'Postal votes' a real misnomer
We refer to the Malaysiakini report Tighten postal voting rules, says MP.
Discussion about `postal votes' as practiced in Malaysia can be a bit confusing because what is practiced is a misnomer, while the people who really would be enfranchised by postal votes have been denied such a valuable service.
The `postal vote' in Malaysia as has been admitted by the Election Commission, no less, involves no `posting' at all. The votes are cast in police, military and district offices where the voters are registered.
This is quite unlike what the public may think, that postal votes should be cast in locations away from the registered polling centers and thus involving the `posting' of the ballots back to the registered `home town' of the voters.
From the above fact, it can be seen that the local police, military and EC staff might as well just vote in the local polling centers, as all other voters.
A few other anomalies follow: the polling centers for `postal votes' are staffed by the police and the military officers contrary to constitutional provision which entrusts election administration to the EC only.
This coupled with one-sided access to police and military voters for the candidates means that a lot of unfairness can occur - seemingly confirmed by the one-sided polling results. Some odd postal votes results which favour opposition candidates cannot cover up the fact that postal votes are not credible.
The introduction of a separate identity number for these police and military personnel add to the confusion as these personnel change status, creating a window when they have double voter registrations. This separate identity number should be abolished and all citizens should just use the one uniform MyKad number.
The way the `postal votes' are cast in a few police and military camps also create opportunities for these votes, which legally can be taken out of the polling stations - unlike normal voting procedure - to be sold en masse to willing buyers.
If postal votes are given to those voters who are scattered all over the world, as done under a real postal vote arrangement, the chances of them selling the votes will be very slim. Thus one anomaly leads to another.
The current practice of `postal votes' should be stopped as soon as possible as it is an utterly unfair practice from the all the aspects mentioned above.
However, the real people who deserve a postal voting service eg, students, workers who are living away from their registered polling centers etc, have been denied their votes all these years.
There are Malaysian embassy officers who openly dissuade such voters from applying for postal votes. Compare this to embassies of other countries eg, Indonesia, Philippines etc,where the embassies themselves set up polling centers for their citizens.
It is to be noted that postal votes need not be limited to those who work out of the country. Hundreds of thousands of Sabahans and Sarawakians are also working in the Peninsular and for no fault of their own they are denied their postal votes under current practice.
It is high time the EC be asked loudly by the public to increase voting rates by allowing postal votes to voters who are away from their registered polling centers (including those overseas/out of town civilians and military personnel on active duty ) and abolish `postal voting' for those who are for all practical purposes, living just next door to their local polling centers.
The writer is attached to polls watchdog group, My Election Watch.
Discussion about `postal votes' as practiced in Malaysia can be a bit confusing because what is practiced is a misnomer, while the people who really would be enfranchised by postal votes have been denied such a valuable service.
The `postal vote' in Malaysia as has been admitted by the Election Commission, no less, involves no `posting' at all. The votes are cast in police, military and district offices where the voters are registered.
This is quite unlike what the public may think, that postal votes should be cast in locations away from the registered polling centers and thus involving the `posting' of the ballots back to the registered `home town' of the voters.
From the above fact, it can be seen that the local police, military and EC staff might as well just vote in the local polling centers, as all other voters.
A few other anomalies follow: the polling centers for `postal votes' are staffed by the police and the military officers contrary to constitutional provision which entrusts election administration to the EC only.
This coupled with one-sided access to police and military voters for the candidates means that a lot of unfairness can occur - seemingly confirmed by the one-sided polling results. Some odd postal votes results which favour opposition candidates cannot cover up the fact that postal votes are not credible.
The introduction of a separate identity number for these police and military personnel add to the confusion as these personnel change status, creating a window when they have double voter registrations. This separate identity number should be abolished and all citizens should just use the one uniform MyKad number.
The way the `postal votes' are cast in a few police and military camps also create opportunities for these votes, which legally can be taken out of the polling stations - unlike normal voting procedure - to be sold en masse to willing buyers.
If postal votes are given to those voters who are scattered all over the world, as done under a real postal vote arrangement, the chances of them selling the votes will be very slim. Thus one anomaly leads to another.
The current practice of `postal votes' should be stopped as soon as possible as it is an utterly unfair practice from the all the aspects mentioned above.
However, the real people who deserve a postal voting service eg, students, workers who are living away from their registered polling centers etc, have been denied their votes all these years.
There are Malaysian embassy officers who openly dissuade such voters from applying for postal votes. Compare this to embassies of other countries eg, Indonesia, Philippines etc,where the embassies themselves set up polling centers for their citizens.
It is to be noted that postal votes need not be limited to those who work out of the country. Hundreds of thousands of Sabahans and Sarawakians are also working in the Peninsular and for no fault of their own they are denied their postal votes under current practice.
It is high time the EC be asked loudly by the public to increase voting rates by allowing postal votes to voters who are away from their registered polling centers (including those overseas/out of town civilians and military personnel on active duty ) and abolish `postal voting' for those who are for all practical purposes, living just next door to their local polling centers.
The writer is attached to polls watchdog group, My Election Watch.
Comments