THE ISSUE of a sanctified electoral list should be the concern of every Anguillian, and of people everywhere who want to see the upholding of democratic norms. Being unnecessarily defensive about the shortcoming of the current system is no way of solving the genuine problems, nor of addressing deep concerns and misgivings.
As we approach another electoral cycle some pertinent questions must be answered:
• Are the Recommendations made by the Independent Observers from the 2015 General Elections being implemented? If not, why not?
• Does the electoral process in Anguilla meet modern and international standards?
There has been a lot of talk about reforming the process – and a draft bill is supposedly sitting somewhere. It is yet to see the light of day that will have it subjected to a robust public debate. This is of such importance that it cannot be left to the last moment, or to a quick passage through the House of Assembly without deep scrutiny.
In spite of suggestions to the contrary, I have made myself available for discussions on the issue, and I still await formal guidance on many areas. The issue of electoral reform has come up in my regular scheduled meetings with the Governor whose office is fully aware of our ongoing concerns.
But we cannot be distracted from the real issues:
• the system as it stands, as I write, is so flawed that it is wide open to abuse and exploitation;
• everyone – and I mean everyone – should be doing everything they can to guard against exploitation, rather than putting all their energy into criticising my justifiable concerns.
The issue of proper identification of people on the voters list is one that we will continue to flag. It is absolutely central to the integrity of the voting system as a whole. The suggestion that there is already a satisfactory set procedure to follow, and that I can raise objections to names on the list, presupposes that we have a list that is in some semblance of order, and that will allow for an organised and detailed scrutiny.
The lack of a proper identification number for each elector makes the process of scanning the list not just inefficient and tedious, but for the most part pointless. There remain only a few places in the democratic, civilised world where people on a list go without identification numbers. But this is a glaring shortcoming of our system that was identified by the Observers in the 2015 election and we did not believe it was too much to hope that, when the office opened three years later, ID numbers would certainly have been added to the list. Nor do the electoral offices balk, as ours does, at making the numbers available to whatever citizens want to know. Demanding ID numbers is not unreasonable or unacceptable. Denying them is what is unacceptable.
The further suggestion, in other quarters, that my advocacy will seek to disenfranchise Anguillians is ludicrous at best. It is simply outright laughable. A proper list protects the sanctity of the vote of every Anguillian and resident who is legally qualified to vote – ensuring that their vote is not undermined, either by padding or by illegal entries.
Maybe the office of the Supervisor of Elections might also need to be bolstered, and maybe more resources could be put into the management and the execution of the system. We are not imputing any motive to anyone at this stage, but just warning that inefficiency and lack of attention represent a dangerous platform for hanky-panky.
Democracy is something that is worthy of our investment – and it works best in the sunshine. It is something worth fighting for. And I will fight for it without fear or favour!
