ECN states election facts

The Electoral Commission (ECN) of Namibia has issued the following statement. THE ECN would like to take this time to respond to the claims by the Rally for Democracy and Progress (RDP) that there is a long series of irregularities in regard to the Voter Register that in their views “has created a dark cloud about the fairness and credibility of the elections.”

The RDP states in their press statement that they derived their evidence from the National Society of Human Rights (NSHR). The RDP further claims that “the failure by the ECN to respond unequivocally to their repeated questions about the voters roll is a clear indication of a deliberate attempt to manipulate the process.”

The NSHR also claimed that they have compiled various “smoking gun” evidence suggesting “gross irregularities” on the part of the ECN in which they list among others “issuance of duplicate voters cards,” “inclusion of deceased persons as registered voters,” “post deadline registration of voters” and “registration of persons below the age of 18 years.”

While the ECN, as a credible, responsible, transparent and fair electoral management body will refrain from the ongoing campaigns of discrediting and defaming the characters of people as clearly demonstrated in the RDP press statement, we feel that the distorted information content contained in both the RDP and NSHR’s press statements requires a prompt response.

Duplicate of voters’ cards
 
In terms of the Electoral Act, where a person loses under any circumstances a registration card, the ECN is obliged by law to issue that person with a duplicate provided that that person presents a police affidavit clearly indicating the loss of that card. The ECN is not obliged by law to investigate the circumstances under which the card is lost neither are we restricted by law to limit the number of duplicates.

Furthermore, the names of citizens that are used at will without their consent by these bodies in the media to justify ill-intentions may not be construed as proper conduct. We can only assure the public that our records indicate that the people referred to in the NSHR and RDP statements came for duplicates but not for registration after the deadlines.

We have copies of the proof attached to this statement showing the following evidence: Tobias Aupindi obtained his Namibian police statement under oath on 23 October, 2009 in which he indicated that he lost his Voter Registration Card on 22 October, 2009. He was issued a duplicate registration card by the ECN signed by the Director of Elections on 23 October, 2009 Theofilia Inekela Iikela and her husband Sioni Iikela were both issued with voter registration cards for the first time on 27 August, 2003 while at Elim in the Omusati region.

They moved to Arandis in the Erongo region where both applied for registration cards on the basis of change of address and they were registered accordingly on 27 September, 2009. It is clear from this conclusive evidence that the NSHR is using people in the ECN Data Capturing Division to unlawfully obtain inconclusive information that Mr. Phil Ya Nangolo is using to distort facts about the electoral process.

What he claims to be “a dossier of gross irregularities” is nothing else than desperate attempts by his institution to mislead the public. “Given this situation, it is clear that this institution cannot be trusted as a credible, fair, transparent, honest, objective and non-partisan observer of elections in Namibia.” The collusion between this organization and one of parties contesting elections on these issues raises serious questions about its impartiality as an observer of elections.

The NSHR also claims falsely that there are people who are under-age on the Voter Register. The NSHR had all the time to genuinely object to the Register as required by law and to follow the correct procedures. On the contrary it is running a campaign of misinformation, vilification and distortion to attract the attention of the international observers in the hope of convincing them that “the electoral process is subject to rigging.”

This is hypocrisy and dishonesty and at the same time an act of defaming the characters of the people that the NSHR claims to have obtained voter registration card illegally.

Voter register
 
In the first place we would like to state that all the legal provisions contained in Sections 21 to 26 of the Electoral Act were complied with in respect of the preparation, public scrutiny, receiving of objections, publication and gazetting of the Voters’ Roll. It is regrettable that the CD-ROM copied and dispatched to the political parties on 16 November, 2009 might have contained discrepancies and omissions due to copying errors but that are not reflected in the Voter Register that was sent to the regions for public scrutiny.

During the copying and transferring of the data from the register into the CD-ROM, two constituencies were copied twice while one was omitted as reflected in the version sent to political parties. However, the printed version of the Register which is gazetted on 9 November, 2009 and that has been reported to the political parties and shared with the media reports on numerous occasions, remains absolutely accurate and correct.

It must also be kept in mind that minimal alterations will be detected on a daily basis at constituency levels as voters who have lost their cards are provided with replacements in areas where they did not originally register. Therefore, the claims by the RDP and NHSR and some media reporters supporting their views that there are loopholes in the Register that will subject the elections to rigging, is a misleading view which in reality remains a figment of distorted imagination.

We can only repeat our assurances that the checks and balances the ECN has put in place, including the invisible ink and the deployment of the electronic voter register in some of the densely populated polling areas will ensure that each voter will only be able to cast their votes once.

Deceased persons
 
The demand that the register should be absolutely free of the names of deceased people is unreasonable. People continue to die on a daily basis and the process of removing them from the records of Home Affairs is tedious, time-consuming and cumbersome because there are some bureaucratic steps involving notifications, validation and verification that are followed for names to be removed from Government systems.

Therefore, it is not incidental to find some names of the deceased remaining on Government records. An example of the bureaucratic nature of systems is the number of people or pensioners who sometimes remain on the Social Security payroll of Governments several months after they have passed away. This is true even in the most advanced bureaucracies of advanced democracies in the world. Furthermore, it is morally questionable for a human rights society to suggest that preferential attention should be given to the removal of the names of eminent persons from national records, simply because they are more important than other citizens.

The ECN is not obliged by any law to operate in that way. As we have explained on numerous occasions, the issue of the Voter Register keeps resurfacing for various reasons. There are partners who are genuine about the need to update the Voter Register as one of the tools required to estimate the total number of registrants and to plan logistics accordingly.

We all admit that an absolutely clean and perfect voter register remains a dream that many nations have not been able to attain. While it is a major conventional requirement for keeping abreast with electoral processes, it is not an absolute condition for universal suffrage.

This is why the ECN has repeatedly explained that only those eligible voters who are in possession of voter registration cards will be able to vote and there are mechanisms in place that will prevent people from voting twice. Therefore, the allegation by some opposition leaders that potential discrepancies in the voters’ roll will result in electoral rigging is false, uncalled for, misleading and intentional to subject the electoral process to disrepute.

Media disinformation campaigns
 
We are also aware that some of the media are using the 2007 figures intentionally to exacerbate confusion, despite the dates clearly reflected on the print-outs. It is very unfortunate that while we prefer to work with the media and all political parties as a credible and independent electoral body, some of these entities want to twist the facts for subjective reasons.

In fact, there is an ongoing campaign to discredit the outcome of the electoral process even before people have voted. Finally, the misspelling of two constituencies, namely Gibeon and Onyaanya that Brigitte Weidlich of The Namibian claims would lead to legal contestations, also needs to be rejected and condemned because the names of these places are correctly spelt in all the voting materials and it is not the first time that elections are conducted in these constituencies.

These constituencies have also been allocated constituency codes or numbers that we have been using for their identification and verification. It is therefore, misleading and premature to predict legal actions on the basis of such minor omissions that have already been detected and corrected.