<<Print>>

The “No verification, no vote” challenges that confronted the 2012 elections may be put to rest during the November 7 polls as the Electoral Commission(EC) develops a system to capture the data of all those whose fingerprints the machine is unable  to capture.

When implemented, the manual verification is expected to clear one of the nightmares of the EC which was accused of failing to implement a rule it stated in the law (CI 72) that regulated the 2012 elections.
The system has, however, been met with mixed reactions from the various political parties.

In interviews with the Daily Graphic, while the National Democratic Congress (NDC) and the People’s National Convention (PNC) agrees with the EC, the New Patriotic Party (NPP) is yet to take a firm decision.

The Progressive Peoples Party (PPP), however, has rejected the process, saying it could create a bypass for some parties to exploit loopholes.  

The process starts with the scanning of the bar code of the voter to confirm the authenticity of his or her voter identification card.

From there, the voter fills a form which requires him or her to state whether the machine was able to pick any of his or her 10 fingers.

A source that attended the last Inter-Party Advisory Committee (IPAC) meeting hinted the Daily Graphic that the process was discussed at the committee’s last meeting last week.

The source said during the meeting, the EC had told the parties that the power to approve who goes through the new process was in the hands of its presiding officers but the parties disagreed insisting that their polling agents should be part of the process.

“We pointed it out to the EC that it was possible for presiding officers in the strongholds of some of the parties to abuse the system and even try to disqualify people so the party agents must be part. If majority of the agents agree then the person can go through the system.

“But the presiding officer will be allowed to handle the process with party agents signing to confirm it alongside the presiding officer,” the source said.

“No verification no vote”

The “no verification, no vote “process was introduced during the 2012 election when fingers of voters were verified by a biometric machine to confirm their identity before they were allowed to cast their ballot.

It was meant to prevent impersonation and multiple voting that some of the parties alleged happened in previous elections.

In the 2012 election, there were glitches in some areas where voters were allegedly allowed to vote without being verified by the machines.

2012 election petition & verification

The issue of no verification, no vote became a subject of litigation during the historic Supreme Court election petition filed by the presidential candidate of the NPP, Nana Addo Dankwa Akufo-Addo, and two others, after the 2012 general election.

The petitioners argued that about a million people voted without going through the process of biometric verification and had prayed the apex court to cancel those votes.

In ruling, the presiding judge, Justice William Atuguba, said, “…The complaint about voting without biometric verification cannot, in addition to the foregoing reasons, therefore hold in the absence of some other contrary evidence. In the circumstances, I do not think that the petitioners have established their allegation of voting without biometric verification, except to the limited extent admitted by the Chairman of the Electoral Commission, which cannot impact much on the declared results.”

The court, however, urged the EC to introduce reforms that would address the issue in subsequent elections.

Following that, the EC formed the Electoral Reforms Committee to help formulate a more credible election process that ensures outcome of polls are generally acceptable to all political parties.

Reactions

With the elections some five months away, there is still some scepticism about the EC’s proposal for verification.

NPP

The NPP is cautious about the proposal, as its Director of Elections, Mr Martin Agyei Korsah, told the Daily Graphic that the party was “considering it”.

“We will come out with a position. We are not yet done.  We are considering it. It came up at the last IPAC meeting,” he said.

PPP

The PPP’s Director of Communications, Mr Kofi Asamoah-Siaw, however, took a bold stance, rejecting the process.

“We think that this defeats the purpose of the verification machines. It is not going to complement the current system but rather create a bypass.”

According to him, the manual verification would create opportunity for some people who want to cheat to do so.

“What we will suggest is that the EC should be able to identify those whose fingers cannot be captured by the machine ahead of time so that the presiding officers and party agents would know those who have the challenge of their fingerprints not being captured to be allowed to use the manual verification form.”

When it was pointed out to him that the bar codes of the voter identification card would be scanned, he said the problem was with whether the EC would store the data of the scanned cards.

“Our position is that the effect of the scanning should be the same as the use of the verification machine so that it will be recorded.”

He also said the current system would only complicate issues, increase cost of the elections as well as results as “a lot of time would be wasted counting forms”.

But the Director of Communications of the PNC, Mr Emmanuel Wilson, said the time wasted would be better than chaos created at polling stations because of issues about verification.

“We support it totally. Our only caveat is that the EC should allow party agents to be part of the process for the sake of transparency and also to prevent possible abuse,” he said.

NDC

The NDC also shared a similar position.  The party’s National Organiser, Mr Kofi Adams, said the party had initially agreed on the “no verification, no vote” position but had to make a U-turn because the EC made a strong case on the grounds that the machines may not function 100 per cent and that no voter should be disenfranchised through no fault of theirs.

According to him, if the machines were to work 99.9 per cent, the 0.1 per cent could still make a difference and should not be disenfranchised.