This study compares the efforts of the Southern African Development Community (SADC) and the Common Market for Eastern and Southern Africa (COMESA) towards electoral systems reform and how this is geared to ensuring peace and stability through constructive management of conflicts. Content analysis and a comparative historical research method was used for data collection. The study shows that the cases of poor electoral systems reform which had been sources of conflicts in both sub-regional organizations can be seen as consequent on the statesmen or differing factions not having given room for fair competition in their territorial jurisdiction. Using the state level theory of classical realism, the study argues that the quest for power accumulation by most statesmen or factions in SADC and COMESA makes it difficult to achieve electoral systems reform which thereby made electoral conflicts to prevail. This comparative evaluation can help in the constructive management of conflicts.