In signing the OSCE’s Copenhagen Document
in June 1990, the UK agreed that “the presence of observers,
both foreign and domestic, can enhance the electoral process”.
Yet when the OSCE came here for the first time, for our November
2003 elections, the delegation was not even allowed to visit
a polling station!
Is this because parts of our electoral law
would never be endorsed by the OSCE? Maybe so, and this article
will concentrate on the most likely cause of concern, the
rules which cover party agents/observers.
But first, a word on terminology: a ‘polling
place’ is any room where voting takes place, while a
‘polling station’ is the more specific desk plus
ballot box associated with a geographical area of about 800
voters. Hence one ‘polling place’ may contain
between 1 and 8 ‘polling stations’.
Elections in Northern Ireland
In one polling place last November, there were not two but
three people sitting at one polling station. The first checked
the identity of the voter; the second official issued a ballot
paper; and the third person, though indistinguishable from
the other two, was actually a party agent, comrade.
Admittedly, the usual practice is for the
officials to sit at one desk and the agents at another. And
one official then announces to the agent(s) the electoral
number of each voter when the latter is formally identified.
Thankfully, most NI parties don’t bother with this provision,
and in North Belfast, only Sinn Féin party agents were
present, and omnipresent, in nationalist areas only, of course.
The rule was designed to counter impersonation,
but now that photo IDs are required, this is no longer such
a problem. So to-day’s party agents are using the polling
place for the furtherance of their own electoral campaign.
This is totally undemocratic! The agent ticks off the names
of those who vote on her copy of the voters’ register.
Later, she checks the list to see who has not yet voted. This
information is then passed to others outside the polling station
- (such a transfer is in fact against the rules; there again,
agents are allowed to rotate, and you can’t stop them
going for a pee, can you?) - and off go the black taxis to
round up the stragglers.
It is the rules, plus this one infringement
of those rules, which allow for this abuse. Admittedly, the
vote is still secret. The voters may vote for whomsoever they
want to, once they are inside the polling booth. Nevertheless,
the very presence of Sinn Féin inside the polling place,
and the fact that they know whether or not the particular
voter has voted, can be intimidating.
One polling station actually had four Sinn
Féin ‘party agents’ - the rules allow only
one party agent per party per polling station - all checking
up on the activities of the electorate à la 1984. (The
returning officer refused to intervene at this four-fold infringement
of what he agreed was wrong.) And the result? Democracy, my
arse!
Some loyalist parties, in contrast, tend to
operate a different form of “persuasion”, forcing
the hapless voter to go through a gauntlet of persons and
papers at the entrance to the polling place. To counter both
activities, maybe it would be better to ban all campaigning
on polling day itself. In addition, on election day, as in
Eastern Europe, no campaign material of any sort should be
allowed within 100 metres of a polling place!
Elections Elsewhere
The OSCE rules for elections in Bosnia, for example –
rules, by the way, which the former NI Chief Electoral Officer,
Mr. Pat Bradley, helped to formulate – stipulate that
clearly identified party observers may observe the overall
voting process, in general terms. They do not, however, have
the right to any particular information on individual voters,
nor to access the signed voters’ register. Furthermore,
the observers are all seated together, in a specified part
of the polling place (not alongside any officials’ desk)
and, in my experience, they normally keep both their distance
and their silence.
Democratic Theory
Only a few countries such as Australia have compulsory voting.
In most jurisdictions, then, every voter has the right either
to vote, or to spoil their vote, or to abstain. Whatever a
voter chooses is entirely his/her own affair, or it should
be, and no party should have the right to know if particular
individuals have exercised their franchise.
As outlined above, however, NI parties do
have access to this particular information. Furthermore, while
in most countries, it is only the unmarked register which
is in the public domain, political parties in NI are allowed
to buy a copy of the marked register. This is disgraceful,
and many would be equally shocked if, in Croatia, Tudjman’s
party was able to know whether certain Croatians had voted;
if, in Serbia, Miloševic’s crew had access to how
various Serbs and Kosovars had behaved; or if, in Russia,
Putin’s boys could ascertain who had abstained in Chechnya.
If? Of course they can.
Recommendation
But back to Northern Ireland, and may I suggest the following.
Parties should be limited to one party observer per polling
place and not, as at present, one agent per polling station.
All party observers should be clearly identified by an arm
band on which are written the two words “party observer”.
The observer should not be allowed to wear or carry any item
which might identify him/her with a particular political party
or group. And finally, the Electoral Commission should keep
all marked registers firmly under lock and key until the next
election, whereupon they should be destroyed.
In addition, accredited international and
domestic observers should have access to all polling stations.
Conclusion
Florida needs observers. And so do we.
PS
Why are our ballot papers and stubs numbered, thereby making
it possible to trace a vote back to a particular individual?
In other words, why is our voting process not secret? It is
everywhere else!
OurKingdom, the new economics foundation and the de Borda Institute recently gave interested parties from think tanks, research groups and campaigning organisations, and members of the general public, the opportunity to participate in an online trial of consensus decision making.
The de Borda Institute and nef (the new economics foundation) have received a grant from the Joseph Rowntree Charitable Trust to test the potential of consensus voting More...
Site information now available in a number
of langugages
