alarmingly low. Many citizens question the purpose of participation and the legitimacy of its outcome. Once voters begin to view elections as procedural obligations rather than meaningful choices, the integrity of the system itself comes into question. The consequences will be a disengaged electorate with hardly any desire to hold those elected to office accountable, and deepening political stagnation. Over time, this can corrode not only trust in elections, but trust in governance itself.

Reversing the trend will take more than administrative fixes. It will require a deliberate effort to rebuild public trust through transparency, genuine political contestations and a firm commitment to guard voluntary participation. Any form of perceived coercion, whether subtle or overt, needs to be addressed without ambiguity. More active participation by a wider range of political actors, fairer access and open engagement are essential if confidence is to be restored. Without that, elections risk becoming hollow exercises, disconnected from the citizens they are meant to serve.

PUBLISHED ON [ VOL , NO ]