GE13: Polls panel insists elections were clean

 

(The Star) – Election Commission (SPR) chairman Tan Sri Abdul Aziz Mohd Yusof defends the election process and addresses allegations of electoral fraud.

The Election Commission has been getting a lot of flak over purported electoral irregularities in the recently concluded general election such as claims of a power blackout at polling centres during the counting of votes, the switching and stuffing of ballot papers and boxes, phantom voters and indelible ink that could be washed off.

Pakatan Rakyat’s Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim alleges the elections were marred by fraud and claims victory has been stolen from them and that they would not recognise the Barisan Nasional federal government as legitimate.

Bersih which organised a number of street rallies asking for electoral reforms and a clean and fair elections, says it has first-hand information on electoral fraud and video clips of it, so it is withholding recognition of the government until it convenes a Public Tribunal to collate evidence and call witnesses to investigate this.

In an interview with The Star, Election Commission (SPR) chairman Tan Sri Abdul Aziz Mohd Yusof defends the election process and addresses the allegations.

He says if there was fraud, that people with the evidence should come forward and lodge reports because “SPR too would like to know.” And he calls on Anwar to “be a gentleman” and accept the election results.

> How do you think SPR did in the overall handling of the election?

Generally, I am happy. All went well – except that before May 5, I had a press conference where I asked voters to come early because the weather forecast said it would be good weather in the morning and it would rain in the afternoon. So at almost all polling centres, too many people came in the morning and there were really long queues with people having to wait for one to three hours to vote. I was disappointed to see senior citizens waiting in the long lines. That is my regret.

We were caught by our own advice. This was the bigger voter turnout in the history of our elections an 85% turnout. After 1pm though, only a few people came to vote because most followed our advice and came in the morning. Based on this experience, we will plan for big crowds in future elections and have two streams instead of one if the crowd is more than 500 people at one time.

The same thing happened during the advanced voting (on April 30) where most came in the morning so there were long queues too. But these are soldiers and policemen and I told them because of their profession they are tough and should be able to take it. (There are 272,387 registered advance voters comprising army personnel, general operations force, their spouses and policemen) My other regret is about the indelible ink.

> What happened with the indelible ink? There were a number of instances where people could wash off the ink on the polling day itself.

I am so sad about it. It really hurt me. When we tested and tested it it was okay. But some fingers were oily. And some of our staff didn’t shake the bottle properly, they didn’t apply the ink properly and let the ink dry. We did train our people.

We told them how to apply the ink and to ink the finger on both sides, top and bottom. But we have 233,200 SPR staff – some listened and some didn’t. And some just inked the nail instead of the whole finger. Also, some people after voting purposely washed the ink off their finger with detergent.

> Even if they did that, the ink shouldn’t rub off because the purpose of indelible ink is to prevent people from voting twice. And those with such an intention would try to remove the ink off by any means. So was the ink substandard? And why did we pay RM10 mil for a low quality ink? Was there corruption?

No! It wasn’t RM10 mil. We paid about RM6mil and it wasn’t low quality ink! The problem was that we couldn’t put more than 1% of silver nitrate in the ink and the silver nitrate is what makes the ink last. We got a letter from the Health Ministry telling us that if we put more than 1% of silver nitrate in the ink, it could damage the kidney and cause cancer.

We had originally planned to put 4% to 7% of silver nitrate in the ink – the 4% for ordinary voting and & 7% for advance voting. But because of the letter from the Health Ministry, we couldn’t. If we put more and people get cancer, then SPR will be blamed, so I asked to replace the silver nitrate with something else but to make sure that it lasts. We couldn’t add animal-fat ingredients or alcohol either because of the fatwa council regulations.

Recently, I spoke to the deputy chairman of the Election Commission in Cambodia and she told me they are going to use 25% silver nitrate in their ink for their coming elections. I’ve now asked the SPR secretary to go and discuss with the Health Ministry for some compromise on the ink for future elections. Let me just say this.

Even if the ink disappears and you try to vote again, your name and IC number on the electoral roll would have been checked and crossed out already at the polling centre by the political parties’ when you came to vote earlier, so you wouldn’t have been able to vote again.

> So SPR is still going to use the ink?

Yes, the law now says you must ink your finger. If you don’t, then your vote is not valid. We can improve the system. That’s why we are getting all the information from various states on the weaknesses and we’ll try to improve it for the future.

And we will discuss with the Health Ministry to see if we can use 3% to 5% silver nitrate. Some other countries use 8% some as high as 25%. People are asking what happened to the ink. It made me very very sad.

> Did you expect such a big voter turn-out?

Yes because of the excitement and the fierce fighting of both political parties (Barisan Nasional and Pakatan Rakyat) and people were really waiting for the general elections. There was even a big group waiting before we even opened the gate at the polling centres in the morning! I am very happy that the turnout was very good.

> There were people doing a citizens’ arrest and chasing out so-called foreigners from the polling centre. They said these people were foreigners because they couldn’t speak Malay or sing Negaraku.

Nobody – except the police or during election time SPR staff – can ask you for your IC. Some of our people look like Bangladeshis, Indians or Nepali or Vietnamese but don’t judge people by their appearance and say they are foreigners. If they hold a blue IC, they are Malaysians. Not all our people can sing Negaraku.

If you ask my nenek or datuk to sing Negaraku, they wouldn’t know. Those planting vegetables too might not be able to speak much Malay or sing Negaraku but they are born here and they are Malaysians.

Those who are working or in school or with the government, they know how to sing Negaraku of course, but you can’t assume that every Malaysian does. And you can’t go around arresting’ people based on how they look. I felt sorry for a Chinese guy who looked exactly like an Indian.

He was of mixed Chinese and Indian parentage and was born very dark but has a Chinese name and they went after him. I pity him. Until today, we have not received any information that a single foreigner took part in our elections.

> There were claims of blackouts during the counting of votes where the Barisan candidate was trailing and when the power supply came back, the Barisan candidate was suddenly in the lead, implying that the ballot box or votes were switched?

That’s a total lie! How can somebody can switch the box in front of the political party agents? I checked with an officers and TNB and there was not even one incident of a blackout.

In any case, all agents have mobile phones and if there was a blackout they can use the light on the mobile phones to see. If people are shining a light from their mobile phone, how can a ballot box be switched or ballot papers added in such a situation?

Their intention is to portray SPR as a body without integrity and credibility, which is even capable of disrupting power supply in order to switch results in the dark! But it never happened.

> For advance voting, you had said in the past that after the voting, the ballot box will be sealed and kept in a police lock up until election day and that parties’ agents can keep watch 24 hours over the ballot box. But the police station refused to allow them to do that and the boxes were in the lock up unsupervised for 5 days so it could have been switched at any time?

We agreed to allow them to watch over it on principle but it is subject to lock up rules and regulations. When I made the statement they could stay guard, it was based on my experience in a by-election but at that time the ballot box was kept in a district office not the police station.

But I am confident of the integrity of the ballot box in the lock up. Because at the end of the process of advance voting, the polling agents would count the ballot papers inside and how many are left outside and seal the box and that seal is signed by both parties’ agents. If people want to take out ballot papers from the box or put new ones in, they will have to break open the seal. And each ballot box is unique.

It has a unique hologram as a security measure and that pattern belongs to only that ballot box. So how can you change to another box, because after the voting it is sealed and signed by both agents and it stated on the box which line, which stream and where the ballot box belongs to. No way it can be switched because the seal has to be signed by both sides.

> Pakatan says normally with advance voting, about 20% of the votes would go for their party and the rest would be for Barisan but this time they suspect something fishy because they only got 10% of the votes.

I don’t know about the numbers but the ballot box was safe. I assure you nobody broke the seal to add or take ballot papers out.

> How many complaints did SPR receive?

We received many complaints most were about indelible ink, The police received 1069 police reports on the elections. And SPR received 1943 complaints through the election campaign enforcement team. And our elections operations room received 745 complaints from the date of dissolution until May 5. It was all sorts of complaints and we are looking into it.

> Why did we have to wait until almost 1 am to get the results?

It wasn’t done on purpose. We have three categories of votes to tally – normal, advance votes and postal votes. And the counting process, the rejection and confirmation takes time because we have to show and count each ballot paper. Most times, it is clear who they vote for but sometimes it is not so clear so we have to put them in the not-sure’ tray. Sometimes too, the number of voters is very big so it takes time for this to be counted.

In some places, we had to wait for the postal votes to be brought in by the Returning Officers. This is quite a lengthy process. We can only start counting the postal votes after 5pm because we have to tear the envelope in front of the political party agent. That took up a lot of time because there was a lot of argument on whether a particular vote was valid or not.

They questioned why there was no address or no date and some wrote the year as 2012 instead of 2013. Some questioned why there was no signature of a witness on the form. Both sides wanted to reject the postal votes. That caused delays.

(For this election, there were a total of 146, 181 postal voters made up of SPR staff, media, soldiers and policemen on duty on election day and Malaysians overseas.)

A lot also depends on the efficiency of the presiding officers and the clerks. There were some instances where the presiding officer put the Borang 14′ on the table and left and there were mistakes in it, so the Returning Officer had to trace the presiding officer and political parties’ agents and get them to come back.

All these factors took time. We can only announce the results once the Returning Officer confirms and officially announces it at the tallying centre. And before he announces it, he must make sure everything is in orders – such as the forms, the counting, the tally because otherwise it can be subject to an election petition.

The results for Subang and Kapar were the last to come in and were only known at 4.30am. But it is not as late as the last general election.

> What’s your comment on Pakatan Rakyat saying it has been robbed of the victory and that it doesn’t recognise the results of the elections because there are instances of “electoral fraud”?

We tried our best to organise this election to be as free and fair as possible. Both sides said before the elections that the other side must accept the results win or lose. If a candidate wins or loses, it is not because SPR helped or didn’t help him or her.

SPR only provides a platform and the space for candidates to participate in elections. Who decides? It is the voters. If voters likes a candidate or a party, the candidate and party will win and vice versa. The kingmakers are the voters. You win some, you lose some.

For Barisan Nasional, they won at rural areas and the smaller towns where the number of voters are smaller for a seat. DAP, PAS and PKR won at the urban and city areas where the number of voters are bigger for the seat.

Voter numbers might be big but the number of seats might be small. That is why they keep stressing about their popular vote. (Pakatan received 50.3% while Barisan got 46.8% of the popular vote). But ours is a first-past- the-post system so it is not by popular vote. If a candidates gets a one vote majority, he wins the seat.

And I would like to ask them what electoral fraud ? They are always talking about phantom voters. If they have the list of names, send it to us or to the police to investigate. Just look at their majorities in Selangor. (Tan Sri) Khalid Ibrahim (PKR) and Dr Siti Mariah (PAS) won by huge majorities. And I don’t think their big majorities are because of phantom voters.

If someone lives somewhere else but his polling address is Selangor and he comes back to vote he is not a phantom voter. He is a legally registered voter. During election day, many people in Selangor head off to Kelantan, Sabah, Johor, Perak and other states to vote because their voting address is there. And there are also a lot of people coming back from these states to Selangor because their polling address here.

A phantom voter is someone who uses someone else’s IC to vote and we got no such report of any such cases. Where are these phantom voters? I too want to know.

> So what is your advice to Anwar?

In any election, there will be losers and winners. Be a gentleman. Be a leader. As a leader, you must be prepared defeat. This is the election of Malaysia. Nobody is happy except perhaps DAP.

Others be it the MCA, MIC, Gerakan, PAS or even the PM they are not happy with the results but they accepted it in a good way. How is it that you accept when you win big majorities in Penang and Selangor and retain Kelantan, but can’t accept defeat at parliament level? Election in Malaysia is every 5 years. Accept the results with an open heart and try again in the next elections. The voters have spoken.

> IDEAS and the Centre of Public Policy Studies has said the elections were “partially free but not fair”. Do you agree?

I just got their report. I want to study their reasons first before commenting.

> What do you think of the caretaker PM or ministers or the caretaker government using government machinery during the campaign period to announce projects?

The caretaker government can use government machinery – the office, the car, the helicopter – if it’s for an official or government function. But if it’s part of campaign, they can’t. They can’t use government facilities, cars, helicopters, government bodies or government offices for campaigning.

I asked the AG about this and he said if they want to use buildings or vehicles for their campaign, they have to pay rent. It’s not free. So if the other side has evidence of any abuse, then lodge a police report. Let the police investigate.

> People also question why there is one parliament seat for a small place like Lubok Antu which has a population of less than 20,000 while in a much larger place like Kapar where there are more than 100,000 people, it too is represented by just one seat in parliament?

We divide areas into cities, towns, semi-urban and kampong. Don’t compare the kampong or rural areas with a city.

Cities have all sorts of facilites, good roads, the number of people, good facilities, good telecommunication services and good support from the local authorities. But it might take two to three days to go into a rural area, so the needs are different.

We must compare city with city, semi urban with semi urban and kampong with kampong. I come from Sabak Bernam. There is no KFC and no McDonalds there and very few traffic lights. How can I compare it to a place like Kapar which is more developed.

> Bersih says it is withholding recognition of the federal government because they have first hand information and video clips of electoral fraud and they are going to set up a People’s Tribunal to look at the evidence before them?

Who appointed them? Does the world and the people agree with them? They form an association and say that we don’t want to recognise you’ so okay we (SPR) don’t recognise them either. If an observer appointed by us says something, then we will take it seriously. Bersih doesn’t recognise us and even asked me to resign.

> Are you going to resign?

No. I am appointed by the King. Who is Bersih to ask me to resign? Unless the King asks me to go, I am staying.

> There seems to be a lack of trust in SPR so how is SPR going to win back the people’s trust?

It’s difficult to answer that. As far as I am concerned, I am really independent. I don’t receive instructions from anybody – not the PM not the DPM. One proposal from the Parliamentary Select Committee (on Electoral Reform) is to make SPR more independent and for it to come under parliament.That’s an option but there are other choices too.

Right now, we get our budget from the Finance Ministry and if we need staff, we get them from the Public Services Department (JPA). But if we are independent, then the allocation for the budget will be made directly by parliament and we can recruit staff ourselves. In many other countries, the Election Commission comes directly under parliament.

> Are you in favour of changing the election system to proportional representation instead of the first-past-the-post system to make it fairer?

Yes, that is one of the proposals of the Parliamentary Select Committee. In fact we are preparing a paper to review our election system. We are in favour of a change. It could be a combination.