MIL Africa Engine

Source: The Conversation – Africa – By Jesper Bjarnesen, Senior researcher, The Nordic Africa Institute

Ivorians went to the polls on 25 October 2025 to choose between incumbent president Alassane Ouattara – seeking a fourth five-year term – and one of four candidates who didn’t have the backing of the largest opposition parties.

There was not much of a choice, as the three main opposition candidates were banned from standing. Ouattara claimed another first-round landslide victory with 89.77% of votes cast.

As a researcher, I have followed political developments in Côte d’Ivoire over the past 15 years, and I’m currently involved in a project on boycott movements which uses Côte d’Ivoire as a country case.

This informs my view of the 2025 presidential elections and the democratic outlook for Côte d’Ivoire.

While the country tends to be seen as a regional front runner in terms of its economic performance, the 2025 elections continue a worrying trend of democratic backsliding and political polarisation.

The 27 December legislative elections will be a test of the country’s democratic resilience.

The build-up

In the months leading up to the presidential elections, major opposition candidates were excluded and political apathy took hold in a shrinking space for democratic expression.

Ouattara announced his candidacy in August, despite the widespread objections to his third-term candidacy in 2020 at home and abroad.

As in 2020, critics insisted that Ouattara was overstepping his constitutional mandate of one presidential term, renewable once. He has argued that a 2016 revision gave him the right to run twice.

As election day approached, Côte d’Ivoire’s political landscape was marked by polarisation, repression and uncertainty.

Tensions deepened in early September when the Constitutional Council disqualified five prominent opposition candidates from the race. Former president Laurent Gbagbo, Charles Blé Goudé and Guillaume Soro were excluded due to prior criminal convictions. The two main challengers, Tidjane Thiam and Pascal Affi N’Guessan, were barred on procedural grounds.

Their exclusion more or less handed victory to Ouattara, and his campaign comfortably turned towards ensuring an absolute majority.

In early October, the National Security Council banned public gatherings, except those organised by official candidates, on the grounds of “maintaining public order”. It also imposed additional restrictions on civic mobilisation. It used the letter of the law to serve Ouattara’s interests in limiting protests against his candidacy.

Going against the ban, opposition parties called for daily protests, but the gatherings were generally small and promptly broken up by security forces.

Three days before the elections, Gbagbo denounced what he called a “civil coup” and expressed his support for those “protesting against this electoral robbery”.

On 11 October, protesters in Abidjan took to the streets. These acts of defiance led to some 700 arrests and 80 prison sentences for disturbing public order. Eleven people were killed in clashes between security forces and protesters.

Along with other domestic and international observers, Amnesty International denounced the repression of demonstrations. At the same time, the government deployed 40,000 security personnel across the country.

France, the regional grouping Ecowas and the EU have remained largely silent. They have generally prioritised stability and strategic relations with the Ivorian government over democratic accountability. This passivity risks further eroding the credibility of these international actors while reinforcing narratives of western double standards in the region.

While the excluded opposition parties tried, and largely failed, to mobilise their supporters in the streets, the remaining candidates (all representing small and newly formed political parties and coalitions) chose a different strategy.

Capable Generations Movement leader Simone Ehivet Gbagbo (the former first lady, who was divorced from ex-president Gbagbo in 2023) deplored the elimination of her ex-husband. But in the final weeks of campaigning she insisted that it was too late to call people to the streets. She called for people to vote instead.

Election day

Election day was mostly peaceful across the country, but violent clashes did break out in several towns. The president of the Independent Electoral Commission, Ibrahim Kuibiert Coulibaly, described these incidents as “marginal” and “quickly contained”.

While the election result was never in doubt, the participation rate was less predictable. The confirmed participation rate of 50.1% shows that many voters stayed at home; many out of apathy but also out of concerns over the risk of violent clashes around polling stations.

Provisional results announced on 27 October gave Outtara 89.77% of the votes. Along with other opposition members, Thiam lamented a rigged and divisive electoral process with inadequate participation, and urged nonviolent resistance. He called for the government to engage in dialogue towards reconciliation.

The ruling party and media supportive of Ouattara described the result as a “landslide victory”, particularly celebrating Ouattara’s victories in historical opposition strongholds.

Three days after election day, several leaders of the main opposition parties were summoned by police on the grounds that military-grade weapons had been found in the homes of individuals linked to the 11 October march.

So, while the elections may be said to have unfolded without major incidents, the lack of a genuine contest and the measures taken to restrict opposition cast a shadow over the poll, and over Outtara’s legacy.

What’s next, and what are the prospects for democracy?

In the short to medium term, the major opposition parties could salvage some of their influence in the parliamentary elections on 27 December. Or they may reignite protests.

In the long term, Ouattara would have to step towards outright authoritarianism to justify a fifth candidacy in 2030. It seems more likely that he will finally hand over to a successor from his inner circle.

Even if that happens, serious questions remain regarding the electoral framework. The opposition has long claimed that the independent electoral commission is biased in favour of the incumbent.

The Ouattara presidency is tainted by its record of one-sided electoral competitions, political violence and insecurity, and a shrinking space for public expression.

Given Côte d’Ivoire’s strategic importance to the global north, as a rare ally in the subregion, international actors won’t have much to say about its democratic performance.

Any prospects for reconciliation, political reform and a peaceful transition in 2030 will mainly be in the hands of the ruling party. It will have to encourage dialogue and political inclusion at municipal, provincial and regional levels.

The 27 December legislative elections will offer a better chance to understand the actual distribution of political leverage than the flawed presidential elections.

Amelie Stelter of the department of Peace and Conflict Research, Uppsala University, Sweden contributed to this article

– Côte d’Ivoire’s democratic backslide: elections leave even less space for freedom
– https://theconversation.com/cote-divoires-democratic-backslide-elections-leave-even-less-space-for-freedom-269469

Source: The Conversation – Africa – By Gift Khumalo, Lecturer, Durban University of Technology

School violence is a global public health phenomenon. This is when learners and teachers are the victims of physical and psychological abuse, cyber threats and bullying, fights, gangsterism, and the use of weapons at school.

The consequences of school violence are dire. There are implications for learners, teachers, the school and the community. Violence undermines the learners’ and teachers’ safety. It causes stress, academic decline and behavioural problems. It can contribute to a broader cycle of violence in communities.

School violence is a problem across southern Africa. This includes South Africa, Zimbabwe, Mozambique and Namibia.

In 2008 the regional body, the Southern African Development Community adopted Care and Support for Teaching and Learning framework. It was to prevent violence, create safer schools and foster a positive school ethos.

But there has been limited research unpacking factors that contribute to school violence. We recently undertook a review project to identify and understand those contextual factors.

Our research stems from our shared scholarly interest in issues of violence in educational settings. Our professional backgrounds include school social work, health promotion, social services with children and adolescents, and teaching general education modules at a South African university.

The review of studies of violence suggests that a range of factors contribute to school violence. These include: exposure to domestic violence, socio-economic status, poor family communication, lack of appropriate disciplinary processes at school, intolerance of individual and social differences, and exposure to alcohol and substance use in the community.

What’s needed are clear school policies, teacher training and deployment of school social workers.

The scope

Our project reviewed 24 studies of violence in Southern African Development Community schools. Most of the studies were done in South Africa but some were in Eswatini, Zambia, Malawi and Angola.

We focused on this region for the following reasons.

• The region comprises low- and low-middle-income countries. Learners experience various socio-economic challenges and structural disparities within their communities and schools.

• Previous research suggests that communities in the region face crime and violence, gangsterism, high unemployment rates and poverty.

---

Read more: Blunting the impact of poor social conditions in South Africa will have big health benefits

---

• The Care and Support for Teaching and Learning framework, which is intended to support learners’ enrolment, retention, performance and progression, has not prevented school violence. The limited evidence suggests a need to better understand the specific contextual factors that contribute to this violence.

Our findings from the papers we reviewed indicate that factors contributing to school violence are present in learners’ home environments, communities and schools.

Family environment

Disrespect towards teachers and physical fights are linked to witnessing domestic violence. The family unit’s socio-economic standing is significant. Compared to better-off learners, those from less privileged environments are more likely to violate school rules, steal other learners’ belongings, and bully others for their lunch meals. Learners from food-insecure families enter into transactional relationships with teachers for financial support and “free” groceries.

---

Read more: Violence is a normal part of life for many young children: study traces the mental health impacts

---

Research shows that the inability of parents to support and talk to their children results in children succumbing to peer pressure and becoming involved in gangs and fights. Parents sometimes incite school violence by defending their children’s misconduct and blaming teachers for their children’s behaviour.

We also observed that in schools with children who have disabilities, some parents arrange intimate relationships for their children with other learners, to shield them from exploitation by community members. However, this exposes them to unintended sexual violence in those relationships, as sexual boundaries and consent are not adequately explained to the young couples.

---

Read more: Bullies in South African schools were often bullied themselves – insights from an expert

---

Community environment

The studies we reviewed indicate that the surrounding community has a role in school violence. Learners’ exposure to alcohol and substance use can lead to violence. Specifically, community members sell substances to learners, who then return to school intoxicated, disrupting teaching and learning. In some instances, fights among the boys that start outside school continue in the school premises.

---

Read more: After school clubs aren’t always safe spaces: what should be done about it

---

School environment

Different types of bullying occur among learners. Research shows that most of the perpetrators are boys, ridiculing girls for their achievements and using violence to “prove masculinity” and gain popularity. Boys are ridiculed for not having romantic partners, which often leads to aggression. Peer pressure also causes boys to verbally abuse girls who refuse their advances, and resort to behaviours such as taking pictures of their underwear in class or through toilet windows. Gangs are common and contribute to violence, serving as venues for violent interactions among boys.

Another factor fuelling school violence is lack of understanding and intolerance of demographic and individual diverse identities – like nationality, gender and sexual orientation, physical appearance, culture and religion. Migrant learners are subjected to xenophobic attitudes where they are body shamed and insulted. Learners are the target of homophobic statements because of their gender and sexual identities. Dark-skinned and slender learners are often targeted, with teasing guised as humour.

---

Read more: Taunts and bullying drive children with albinism from Tanzanian schools

---

Way forward

The purpose of this review project was to map the literature on factors contributing to school violence in the Southern African Development Community region. It could be useful in other similar regions too.

We suggest education ministries and schools countries could consider:

• implementing clear school policies on how to report and respond to incidents of school violence

• training teachers and school administrators on national and school policies for addressing school violence and promoting professionalism

• documenting incidents of school violence and developing strategies to create safe environments

• collaboration among schools, parents and psychosocial support personnel, such as school social workers, to reduce violence in schools.

We argue that different intervention programmes and services need to be adopted to address the root causes of violence. Deploying more school social workers would be part of this effort.

– School violence doesn’t happen in isolation: what research from southern Africa is telling us
– https://theconversation.com/school-violence-doesnt-happen-in-isolation-what-research-from-southern-africa-is-telling-us-269288