Skip debate on 200 metres, focus on orderliness.

BY EDITOR

24th October 2015.

Editorial Cartoon.

Plenty has been said concerning the 200 metres distance that voters and citizens in general will have to observe after voting, which seems to be the kinder version of things. 

The stern version of what is expected after one has cast his or her vote (and mostly it is the men who are being addressed) is to go home forthwith, and wait for results via ordinary channels of information. 

Waiting for vote counting nearby is a sign of readiness to spring to action in case of a ‘wrong’ verdict, a bit mindlessly as it were.

That is what might be called an official version of things, as to what the law enforcers worry about, but the other side of the political divide sees it differently, that law enforcers, always in cahoots with the current authorities, are engaged in cleaning up the precincts of vote counting rooms so as to ‘get away with murder.’ 

Many supporters of the opposition do not trust the good sense and probity of party polls agents as they know from experience that they can be purchased. That is why they seek to ‘guard’ votes.
In that sense the real dispute is pegged on mistrust on all sides of the political chessboard, in that the ruling party in tandem with law enforcers can be expected to seek to fill ballots gaps by foul means of various sorts, like vote stuffing or faulty recording of numbers in tallying. 

That is why polls agents are not altogether to be trusted as many of them might figure out that this is where they can make a penny or a dollar if one ought to be more modern. That definitely isn’t in keeping with the popular interest, in which case there arises the need to keep a collective watch, not leave things to the ‘hungry’ vote agents.

What this means is that the polling, counting and tallying process is far too important to be left to a few people in the vote counting rooms, with the strong assurance that the police will be around so there is no problem. 

People are wiser than that - and the political groups more likely to lose out if things are left that way, namely the opposition will not be in a position to get everyone home, expect a good sleep, and trust to the sense of honesty of their party agents. 

They will make sure they aren’t far away, just in case there is need for word to spread around – precisely what the police don’t wish to hear, or NEC.

Variations of sentiment have been registered between the law enforcers and the government generally on the one hand, and the National Electoral Commission on the other hand. 

Then there is open dissent from the various political parties at odds with the whole directive of going home to wait for vote results from there, in which case these political stakeholders have been seeking legal clarification and express order to the polls authorities, and the law enforcers, concerning the matter. 

Quite apart from what the verdict would say, on the presence of groups of voters beyond or at around 200 meters from stations,   there is a more practical aspect, that most of the time there aren’t more than 20 meters to dwellings.

In that case people will return to their houses in the sense of leaving the polling stations, and loiter in nearby areas whether it is the verandahs and corridors of living places – or those with some cash can take seats in bars and occupy themselves with pool, TV or reflect on the voting. 

But no law says each has to go to his actual house and remain there until the following morning. That would require a state of emergency and its manner of proclamation and enforcement is way different from what we are talking about at the moment. 

Here things are peaceful, people will leave polling centres and stay in the living quarters nearby and in so doing they will not break the law, so long as they make no move to interfere. 

Yes, the judiciary ruled out the matter yesterday but practically such a verdict appear to be more practicable in rural than urban areas.

SOURCE: THE GUARDIAN