Tweet
How could you, Mr Peralto?
Tuesday, September 18, 2007
The Jamaica Labour Party (JLP) may very well have a point in law supporting its position to block the counting now of two ballot boxes in the South East St Mary constituency.
But even while we understand the suspicion that would have accompanied news of the existence of these two boxes, especially because the information emanated from the JLP's political opponents, the fact is that the Electoral Office of Jamaica (EOJ) has come forward and accepted responsibility for the error.
In fact, not only did the EOJ admit that it erred, the office has apologised. This, we believe, should provide Mr Tarn Peralto, the JLP candidate affected by the problem, and his lawyers, with enough comfort and confidence to support the counting of the votes in the boxes.
According to the EOJ, the boxes, which contain votes cast by election day workers and members of the security forces, were returned, among 282 boxes, to its 43 Duke Street office on August 28, the day both sets of people voted.
"The two boxes in question," the EOJ said, "arrived without the keys to open them and while waiting for a tool to cut the locks we proceeded to count other boxes. We did not complete counting the remaining boxes until after 2:00 am and inadvertently stored these uncounted boxes with the counted boxes."
The EOJ was at pains to point out that two members each of the People's National Party and the JLP observed the receiving, opening, sorting and counting of all ballots from election day workers, police and soldiers, and that before the early morning end of the count, they were "all of the view that all boxes were opened, sorted and counted".
We have no reason to doubt the explanation advanced by the EOJ as to why the boxes were not counted. And given the EOJ's demonstrated commitment to ensuring the integrity of the electoral process over the past 20 years, we don't believe that it would do anything to tarnish the reputation for fairness that it has worked so hard to achieve.
By obtaining a court injunction blocking the counting of the ballots in the two boxes, Mr Peralto and his lawyers are painting an unkind image of the JLP in relation to the party's respect for the electoral process.
For the suggestion is that Mr Peralto is more concerned about his personal fortunes than about the democratic process and the integrity of the election machinery.
Unless he knows something that the rest of us don't, Mr Peralto might still find that he enjoys the majority of the votes in these two ill-fated boxes. We are left to wonder what does he really fear?
That aside, one possible way of amicably resolving the matter is by accommodating a recasting of the ballots by election day workers and members of the security forces in that constituency.
The court will no doubt treat this matter with the urgency it deserves, and we expect that its ruling will be respected by both parties.
Whatever the decision, it is important that the outcome of the vote reflects the will of the majority.
Tuesday, September 18, 2007
The Jamaica Labour Party (JLP) may very well have a point in law supporting its position to block the counting now of two ballot boxes in the South East St Mary constituency.
But even while we understand the suspicion that would have accompanied news of the existence of these two boxes, especially because the information emanated from the JLP's political opponents, the fact is that the Electoral Office of Jamaica (EOJ) has come forward and accepted responsibility for the error.
In fact, not only did the EOJ admit that it erred, the office has apologised. This, we believe, should provide Mr Tarn Peralto, the JLP candidate affected by the problem, and his lawyers, with enough comfort and confidence to support the counting of the votes in the boxes.
According to the EOJ, the boxes, which contain votes cast by election day workers and members of the security forces, were returned, among 282 boxes, to its 43 Duke Street office on August 28, the day both sets of people voted.
"The two boxes in question," the EOJ said, "arrived without the keys to open them and while waiting for a tool to cut the locks we proceeded to count other boxes. We did not complete counting the remaining boxes until after 2:00 am and inadvertently stored these uncounted boxes with the counted boxes."
The EOJ was at pains to point out that two members each of the People's National Party and the JLP observed the receiving, opening, sorting and counting of all ballots from election day workers, police and soldiers, and that before the early morning end of the count, they were "all of the view that all boxes were opened, sorted and counted".
We have no reason to doubt the explanation advanced by the EOJ as to why the boxes were not counted. And given the EOJ's demonstrated commitment to ensuring the integrity of the electoral process over the past 20 years, we don't believe that it would do anything to tarnish the reputation for fairness that it has worked so hard to achieve.
By obtaining a court injunction blocking the counting of the ballots in the two boxes, Mr Peralto and his lawyers are painting an unkind image of the JLP in relation to the party's respect for the electoral process.
For the suggestion is that Mr Peralto is more concerned about his personal fortunes than about the democratic process and the integrity of the election machinery.
Unless he knows something that the rest of us don't, Mr Peralto might still find that he enjoys the majority of the votes in these two ill-fated boxes. We are left to wonder what does he really fear?
That aside, one possible way of amicably resolving the matter is by accommodating a recasting of the ballots by election day workers and members of the security forces in that constituency.
The court will no doubt treat this matter with the urgency it deserves, and we expect that its ruling will be respected by both parties.
Whatever the decision, it is important that the outcome of the vote reflects the will of the majority.
Karl yuh haffi wake up, shake off sleep and slumber.
Comment