Despite having a so-called 'independent' body, the Election Commission, to oversee our elections and ensure that impediments to a 'fair and free' election are removed, grave doubts prevail over various aspects of the electoral process.

A recent report by the Malaysian Citizen's Election Watch (PEMANTAU) has highlighted concerns over the last election.

PEMANTAU's steering committee was made up of eight representatives from the participating NGOs. They were Pertubuhan Kebajikan BUDI Malaysia (BUDI), Aliran Kesedaran Negara (ALIRAN), Angkatan Belia Islam Malaysia (ABIM), the Human Rights Society of Malaysia (HAKAM), the International Movement for a JUST World (JUST), Pertubuhan Jemaah Islah Malaysia (JIM) and Suara Rakyat Malaysia (SUARAM). The Civil Rights Committee (CRC) of the Chinese Assembly Hall was assigned the responsibility of liaising with the Chinese community.

PEMANTAU, together with some international election observer organisations (the National Democratic Institute and the Asian Network for Free Elections) carried out independent observation and monitoring during the general election. Their observations were compiled in a report (Interim Report On the 1999 Malaysian General Election) which has been released to the Election Commission, local political parties as well as Election Watch organisations overseas.

The report highlights the following crucial points:

Far from responding with enthusiasm that Malaysians were concerned about their electoral process and were willing to help make it more 'fair and free', the Election Commission chose to reject the report out of hand. According to a report in the Star (10 February 2000), the response of the Commission's Secretary was that:

Quite how democracy is threatened is unclear. After all, the activities of PEMANTAU reflect the kind of active public Malaysian participation that can only add constructively to national debate and peoples' involvement in critical issues affecting the country.

The usual scape-goating of 'foreigners' is as cheap as it is hypocritical. The Malaysian government and many of its statutory bodies have consistently used foreigners to research and write such critical policy documents as our Industrial Master Plans, have made foreign investment a lynch-pin of our economy and have entered into major deals with foreign companies, not least in the development of, for example, the Multimedia Super Corridor.

Far from the overtly defensive stand taken by the Commission, it should be glad to join hands with anyone anxious to help it in its task, of removing any doubt about the Malaysian electoral process. The 'independence' of the Election Commission was already in serious doubt in the minds of many Malaysians, following the decision not to allow more than 680,000 registered voters the chance to exercise their basic right. This in itself has been the subject of a court action. Now we have the denigration of a serious report.

In the Commission's response, it is stated that the sparse number of election petitions (challenging results) is 'proof' that everything is okay. Again, this rhetorical logic misses key points, which also need serious remedy. Appeals to the courts to rectify abuses in the system have rarely been successful. Further, the costs and time involved serve as major deterrents, given that the petitioners could well find themselves lumped with paying costs of the other party as well, which in some cases could mean bankruptcy.

As far as we can ascertain from the Commission, there are at present 22 election petitions which have been filed, 16 (7 parliamentary and 9 state seats) in Peninsular Malaysia and 6 (state seats) in Sabah. The majority of the petitions in the Peninsula are in areas where the opposition have won, whereas in Sabah the majority of the petitions are in areas where the BN has won.

The petitions filed demonstrate a number of the concerns which were raised by the PEMANTAU Interim Report (and which were dismissed so summarily by the Election Commission). Included in the complaints are the alleged abuse of electoral rolls (including registration of phantom voters and inclusion of dead voters), the alleged importing of voters into constituencies to bolster votes and the alleged misuse of monies (bribery).

One example of a petition being filed is that of Sungai Siput. This election petition is filed by the Parti Sosialis Malaysia (PSM) member, Dr Jeyakumar Devaraj (who stood on a DAP ticket because PSM had been refused registration). It may be recalled that Jeyakumar lost the parliamentary seat by 5,200 votes to the incumbent, S Samy Vellu.

The election petition requests that Samy Vellu's victory be nullified and that Jeyakumar be declared the winner instead, or, alternatively, that the result be declared null and void (meaning a by-election be held). The petition also requests the Court to direct the Election Commission to prosecute anyone who has contravened election regulations and also to update the voter's list for Sg Siput.

Jeyakumar is claiming amongst other things that thousands of voters based outside of Sg. Siput were transferred to the constituency by way of giving false addresses and making false declarations in their voter registration forms.

Evidence for this has been submitted in a Memorandum to the Ipoh State Election Commission by opposition candidates who contested in the Sg Siput Parliamentary and State Jalong and Lintang state seats (The Sun, 13 January 2000). The Memorandum specifically asked the Commission to investigate as a matter of seriousness the issue of phantom voters in the Sg Siput Constituency, and for a follow-up meeting with the representatives in three months (i.e. in March 2000) to inform them of the progress made in the investigations.

The Sg Siput election petition argues that the net result of the election offences that took place in Sg Siput (U) deprived, denied, prevented and negated the constitutional right of the legitimate voters residing in Sg Siput (U) to freely decide and elect their own Member of Parliament as provided for under Article 119 (1)(a) & (b) of the Federal Constitution.

The problem of phantom voters and abuse of electoral rolls is a major issue. Whatever the outcome of the petitions, including the Sg Siput petition, clearly there remains much work to be done by the Commission in cleaning up these rolls. How can there exist so many doubts still, despite the advent of computerisation, the now relatively easy cross-referencing of, for example, dead people with names on electoral rolls and the ability to check if the same IC number or the same address has been used twice (or more) to register additional voters?

The PSM has gone ahead with its Election Petition in the context of raising public awareness of the issues. They claim that they are maintaining their campaign slogan, "Berani dan Berprinsip" (Courageous and Principled) and have chosen to challenge the election results in Court, as provided for in the Federal Constitution, as a way of highlighting the issue of phantom voters, and forcing an open discussion of the phenomenon.

Instead of blaming reports such as PEMANTAU's for tarnishing the image of our country, it is high time agencies such as the Election Commission realise that it is inaction in the face of abuse that not only tarnishes just our image, but threatens the very basis of our democracy.