The Importance of Revisiting the New Mixed Electoral Process

(Through revisiting the earlier comment on the concluded local Government Election)

The Election Commission has just concluded the process of electing the members for the local government bodies that are going to administer its voters; the hurried in a rather slip shot way and hence the voters have no clue whatsoever what ward or constituency they belong to or the candidate they voted for, and more pathetically the electors does not know who they have elected for their unknown ward or electorate! Yes, the polling card issued to the voters bears the name of the ward the same voter belongs. 

A political double way pressure first to delay and then to expedite the election rather unnecessarily, a rather pathetically hilarious situation when considering the blatant claim that that the Election Commission is Independent of Political Authority after the Nineteenth Amendment to the Constitution.

 The reason for the political authority holding the strings until the last moment or rather with a pretext of - the shift of electoral process from absolute proportional system to mixed electoral system that mixes both the process that have been practiced in Sri Lanka, one that was just replaced and the other one was just 37 years ago. Anyhow The Election Commission should be commended for applying the new electoral process for the election and selection of increased numbers of members 8300 odd for 340 bodies, though with some acrimonious reservations! Chairman of Commissioner may be exhausted and deserves a lengthy rest for withstanding the maneuvering political pressure of the past and future for the ultimate electoral Process emerges.   

My emphasizing point here is, that a candidate for an electorate should not be masquerading as a symbol to be elected.  

Majority of the Politicians of South East Asian Countries wanted to sustain power at all costs for the greed of power aimed at greedy wealth – they see winner politics as a wealth accumulating means and apply all the dirty tricks available to secure the winner position! Violence is a common trick during electioneering. 

The super greedy Sri Lankan politicians have gone a step ahead are constantly meddling with electoral process itself to hold on to the power for the reasons above. When UNP regime without foreseeing or considering the demerits of the absolute PR system that were well discussed among educated elite prowess and the universities – went ahead with the disastrous change as a show of 5/6 strength majority.

Disastrous consequences felt since were

1)      the voter not recognizing his or her actual representative

2)       pitched violence among the candidates irrespective of opposing or same party candidates

3)      Winner candidate becoming irresponsible towards the voter needs – through escapism by virtue of many members representing a single larger electorate

4)      A single larger electorate inducts severe competition among the candidates and that in  indulges

a.      Pitched violence b. very expensive electioneering and c. costs need of huge manpower

Equal distribution of ethnic representation is the only advantage the absolute PR system carried, against the all the above-mentioned constraints that in turn emancipated many catastrophic social evils – being part of drug trafficking, illicit liquor distilling, bribe, fraud, and corruption,  in order to meet the ends, demanded by a. to c.  Stated in above 4).

The way mixed electoral process applied in the just concluded election virtually has not addressed the constraints properly though to a certain extent 2) and 4) of above.

 Therefore it is emphasized here that reverting back to total PR system is an absolute disastrous towards social responsibility.  

In respect to No 1) above I strongly condemn the Election Commission (EC) for not promoting  to the ballot paper samples of First Past the Post System put out by Department of Elections 41 years ago that would have enabled the voters to identify their ward or electorate with its candidate; I also strongly condemn the EC for failing to apply the procedure that was available in the just replaced absolute proportional system enabling the voter the  all-important candidate identity, though one of the reasons this system to be replaced was lack of proper identification of candidates in the ballot paper which had numbers properly displayed by each party; though inability of the EC clearly an outcome of a maneuvering political pressure politicians squandering preference to the PR system character that it would not easily reject as in FPP and to masquerade the good and bad the character of the candidates behind a symbol in the mixed system.

Election violence is a senseless Human behaviour, which has to be thwarted only through stringent implementation law and order, rather than compromising the best and basic procedures of polling processes. 

Though just concluded local government election was reported to be peaceful to an extent – post-election violence flared up not lesser than of previous elections, thus peaceful pre-election violence cannot be attributed to change of electoral process anyway but the manner the law and order were applied, thanks to the Election Commission!

The reason for removing the preferential voting criteria was that it inducted rivalry and pitched violence within the same party ranks, which does not mean any way that voter discretion for individual candidates of opposing parties has to be completely blocked.

It is the basic right of a voter to identify the candidate to whom she or he is going to cast her/his vote and it is the sole responsibility of the Election Commission for enabling or facilitate the identification of the candidate to the voter on a Ballot Paper, minimum by the name.

In one of my written proposals to Mixed Electoral Process, I have argued that a candidate lost for election in the ward contest should not be considered for selection through the PRS part of the process. Though this methodology appropriates the real purpose of an election Sri Lankan politicians have set aside this proposal for their own convenience – but have stuck onto the handing over of two sets of name list at the nomination level demanded only by the same criteria with some vested interest- in order to stay more proxy of PR system even though the so claimed mixed electoral process of FPPS and PRS.    

Further, it is a citizen’s basic right to decide upon whether to contest a single ward or electorate or as a group to group of wards – Individuals discretion to serve lonely to a ward or an electorate cannot be hindered by election rules. There are qualified professionals men and women who opt to serve their ward or electorate alone rather than committing into a group. Likewise, a party symbol alone cannot be allowed to obscure the individual popularity or the character or vice versa through the Ballot Paper served to cast the vote.   

My emphasizing point here is in order to ensure the Identity of the candidate the new mixed electoral process basically should emanate from the Ballot Paper Models of prior 1977 FPPS, that ensures the winner representative of an electorate known publically, as soon as the counting is over and then the PRS be applied to all those lost the election by pooling all losing vote of the area major against the total voter turnout of the same area calculating and preparing a merit list of percentage. (https://mahadevafreelancevetrinarian.blogspot.com/2017/10/blatant-miss-calculation-by-minority.html)

The best-suited proportion for mixed electoral process FPPS to PRS is 70:30 here the political parties have meddled too heavily to spoil it, that is why it is emphasized to leave the Election Commission and its prowess along with the permanent Delimitation Committee as independent organizations, so that the expertise formulate an appropriate Electoral Process for the nation free of any political pressure. Any complaint against the expert formulation the expert committee shall explain the merits to the Parliament’s special committee. 

It should not be compulsory to submit two different lists on nominations-  it should only be the Political Parties’ discretion, but all political parties shall submit PRS selection list within 48 hours of completion of the FPPS part of the Mixed Electoral Process so that to be eligible for PRS part selection of members.  In such an arrangement both an individual as well as a group of independent candidates accommodated for election and afterward selection if requested by the same group. There shouldn’t be any need for floating number members – it should be a strict rigid number for particular body = Parliament or Local body. Deviation merit** list based on the losers’ vote count distance against the mean number* needed to be elected will decide the selection or rejection – best performing candidate amongst the 5% minimum qualifiers becomes eligible for membership in the ruling body, so that every political party obtaining more than 5% vote (or any less number of percentage stipulated EC) need not be accommodated for PRS selection.

*mean number needed to be elected = Total number of votes cast ÷ number members of local body

**Closer the votes received to mean number needed to be elected becomes better of the next.

Mixed Electoral Process shall not carry any Multimember Constituency, particularly for smaller Pradeshiya Sabbhas. It is quite an absurdity to have increased the number of members for Pradeshiya Sabbhas almost double fold in order to accommodate the new mixed electoral process – this is just another political bribing manipulation; 336 Pradeshiya Sabbhas had 4486 members equaling 13.3 per Pradeshiya Sabha, which has now increased to 24.5 through 341 Pradeshiya Sabbhas holding 8356 members, whereas just around 15 to 16 per Pradeshiya Sabha would have justifiably satisfied the accommodation  of New Mixed Electoral Process with whatever the percentage of FPPS to PRS.   

It is the sole responsibility of the Election Commission to ensure the voters cast the votes to an appropriate person (s) without any external influence by providing enough identity of candidates otherwise there is no any purpose in the mixed electoral process. Mere one Gazette notification and exhibiting photos of candidates at the Polling Booth will not reach entire voters and hence the beneficiaries of representatives in thousands.

An Electoral Process belongs to the voter, and political parties cannot meddle with it to unfair advantages!