I would argue that it is simplistic to term a country democratic only because it holds regular elections, even if such an election is judged to be 'free and fair', because democracy needs to have deeper meaning than simply the right to vote.

NAMIBIA, is of course also signatory to the African Charter on Democracy, Elections and Human Rights, which calls on member states to "commit themselves to promote democracy, the principle of the rule of law and human rights".

While the Charter is a lengthy document, it is appropriate and relevant to mention one or two provisions which are pertinent to our own situation vis-a-vis elections, as well as to Zimbabwe, which is currently under international scrutiny following the somewhat disastrous scenario that has emerged after the people of that country went to the polls recently.

Chapter 2, Article 2, Objectives of the African Charter requires members to "Promote best practices in the management of elections for purposes of political stability and good governance".

Chapter 3 on Principles requires member states to commit to "Strengthening political pluralism and recognising the role, rights and responsibilities of legally constituted political parties, including opposition political parties, which should be given a status under national law".

Both the Namibian and Zimbabwean Electoral Commissions have come under the spotlight recently for the ways and means they've managed (some may say mismanaged) recent elections taking place in the respective countries.

It would be hard to argue that Zimbabwe complies with generally accepted principles that would underlie a democratic state.

After all, they do hold elections, but none of the accompanying democratic rights are complied with, among others, freedom of speech and the press.

While Zimbabwe too, is signatory to the African Charter, this appears to be meaningless lip service rather than a firm commitment, and would argue more strongly in favour of the African Union and/or the Southern African Development Community (SADC) for that matter, taking a much harder stance towards the Mugabe regime than they have done to date.

Their reactions have at best been timid and apologetic.

Even though the actual voting process in Zimbabwe was declared by the minimal (and in some cases questionable) number of election observers allowed by the regime to observe the process as largely free and fair, there can be no doubt that the counting and re-counting processes have been deeply flawed and about as untransparent as they could be.

Yet, despite adherence to the Charter, African countries generally can't or won't get their act together to take a united stand of condemnation on the part of the people of Zimbabwe.

Small wonder then, that the AU or SADC for that matter, command so little public respect.

On a much smaller scale, but no less relevant to the people of the country in question, Namibia's Omuthiya debacle continues to show up the serious flaws in our own Electoral Commission.

Most worrying is that political players don't seem to be well-acquainted with our policies, rules and regulations governing elections; and they're probably even less aware of the contents of the African Charter in regard to the abovementioned.

The quoted paragraph on the commitment to strengthening political pluralism, for example, and recognising the role of opposition parties, doesn't seem to have any resonance as far as our ruling party is concerned.

For as much as the Zimbabwe Government must have meddled behind the scenes in the count/recount and release of figures in their parliamentary and presidential elections; so too has there been meddling and dirty tricks with our own Electoral Commission.

Namibia is streets ahead of Zimbabwe insofar as adherence to other democratic principles, freedoms of speech, the press and human rights observance, among others, but we nevertheless have a long way to go to make of ourselves a deep and meaningful democracy in both word and deed.

Zimbabwe, on the other hand, elections or no elections, simply can't be termed democratic at all.

We need to renew our commitment to among others, the African Charter, and make it a meaningful document, which states are not only expected to implement, but take to heart, in our own and other contexts on our continent.

We don't need the West to tell us when we've done wrong; we need simply to do it ourselves in terms of our own continental agreements and with no duress from abroad, and to put things right in concert.

It's high time we start to do so.

Columns Of The Last 48 Hours

•  AU Letting Africa Down
•  Political Perspective
•  Zimbabwe The African Mark Of Cain
•  Lifting veil of secrecy crucial to deepening democracy
•  Please solicit your customers discreetly: The problem of sex work in Namibia
•  From the Sidelines : NFA blunders again