Dear Editor,
I am compelled to respond to your article appearing Monday, March 25, 2013 entitled "ECJ to look at ballot validity issue" for the simple reason that some readers may be left with the view that ballots are declared rejected for the sole reason that they are marked otherwise than by using the prescribed symbol 'X'.
The respective provision as contained in The Representation of People Act, Section 44/2, the Parish Council Act, Section 40/2, and the Kingston and St Andrew Corporation Act, Section 62/2 allows for a Presiding Officer in counting the votes to reject all ballots;
(1) Which have not been supplied by him.
(2) Which have not been marked for any candidate.
(3) On which the elector has marked for more than one candidate, and
(4) On which there is any writing or mark by which the voter could be identified. Such markings would be those placed on the ballot by the voter which would serve to identify him.
The law also requires that the ballot be marked "by making a cross with a black lead pencil within the space containing the name of the candidate for whom he intends to vote..." ('He' being the elector), Representation of the People Act, Section 35/3, Parish Council Act, Section 31/3 and Kingston and St Andrew Act, Section 53/3.
All of the above stated, represents the totality of conditions under which ballots are rejected. There is also a clear distinction between a ballot declared 'rejected' and a ballot that is deemed 'spoilt'. A ballot is declared 'rejected' by the Presiding Officer if it fits into any of the categories described above. A 'spoilt' ballot on the other hand is a ballot paper which is given to an elector by the Presiding Officer which the elector then returns to the Presiding Officer with the claim that he has spoilt it through his own inadvertence. This ballot is further rendered spoilt by the Presiding Officer who punctures it, writes the word "SPOILT" on it, and immediately issues another to the elector in its stead.
These two terminologies are often confused and misapplied.
Your article makes reference to several constituencies or electoral division giving specific figures of the margin of votes secured by the winning candidate and where at the vote and the number of ballot declared rejected. This, I believe, in the absence of more information may create an impression that those ballots were rejected because the Electoral Commission of Jamaica (ECJ) has been, as quoted in the article, "slavishly" adhering to the particular provision that requires the ballot to be marked using the symbol 'X', and not as a result of the several other conditions that are clearly expressed in the electoral law.
The Presiding Officer's decision even though final at the Preliminary Count, may be overturned at the Final Count by the Returning Officer whose decision may also be overturned by the Resident Magistrate at the Magisterial Recount. Therefore, at every level, the decision made at the previous level may be either upheld or overturned.
Finally, the experience of the Electoral Office is that the majority of ballots rejected are not as a result of the "X" being improperly marked, but from electors violating one or more of the other conditions listed above.
Orrette Fisher
Director of Elections
How ballots are rejected
-->
I am compelled to respond to your article appearing Monday, March 25, 2013 entitled "ECJ to look at ballot validity issue" for the simple reason that some readers may be left with the view that ballots are declared rejected for the sole reason that they are marked otherwise than by using the prescribed symbol 'X'.
The respective provision as contained in The Representation of People Act, Section 44/2, the Parish Council Act, Section 40/2, and the Kingston and St Andrew Corporation Act, Section 62/2 allows for a Presiding Officer in counting the votes to reject all ballots;
(1) Which have not been supplied by him.
(2) Which have not been marked for any candidate.
(3) On which the elector has marked for more than one candidate, and
(4) On which there is any writing or mark by which the voter could be identified. Such markings would be those placed on the ballot by the voter which would serve to identify him.
The law also requires that the ballot be marked "by making a cross with a black lead pencil within the space containing the name of the candidate for whom he intends to vote..." ('He' being the elector), Representation of the People Act, Section 35/3, Parish Council Act, Section 31/3 and Kingston and St Andrew Act, Section 53/3.
All of the above stated, represents the totality of conditions under which ballots are rejected. There is also a clear distinction between a ballot declared 'rejected' and a ballot that is deemed 'spoilt'. A ballot is declared 'rejected' by the Presiding Officer if it fits into any of the categories described above. A 'spoilt' ballot on the other hand is a ballot paper which is given to an elector by the Presiding Officer which the elector then returns to the Presiding Officer with the claim that he has spoilt it through his own inadvertence. This ballot is further rendered spoilt by the Presiding Officer who punctures it, writes the word "SPOILT" on it, and immediately issues another to the elector in its stead.
These two terminologies are often confused and misapplied.
Your article makes reference to several constituencies or electoral division giving specific figures of the margin of votes secured by the winning candidate and where at the vote and the number of ballot declared rejected. This, I believe, in the absence of more information may create an impression that those ballots were rejected because the Electoral Commission of Jamaica (ECJ) has been, as quoted in the article, "slavishly" adhering to the particular provision that requires the ballot to be marked using the symbol 'X', and not as a result of the several other conditions that are clearly expressed in the electoral law.
The Presiding Officer's decision even though final at the Preliminary Count, may be overturned at the Final Count by the Returning Officer whose decision may also be overturned by the Resident Magistrate at the Magisterial Recount. Therefore, at every level, the decision made at the previous level may be either upheld or overturned.
Finally, the experience of the Electoral Office is that the majority of ballots rejected are not as a result of the "X" being improperly marked, but from electors violating one or more of the other conditions listed above.
Orrette Fisher
Director of Elections
How ballots are rejected
-->