“Ajaran Sesat” by the Suruhanjaya Pilihan Raya

For the past one month, the EC Chairman and Deputy Chairman have been flogging the meme ‘ajarasesat’ . See TheBorneoPost 20^th Feb 13 and TheStar 22^nd Mar 13. It has clearly become a pattern that should not be left unchallenged as it appears designed to mislead the public.

Having accused unnamed NGOs of confusing the public with “ajaransesat”, the SPR continues its program of confusing the public even more by making public pronouncements that come apart upon careful scrutiny.

The most recent is the “clarification” published in the media (TheMalaysianInsider 23^rd Mar 13) which claimed that, even with double registration, it is impossible to vote twice.

Let us see how much that clarification is worth.

First, they are implicitly admitting that there is double registration!

Second, will the indelible inkprevent double-voting as claimed by the EC?

The UNDP Procurement Guide For Post-Conflict Electionshas recommended that indelible ink has a reliable lifetime of 3 days! [By the way, indelible ink is used for post-conflict elections. That is how bad our electoral system has become.] We have no idea what kind of indelible ink will be used by the SPR. Independent parties have not been given any demonstration of the durability of the ink nor have they been given any samples of the ink for testing. In the absence of other evidence, we have to take the UNDP recommendation as valid.

Regulation 3 (1A) of Elections (Conduct of Elections) Regulations 1981requires that the “advance polling day shall be fixed not less than seven days after the day of nomination andnot less than 3 days from the date or dates of the polling day” . There is a window for Advance Voting, 7 days after nomination and 3 days before polling. This is very strange.

The indelible ink for Advance Voting cannot meet the minimum recommendation of the UNDP unless they use very high quality ink and have stringent procedures to prevent fraud. Thus the SPR cannot guarantee that indelible ink applied on Advance Voters will remain visible on polling day.

There are additional factors that the SPR chooses to ignore although these factors have been publicly discussed during the alleged “ajaransesat”, some of which sessions were attended by persons suspected of being SPR officers and even Special Branch members:

1.      What measures are being taken against a voter coating the finger with a transparent substance such as transparent nail polish to prevent the indelible ink from sticking?

2.      What solvents has the SPR tested on the indelible ink to ascertain the indelibility of it? How certain are we that a person who knows the chemistry of the ink cannot devise a way to reduce, if not remove, the ink stain?

3.      Has the indelible ink been tested on a variety of skin types to ensure that its indelibility applies effectively across all skin types?

4.      Polling Agents are currently positioned where it is very difficult for them to inspect the fingers of voters. There is a comedicvideo circulating on You Tube that demonstrates this. Comedy notwithstanding, there is a very real fear that voters who have voted before can be allowed to vote again, especially given that the SPR itself stands accused of colluding with the incumbent leadership.

5.      In a training video released by the SPR, the KetuaTempatMengundi (Presiding Officer) is given instructions on how to cope with a long queue at the Polling Station by processing voters two-by-two. If this were to happen, how effectively can the Polling Agents screen fingers for indelible ink? If collusion is suspected, the double processing can be expected to be implemented just when voters with stained fingers come to vote, thereby ensuring that specific persons succeed in voting twice.

6.      Even if the identity inspection is conducted one voter by one voter, we must remain aware of the time constraint – in each Polling Station (Saluran),700 voters need to be processed in 9 hours.  This means each voter has to be processed in just over 46 seconds. In those 46 seconds, the following need to be done:

a.       The voter’s finger needs to be inspected and verified.

b.      The voter’s identity document needs to be inspected and the photograph matched with the face.

c.       The voter’s record needs to be located in the Electoral Roll

d.      The voter’s name and identity number need to compared between identity document and Electoral Roll

e.       The voter’s name and identity number need to be read out for the Polling Agents to verify.

f.       Time must be allowed for the Polling Agent to raise any objections

g.      If there are any objections, the time remaining for the remaining voters will become even less.

How effective can the screening by the Polling Agent be? Yet the Deputy EC Chairman dare to publicly claim (TheStar 22^nd Mar 13) “It only takes three minutes for a person to vote, unless he or she creates chaos and refuses to follow instructions,” he told reporters after chairing a special session with election and police officers in the state here yesterday.

To date the SPR has done nothing to assure Civil Society that the implementation of indelible ink is expected to be effective. All we have seen are potentially chaotic situations and no credible answers to the questions that have been raised.

There is one other very significant factor that has conveniently been ignored by the SPR – there is a class of voter on whom indelible ink will not be applied! Yes, there is no provision for indelible to be used on Postal Voters. We understand the impracticality of applying indelible ink on persons who could be anywhere when they vote. But most of the local postal voters can vote as Advance Voters! But they are not assigned as such.

This is why it is critical that any person eligible to be a Postal Voter must be scrupulously removed from the Electoral Roll of regular voters. Otherwise indelible ink CANNOT guarantee that double registration does not mean double vote.

Remember that any member of the Police and Military forces can, at any time, opt for postal voting. This means the infamous Papagomo could have used both his military and civilian identities to vote. So let us not be fooled and lulled into complacency. There is a massive loophole in the system.

Postal voting is also available for all EC officials –some 300,000 of them. This potentially creates 300,000 double votes.This is no trivial number considering that sometimes seats are won or lost by a margin of a few hundreds or even tens. It only takes a majority of one to win!

Journalists on duty are also eligible to be Postal Voters. We can expect that, if the suspected collusion turns out to be real, those journalists allowed the double vote would be selective and dependent on the political alignment of their parent organisation. We are not suggesting that this will happen. We are simply saying that this loophole in the system has not been plugged effectively. We should not be so naive as to depend on the honesty of the people involved. Systems should be designed to be secure.

There is one other element that many people remain blissfully ignorant of – with the use of a Borang717, an SPR officer can cast his Postal Ballot at any Polling Station.

This is even provided for in the Conduct of Election Regulations 15(1)!

Provided that where an elector for any constituency is employed as a presiding officer or in any other official capacity at a polling station within that constituency and it is inconvenient for him to vote at the polling station to which that part of the electoral roll which contains his name has been assigned, the returning officer may authorize such elector to vote at any other polling station in the constituency. Such authorization shall be given under the hand of the returning officer and shall state the name of the elector and his number in the electoral roll, and the fact that he is so employed as aforesaid and shall specify the polling station at which he is authorized to vote.

Since the issuing of such Ballot Papers is not witnessed by any independent agent, any number of such Ballot Papers can be issued to the officers. And these Ballots can be cast in any Saluran so long as they are accompanied by a Borang 717.

If there is no validation system in place, SPR officers can vote any number of times. And this is why NGOs teaching about Election Laws and the Electoral Process are accused of “ajaransesat” – too many of the SPR secrets are being exposed.

We have said this before and we will say it again – WE HAVE NO CONFIDENCE IN THE CURRENT SURUHANJAYA PILIHAN RAYA.

Article 114 of the Federal Constitution provides that an Election Commission be appointed “which enjoys public confidence”. The public has lost confidence in this Election Commission and calls upon His Majesty the Yang di PertuanAgong to sack this Election Commission. We can only have democratic elections if the body charged with conducting the elections is capable of acting in a fair and impartial manner. The present Election Commission has shown time and again that it is both biased and incompetent.

Enough is enough!

Versi BM