The EU’s Election Cash in Africa Props Up Autocrats, Not Democracy

The European Union claims to champion democracy worldwide, investing heavily in African elections with the promise of free, fair, and credible voting. But a deep dive by investigative platform ZAM reveals a troubling pattern: EU funding overwhelmingly benefits autocratic and corrupt leaders, entrenching power rather than challenging it.

Since 2019, the EU has spent more than €100 million supporting elections in five African nations—Nigeria, Ivory Coast, Kenya, Uganda, and Zambia. Much of this money flows to government institutions, ruling parties, and security forces, with civil society groups and independent watchdogs receiving a fraction of the funds. This imbalance sustains “a façade of democracy,” according to ZAM’s coordinator Evelyn Groenink, effectively legitimizing regimes that undermine democratic principles.

Nigeria’s 2023 presidential election offers a stark example. The EU allocated nearly €50 million to support the electoral process, including €18 million to consultancy DAI Global for training officials on biometric voting machines. Yet when the moment came, the technology failed spectacularly. The system for uploading results collapsed, fueling widespread skepticism and accusations of fraud. Opposition parties rejected the outcome, and EU observers themselves concluded the vote was neither transparent nor inclusive.

“The disappointment was so great that many young voters resolved never to vote again,” said Premium Times journalist Idris Akinbajo. Reports of violence, voter intimidation, and vote-buying marred the election, further eroding trust in the process.

Despite these glaring problems, the European Commission largely ignores critical findings from its own election observation missions. Most EU grants are funneled through UN agencies like the International Organization for Migration (IOM) and the UN Development Programme, raising questions about the true beneficiaries of this aid. Critics ask why funds earmarked for “democratic governance” are allocated to organizations primarily focused on migration and displacement.

Auwal Rafsanjani, a Nigerian civil rights advocate, argues the EU must rethink its approach: “If the EU can change their perspective and focus their support on civil society organisations and independent media, their support will not be seen as legitimising a failed system.”

At a moment when democracy worldwide faces unprecedented threats, the EU’s election funding in Africa risks doing more harm than good. Instead of empowering citizens and holding power accountable, it props up autocrats and deepens disillusionment. The EU must stop bankrolling authoritarianism and start investing in genuine democratic change—before it’s too late.