|
Part III THE ELECTION ITSELF Polling
It dawned very
early upon the Commission that polling in Sabah could not be commenced and
completed in one day as in the States of West Malaysia. Difficulty of
communications owing to nomination day.the absence of roads and problems
of personnel were the underlying reasons. The use of aircraft to transport
polling officials to the remote polling stations and back to the places of
count had to be ruled out as the costs involved were very prohibitive and
the aircraft were not available in suficient number. Even if they were
available, there was the problem of finding sufficient air strips and
landing grounds. If all these difficulties could be overcome, there was
still the problem of finding enought personal of the right calibre to man
the numerous polling stations. Altogether there were not less than 600
polling stations each of which was to be manned by at least three
officials. In some remote areas, a polling station was assigned to serve
as little as 20 electors.The staff available for polling duties were based
mainly in the Residency headquarters. A very limited number
There was clearly no alternative but to stagger the dates of poll and use the limited number of polling teams available over and over again to complete the polling in the remote constituencies. In spite of this extended period of poll polling at each polling was in fact commenced and completed in one day in most urban in the constituencies polling was completed on the first polling day.
Thus the law pertaining to conduct of elections, namely the Elections (Conduct of Elections) Regulations, (Sabah) 1966, was framed to provide for the holding of poll in the State on more than one day.
The first polling day was 8th April. 1967 and the last polling day was 23rd April, 1967, Details of polling dates. and the number of polling stations by constituencies are shown in Appendix H to the Report. Mobile Polling Teams
As a result of the decision to hold polling in the remote constituencies on staggered dates and in order to minimise the costs involved and maximise the use of the limited number of staff available it became necessary to resort to the use of mobile polling postal teams. A mobile team was assigned several polling stations. Generally a mobile tearn commenced operation at the farthest polling station and then worked its way back to headquarters stopping at every polling station on the way and operating thereat in turn until all the polling stations assigned to it had been covered. Because the journey between one polling station and the next took some time. an adequate interval had to be allowed to the mobile teams for travelling between polling stations.
Although the same mobile team covered different polling stations, it used a seperate ballot box at each polling station. Security of these ballot boxes was taken care of through the perpetual attendance of the Police up to the time these boxes safely arrived at the place of count.
The period covered by these mobil teams varied from as little as 2 days to as long as 20 days, for example in Pensiangan sook. it is worth mentioning that the teams did remarkably well under extremely hazardous and tiring conditions. Manner of poning---Turnout
Polling hours varied from polling station to polling station depending on the number of electors assigned to each. On the polling hours were from 8 or 9 a.m.to 5 or 6 p.m. In some of the urban constituencies polling closed at 8 p.m These polling hours were published in the State Gazette and widely published.
There was very heavy polling with long queues of voters waiting to take turns at the larger polling stations as soon they were opened. Most polling stations had, however, completed polling by mid-day and were deserted for the rest of the day. In rural areas, where the electorate was small, polling was completed very early.
The highest Percentage of polling was recorder in pepar constituency where 95.6% of the electorate voted. The lowest was in Sugut constituency which registered 80.9%.
It is apparent that the turnout of voters in this election was exceptionally high. it surpassed even the highest ever recorded in elections in West Malaysia.
Polling was generally orderly and without serious incidents featured only by the remarkable turnout of voters and good humour and excellent co-operation. Exceptions were, however, noted in one constituency where, due to the keen rivalry of the opposing candidates, reinforced by party activities, great tension and election fever resulted. Nevertheless, the situation was brought under control through the efforts of the Police Force. It must be mentioned that police personal were stationed oll the polling stations to maintain law and public order without which a peaceful election could not be guaranteed.
At the close of poll. the ballot boxes were sealed by the presiding officers in the presence of the polling agents and transported back with police escort to the places of count. Counting.
The law requires that counting of votes shall be carried out as soon as practicable after all the ballot boxes relating to the constituency have been received by the returning officer. There was, therefore, no question of holding the count on the same day simultaneously in respect of all the constituencies as it will be noted that some constituencies would have completed polling very much later than the others. Moreover, notwithstanding the provisions of the law, to keed in storage those ballot boxes received early for a number of days pending the count would be a task too heavy to be shouldered by the responsible authorities ensuring that the safe custody of the ballot boxes was beyond reproach. It would be necessary to showhat that the boxes were secured, that the places of storage were accessible to the general public round the clock and that they were under constant police guard.
In view of the express provision of the law as earlier on stated, the Commission therefore decided that counting must be carried out constituency-wise as soon as polling was completed in each case and all the ballot boxes relating thereto had been received.
Certain quarters levelled criticisms publicly against the decision of the Commission. They alleged that staggered polling (and naturally, staggered counting) would defeat the democratic principle of a free, unbiased and impartial election. They advocated the holding of simultaneous counting so as to prevent the results in constituencies which had completed earlier from unduly influencing voters in the remaining constituencies. The Election Commission wish here to refute those allegations. It is preposterous to suggest that staggered polling and counting would defeat the democratic principle of a free and unbi election. The staggering of polling and counting is devoid of any element to coerce or force voters into voting against their free will. The secrecy of the ballot was still intact. As to the charges of undue influence, the Commission failto appreciate their validity. It is the considered opinion of the Commission that the voter would orded have made up his mind as to which candidate he wished to vote for long before polling commenced.
Appendix I details by constituency, the dates, time and places of the count.
The counting was well carried out by the returning officers and their counting staff. The returning officers were advised to use entstheir wide discretion in determining good or bad ballot papers.In view of the illiteracy of the great majority of the the voters it was too much to expect them to mark the ballot papers strictly in accordance with the manner required by the ragulation The number of rejected votes was 3,694 out of a total of 162.329 or 2.3% which was a low figure by any standard. This indicated that the electors in Sabah. were generally intelligent and understood the manner of voting well. Results
Results were relayed to the Supervisor of Elections, Sabah as soon as they were obtained, Those members of the general public who witnessed the counting at the counting centres obtained the results at first hand. The rest of the public either obtained the results immediately after each count through the radio or early the next day through newspapers. The first result was received from the constituency of Tenom at about 11 p.m. on the night of 8th April, 1967 The last to come in was from the constituency of Sipitang Ulu Padas at 11 a.m. on 27th April, 1967. There were no re-counts in any constituency.
The names of the candidates in contested constituencies and the votes they polled appear in Appendix J.
A total of 17 candidates (all Independents) lost their deposits of $250 each for failure to obtain one-eighth of the number of valid votes polled.
These results were published in the State Gazette on 10th May, 1967.
There had been numerous reports made to the police under the election Election Offences Ordinance. These ranged from minor offences such as mischief to posters, banners, etc. and canvassing offences, to the more serious ones such as Bassaults, threats and corruption. All these reports were under police investigation. Election Petitions
Four election petitions were filed. These were against the successful candidates in the constituencies of Sandakan Lahad Datu, Ranau and Bengkoka-Banggi. The following grounds of petitions were submitted. In respect of Sandakan Bandar the desire to petitioner, inter-atia, alleged that the nomination papers of the successful candidate were falsely executed and that the statutory declaration had not been cancelled in the manner prescribed by law. It further alleged that general bribery was committed in connection with the said election by the said candidate. In the petition relating to Lahad Datu, the petitioner prayed that returning officer was wrong when he rejected the nomination papers of the petitioner (see under Nomination). In the petition relating to Ranau, the petitioner parties alleged that the successful candidate had contrzvened section 26 (2)and (4) of the Election Offences Ordinance. In the last-named carried petition, bribery, undue influence, genelan intimidation and misconduct were cited as grounds by the defeated candidate who was services the petitioner. All these four petitions contained a prayer that it might be determined that the successful candidates were not elected and that the election in those constituencies was void.
Up to the time of writing, hearing of these petitions had been fixed by the Election Judge whose appointment had been gazetted on 15th April, 1967. Conclusion
It is outside the scope of this Commission to comment on the reasons why voters chose a particular candidate or party at this election. To find the answer, readers must rely on other sources of information such as party manifestos and newspaper reports or make some other analytical studies of their own.
From the point of view of administering the election, the Commission is satisfied that it had been successfully carried out despite the many shortcomings and difficulties in the way such as problems of transportation and the limited and uneven distri bution of the staff available. The time allotted to the Commission to bring the election in Sabah to its completion was limited Commission had in the first instance to carrv out the first delimitation of constituencies in Sabah and the first registration of the State's electors. All these were completed in less than two years-a short period indeed under any circumstances.
The results of this election, however, brought one prominent fact to light, namely, that the charges of undue influence resulting out of staggered counting were false as evidenced by the summary of results shown in Appendix K. If the charges the results would have indicated a bigger swing in favour of the political party which was in the lead in the first few days of polling.
The Election Commission concede that defects and shortcomings did exist in certain operations but it must be remembered that this election was held for the first time and done in haste. Thus, problems arising out of unfamiliarities naturally confronted the Commission. These were lessons lernt and would be put to good use in future elections.
The fantastic turn-out of voters was a remarkable achievement. It showed to the world that the people of Sabah know what want. It indicated their keeness to participate in the process of democratic government and being people of a free nation, they stand side by side with the people of other free nations in their desire to uphold the principles of democracy. >> back << |