|
Press Release
CADA, October 24, 2013
CADA DISCUSSES OVER
VOTING
Of late Ghanaians have become obsessed with throwing
electoral ‘jargons’ around arising from the recent
Election Petition in the Supreme Court of Ghana and most
people have overnight turned themselves into Electoral
Specialists in view of the enormous interest generated
during the petition hearing. However, there are still
lack of clarity and understanding in some of the widely
used electoral terminologies. The Centre for African
Democratic Affairs (CADA) a ‘Think Tank’ of Election
Experts, has taken upon itself the challenge to
critically examine some of the terms that created
confusion in the minds of people during the court
proceedings. One of such terminologies is over voting
whose definition is still ambiguous even after the
ruling of the Supreme Court. CADA therefore discusses
the term Over Voting in the first of its series.
Lack of clarity during the court hearing and ruling has
even worsened the uncertainty surrounding the term over
voting, but it must be said that confusion and ambiguity
have no place in a serious business like elections.
Going forward in Ghana’s electoral development, it is
imperative that the EC clearly defines what constitutes
over voting so that various Electoral Officials and the
Political Parties are not given room to determine what
over voting is and how to deal with it.
Over vote is said to have occurred where:
1) The number of ballots found in the ballot box at the
end of Polls is more than the number of voters
registered to vote at the Polling Station.
2) The number of ballots found in the ballot box at the
close of Polls is more than the number of ballots issued
(valid, invalid, spoilt ballots etc) at the Polling
Station.
These two distinct definitions of ‘over voting’ were at
play at the just ended Election Petition hearing at the
Supreme Court of Ghana, the petitioners ostensibly
praying the court to overturn an earlier declaration of
John Dramani Mahama as President by the Electoral
Management Body (EMB) of Ghana.
While the EMB did not state its disagreement with the
second definition, the remaining two respondents were
vehemently opposed to the second definition; all three
respondents however, felt comfortable restating the
first definition, as acceptable reference point for
‘over voting’.
The challenge with this ‘classical' definition is that,
it assumes a hundred per cent voter turnout hence once
more votes than the number on the voters’ roll is
recorded, then an over vote has occurred. This
definition therefore suggests that once the number of
votes found in the ballot box, irrespective of the
actual number of voters who turned out on election day
to vote, is not more than the total number on the
register, no over voting would have occurred. But it is
common knowledge that a hundred percent voter turnout is
almost impossible in elections. This assumption
therefore falls short of logical reasoning and the
definition must therefore be critically looked at once
again.
Over voting in the case of first definition (classical)
the results if it should occur is cancelled outright, no
investigation is undertaken. It is a phenomenon that is
not entertained/ acceptable in any competitive election.
In the case of the second definition, it is required
that ballots in the ballot box be screened mostly aimed
at identifying and putting aside ballots that were
misplaced in ballot box and the presence of foreign/
unauthorized materials during the polling process.
Through the reunification process, misplaced ballots
will be placed in their correct ballot box and joined
with the group of ballots they belong to. For instance
where presidential and parliamentary elections take
place simultaneously it is common for parliamentary
ballot papers to be placed in a presidential ballot box
and vice versa, in spite of the fact that ballot box
controller is made to stand close to the box to ensure
the right ballot goes into the right box. Issues of
misplaced ballot are not considered an election
irregularity
Foreign or unauthorized ballots uncovered under the
second definition however, will have to be scrutinized
by the Presiding Officer/Counting Officer and carefully
follow instructions provided to deal with that
irregularity. For example rechecking all calculations,
recount of ballots, spoiled ballot papers, recount
unused ballot papers, invalid ballots(unstamped) record
in the polling station journal, inform party
agents/observers and returning officer, before a
decision of over voting is declared
Closely linked to over voting is what is known as
‘ballot-stuffing.’ It is a situation where a number of
officially stamped ballots with identical marks for a
particular candidate either in singles or bunched
together are pushed into the ballot box. This act is
mostly perpetuated with the connivance of the Polling
Staff, especially where the turnout at the polling
station is low to create opportunity to add more votes
to that of a candidate. This sometimes occurs when a
candidate agrees with the polling staff for a specific
number of votes to be inserted for a fee or some favor.
This form of irregularity may be difficult to detect.
But whether it is detected or not, the fact remains that
the practice results in more votes in the ballot box
than the actual number of voters who turned out to vote.
It is therefore not adequate to consider over voting
only in the context of the two definitions given above.
A third situation where over voting would have been
occasioned is where the number of ballots in the ballot
box at the end of polls exceeds the number of voters who
turned out to vote even though it may be less than the
total number of voters on the register. This can be
determined when the total votes recorded are checked
against the number of voters verified by the biometric
verification device and or the number of ticks made in
the register as voters go through the election process.
Usually the training of temporary staff is not thorough
to understand election technicalities and therefore go
out of their way to do ballot stuffing which increases
the ballots in the box over and above the number of
registered voters at the polling station, only to
realize at the end, the results will have to be
cancelled.
It is obvious that political parties or candidates to an
election, are only willing to accept results from an
election that is considered credible, and therefore
infractions like over voting and ballot stuffing, if
widespread are seen as unfortunate incidences that do
not only have the tendency to undermine the credibility
of election results but have the potential to derail
effort at consolidating the hard-earned peace of any
country.
In Ghana the high voter turnout during the Polls and the
remarkable calm displayed by the country’s citizens when
the Supreme Court verdict on the election petition was
announced are a clear manifestation of people desire for
peace, democracy and development and therefore do not
deserve how the Electoral Commission handled the
elections looking at the exposure at the election
petition
While it is seen as crucial that official results are
released as soon as possible to end any uncertainty and
speculation, it is also important to develop a mechanism
that will require and ensure that results declared at
the collation centers are devoid of irregularities,
malpractices and violations, so that the results are
acceptable to all parties to spare the people of any
letigation.
In this respect Officials entrusted with this
responsibility should not fail the people and if this is
to be accomplished there must be a system of continuous
education for Electoral Officials to develop critical
skills to be accountable as well as deliver quality and
efficient services to the people. The right set of
incentives and punishment that will affect the way
officials behave be put in place to ensure that
performance is monitored and hardworking staff rewarded
and people held accountable for lapses.
For media relations kindly contact
Mr. Damoa Agyeman
0244238540
Frank Adarkwah-Yiadom
0236697122
Adarkwah-yiadom@cada-af.org
|
