Thursday 28 Mar 2024
By
main news image

This article first appeared in The Edge Financial Daily on May 7, 2018

KUALA LUMPUR: The Election Commission (EC) is responsible for 10 electoral crimes, according to preliminary findings of the electoral reform group Bersih 2.0 on the electoral process and system’s integrity in the 14th general election (GE14).

These findings are based on the group’s ongoing monitoring of the electoral system since 2006 and the Pemantau (election observers) campaign focusing on election offences in the past six months, Bersih 2.0 acting chairman Shahrul Aman Mohd Saari said at a press conference yesterday.

“Bersih 2.0 concludes that  the EC of Malaysia has failed to command public confidence in managing the electoral process and system of Malaysia, in particular for GE14. The EC’s seven members — Tan Sri Mohd Hashim Abdullah, Othman Haji Mahmood, Md Yusop Haji Mansor, Abdul Aziz Khalidin, Sulaiman Haji Narawi, Bala Singam a/l Karupiah and Leo Chong Cheong — have committed 10 serious crimes against voters in Malaysia, and in so doing have ruined GE14’s integrity,” he said.

Hence, Shahrul Aman said Bersih 2.0 concluded that the upcoming GE14 is already not clean, free nor fair even before the polling day.

“Bersih 2.0 holds the EC responsible and guilty for the 10 crimes as they are the primary body responsible to manage and conduct elections in Malaysia. Bersih 2.0 is compelled to do so to highlight the severity of the problems surrounding GE14,” he said.

“Although GE14 will not be clean, free nor fair, Bersih 2.0 believes you (voters) will play an important role in the upcoming election,” Shahrul Aman said in a message to voters.

In a statement, Bersih 2.0 listed the 10 crimes as:

  • gerrymandering, malapportionment and abuse of the redelineation process
  • failure to clean up the electoral roll and prevent phantom voters
  • disenfranchisement of voters
  • setting the polling day on a weekday
  • setting the the bare minimum campaigning period
  • arbitrary disqualification and prevention of nominations
  • failure to take action against election offences
  • making arbitrary and unreasonable election regulations
  • irregularities in advance voting and postal voting
  • failure to allow meaningful election observation
      Print
      Text Size
      Share