Secret ballot - NOT!

C

crugers

Guest
I voted yesterday but I was not happy that the returning officer performed his/her duties appropriately!
The Electoral Act 1992 Section 94 (5) States that the returning officer shall provide...
(a) such number of compartments in which the voters can mark their ballot papers screened from observation, as he considers necessary...and
(c) a sufficient number of ballot boxes.
I would have thought that the words "screened from observation" would mean that any individual could not observe another voter marking their ballot without making a definite effort to do so.
And I would interpret "a sufficient number of ballot boxes" to mean that when a ballot is put into the box, it would, again, take a deliberate effort for the ballot to be retrieved.
In my case I did observe another voter marking their ballot on the referendum by merely adjusting my gaze. I felt very conscious that my secret ballot was not entirely secret despite my best efforts.
When depositing my ballots in the ballot box it was so full that even though I pushed the papers in twice, they still stuck out of the box and could have been removed without effort.
Gone were the old three sided plywood individual polling booths to be replaced by aluminium framed booths where voters were two to a booth using a triangular shelf slightly bigger than the referendum ballot paper.
Gone were the old square steel ballot boxes to be replaced by "stackable" plastic boxes which obviously didn't have the same capacity. With the new format ballot papers and the multiple poll, it should have been obvious that they would not be suitable for the volumes involved.
A consequence of the e-voting debacle?
"Could do better" would be my comment on the returning officers report card!
 
My polling station still had the old plywood booths but, as ever, there was no curtain which was something that I only thought about when I saw some TV footage from another EU country which had properly shielded booths. This did not worry me personally unduly but I can see how it could some people since voting privacy is fundamental to our democratic system. I wouldn't necessarily use this as an argument in favour of e-voting though.
 
Polling "booths"

The polling booths where I voted were a disgrace - they consisted of one table divided in four by partitions in an X shape. This was in the middle of the room beside the queue so at any one time the queue could easily see how two people were voting
 
The voting

I too experienced the 'booth' in the middle of the floor and anyone walking past could see who you were marking against - also I was not happy with the use of pencils to mark my choices - pencil marks are easily altered or replaced.

In some countries UN observers may have raised an eyebrow??
 
Re: The voting

Did anyone even see people being asked for id, the guy ahead of me handed in the wrong registration card (he had his and his son's) and only realised his mistake when he was on his way out.
 
In all the years I've been voting the polling stations that I've used have only ever provided pencils to mark the ballot papers. In relation to ID I've never been asked nor have I ever seen anybody else being asked. A letter to the Irish Times yesterday described the situation of a South African citizen living here who was eligible to vote in the local elections only but who, on presentation of the polling card, was handed papers for everything (local, EU and referendum). I can't understand why ID isn't always checked particularly given that there seem to be a large number of duplicate or erroneous polling cards issued. I mean - even deceased Colombian drug lord Paolo Escobar was issued one in Dublin this year... :\
 
Sorry - Pablo Escobar! I think Paolo was his Clerical Officer brother. ;)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top