Atiwa, Akwatia danger signals for 2012

The Atiwa parliamentary election revealed nothing new. That alleged NDC tactic was first rehearsed, under the able triumvirate command of Ofosu Ampofo, Baba Jamal and Aseidu Nketia at Akwatia in 2009.

Like Atiwa last Tuesday, it had no hope of bringing electoral victory but as a rehearsal for 2012 it was an excellent exercise. It succeeded in making the point – that, intimidation pays.

First, the milieu of intimidation, harassment and vote-buying allegations managed to do two main things: it frightened some NPP voters away from the polling station, leading to a low voter turnout. Also, it increased, albeit marginally, NDC votes in the two places.

As the Cheriponi by-election showed, where the seat is marginal, such an extra-electoral tactic can have a telling effect on the results. It is tempting to say that in a general election, it would be nigh impractical for the ruling party to be able to deploy used clothes, thugs and loyal security agents across all the expected 22,000 polling stations.

But, that would not be necessary. The ultimate prize is the presidential ballot. The NDC can be expected not to spread its resources thin. Their tactic then will be to concentrate force and resources at the NPP strongholds, reducing security presence in areas where the NDC is already in control.

Ostensibly, they have already given notice that for the Ashanti Region Government will insure a strict one-man-one-vote policy. This could certainly be the kind of legitimate cover needed to unleash the kind of intimidation, violence and mayhem that we have witnessed in Akwatia and Atiwa.

The results, predictably, if successful, would lead to low voter turnout in NPP strongholds. This, as we saw in Atiwa this week, would not be fatal for the parliamentary fortunes of the opposition party. But, it could be fatal to the presidential ballot, where a mere swing of 20,300 votes the other way could have seen Akufo-Addo at the Jubilee House and crisis in the NDC.

What is even more dangerous is how the NPP intends to respond to this electoral hooliganism. There is certainly no way that the NPP, which controls about half of the country, can be expected to just lie down and take this kind of electoral thuggery. Should we, especially civil society, sit down, arms folded, and allow the doctrine of bumper-to-bumper strategem to define the electoral make-up of 2012?

It may be lost on the majority of Ghanaians but we are gradually procuring the ingredients for an electoral gourmet of violence in 2012; it could be served hot and plenty, consuming our democracy and all its promises.

In an article that I wrote for the Summer/Fall edition of the Georgetown Journal of International Affairs, I make the point that “The reason why Ghana came perilously close to election violence was ultimately because there was so little confidence in the electoral system’s ability to withstand manipulation and still produce valid results. Once established, the distrust of the electoral system is difficult to overcome.”

The article recognises that there has probably never been a perfect election anywhere in the world, but if democracy in Africa is to succeed, it will require solutions which undermine it:

“These may include a bloated voter register, ballot box stuffing, theft or destruction, multiple voting, voter impersonation, spoilt ballots, intimidation and violence at the polling station, alteration of counted ballots before declaration, and manipulation of results during the long periods between the closure of polls and the declaration of results.”

Violence and intimidation at the polling station occur for one reason only — rigging. The incentive for that is to create an opportunity for vote rigging by any of the methods listed above. So, the solution is to deny the perpetrators the oxygen of incentive. Take that away and make violence and intimidation redundant.

A May 12, 2009 joint declaration by the political parties and the Electoral Commission settled on the commission compiling a new voter register based on biometrics with the intention of removing from the equation the issue of a bloated voter register. The EC drew up a programme which would have led to a pilot scheme this year and a nationwide biometric voter registration exercise next year.

As I write, there is no indication that the 2011 national budget to be read in two months time will make provisions for that critical exercise. Without a credible voter register Ghana risks returning to the brink of violence and there is no guarantee that in 2012 we would again avoid crossing that threshold from brink to full-blown civil unrest.

In 2008, what saved the country after December 28 was the fact that the razor-thin results were declared in favour of the opposition presidential candidate. What if for 2012, no significant changes take place to enhance the integrity of the voting system, the NPP assumes a similar dangerous posture as the NDC in 2008 and this time around the results are declared for the ruling party?

A biometric voter register will undoubtedly take care of the historical issue of a bloated voter register (through multiple registration and impersonation), since we all have unique biometric details.

But, as the 3-day February conference of civil society and political parties on biometric voter register and e-voting pointed out, “Our electoral system will be more democratic, credible, less costly, and free from errors, delays, violence, fraud, intimidation and other electoral malpractices that frequently undermine the credibility and general public acceptance of our elections, if we institute a biometric registration and electronic voting system in Ghana.”

That conference analysed the viability of e-voting in Ghana and settled on the Electronic Voting Machines of India as best suited for Ghana. However, in the Georgetown University article, I make the extra point that EVMs of India would require some modifications to tackle inherent electoral problems in Ghana. However, we may not have to go e-voting as the EC itself is not prepared to go beyond biometric voter credentialisation. E-voter ID yes. E-voting, not yet – has been the clear message from the EC.

I am currently in the United States undertaken further research in electoral systems but what is so clear even now is that by merely providing a biometric voter ID the best that can do is to reduce rigging to the actual number of voter population – minus ghost names. But, it would not stop thugs from preventing polling agents and voters from the polling stations and for those thugs to vote on behalf of the denied actual voters.

Thus, unless the human factor is reduced to the barest minimum, from the process of authenticating voters and an automation system linked to biometric authentication that is linked to the clearance for voting put in place, the incentive for violence and intimidation will remain.

What this means is that the EC should not just stop at the issuance of a biometric voter ID. It should put in place at all 22,000 polling stations a verification system that can be directly linked to the all-clear being electronically given to a person to vote. Except, of course, the voting itself, in line with the EC’s preference, need not be electronic.

I argue in the said journal, “In that sense, a better example for Ghana to follow is Jamaica. In 2007, the Electoral Office of Jamaica implemented the Electronic Voter Identification and Ballot System (EVIBIS). The main objectives of EVIBIS are to prevent impersonation of a voter, multiple voting by individuals, and the use of unauthenticated ballots. With EVIBIS, registered electors are identified and verified at the polling station by using their fingerprints, it is only after which the system issues authenticated ballots for voting. The voter then proceeds to vote [manually] using a paper ballot. The issuing of paper ballots is [thus] directly linked to the biometric authentication process, which is crucial to resolving the issue of biased human influence in elections.”

In this case, Afari Gyan’s dead grandmother can vote without any e-fear. The voter need not be compelled to use any electronic system. We ignore this, I fear, at our peril. Our democracy needs to be saved and now.

Source: GABBY ASARE OTCHERE-DARKO