The 2013 Elections in Kenya and Zimbabwe: Lessons for Africa and Beyond

This policy brief by the South African Institute of International Affairs analyzes the 2013 elections in Kenya and Zimbabwe, which followed periods of severe electoral violence in 2007 and 2008. The author examines how different levels of constitutional reform, the available lead-time before polling, and the influence of transitional justice and Western diplomatic pressure shaped the outcomes of these 'first-generation' elections.

• The 2013 elections in Kenya and Zimbabwe were notably peaceful compared to the violent polls of 2007 and 2008, though the outcomes were non-consensual. These elections were influenced by diplomatic efforts from regional bodies, specifically the African Union (AU) and the Southern African Development Community (SADC), to prevent negative externalities in their respective sub-regions.
• The scale and success of electoral reforms differed significantly between the two nations due to the available lead-time before elections. Kenya had two and a half years to implement reforms following its October 2010 constitution, while Zimbabwe had barely two months after its May 2013 constitution, resulting in minimal institutional transformation in Zimbabwe.
• In Kenya, an overenthusiastic reform agenda led to systemic failures in technology-intensive voter registration and results management. This created a dangerous electoral stand-off between Uhuru Kenyatta and Raila Odinga, nearly triggering a repeat of the 2007 post-electoral violence.
• Zimbabwe's 2013 elections were marred by a flawed voters' roll and a rushed process, leading to conflicting assessments from observers. While SADC and the AU recognized the polls as peaceful, the Zimbabwe Election Support Network (ZESN) declared them compromised.
• Transitional justice and Western interference played a major role in the political dynamics of the 2013 elections. In Kenya, the candidacy of Uhuru Kenyatta and William Ruto was framed as a referendum against the Western-backed International Criminal Court (ICC). In Zimbabwe, the government barred observer missions from the European Union and the Carter Center due to sanctions on ZANU-PF personalities.
• The 2013 electoral experiences suggest a need for Western countries to rethink their foreign policy on democratisation in Africa, as African states increasingly view electoral processes as sovereign and not requiring Western approval for legitimacy.

APA

Gerenge, R. (2014). The 2013 Elections in Kenya and Zimbabwe: Lessons for Africa and Beyond. South African Institute of International Affairs. https://saiia.org.za/wp-content/uploads/2014/07/Policy-Briefing-98.pdf

Chicago

Gerenge, Robert. The 2013 Elections in Kenya and Zimbabwe: Lessons for Africa and Beyond. South African Institute of International Affairs, 2014. https://saiia.org.za/wp-content/uploads/2014/07/Policy-Briefing-98.pdf.

Wikipedia

{{cite report |last1=Gerenge |first1=Robert |title=The 2013 Elections in Kenya and Zimbabwe: Lessons for Africa and Beyond |publisher=South African Institute of International Affairs |date=June 2014 |url=https://saiia.org.za/wp-content/uploads/2014/07/Policy-Briefing-98.pdf |access-date=17 August 2026 |via=Climate Insights Directory}}

BibTeX

@techreport{gerenge20142013, author = {Gerenge, Robert}, title = {{The 2013 Elections in Kenya and Zimbabwe: Lessons for Africa and Beyond}}, institution = {South African Institute of International Affairs}, year = {2014}, month = jun, url = {https://saiia.org.za/wp-content/uploads/2014/07/Policy-Briefing-98.pdf}, urldate = {2026-08-17}, note = {Indexed by Climate Insights Directory} }