Presidential election’s first round: appreciations which do not cover the issue’s core up

The union of civil society organizations unveiled that October 25th’s polling day process would have littered by some 30 problems and incidents in all: omissions into the electoral register, failure to deliver electoral cards, security issues, non compliance of ballot box size and transparency with national standards, insufficient sensitization on the use of the unique ballot, slow publication of results and so on… Yet it does not seem to prove enough to challenge the Malagasy presidential election’s first round as a whole.

The international observers’ first impressions, made of productive critics, happen to turn into series of praises for the Electoral Commission’s job. The issue concerning the electoral register’s incompleteness may well shock the affected local voters, does however not bother the International Community that much. Why should it actually? The electoral code’s article 15 outlines the voter’s responsibility to carry out himself the check up of the electoral register for his own name. An Electoral Commission having repeatedly called upon such a duty to be completed would not be blamed for voters most likely unwilling to make the move to their respective Fokontany office.

Its partners consequently do not condemn the Electoral Commission whatsoever. Besides, international organizations which undertook electoral observation missions do not unanimously agree on the way to do away with these loopholes and make the rest of the process even more free, fair and transparent. The debate concerning the electoral register is not yeet over. The Malagasy law does not oppose its reprocessing, even if the same single register is being used throughout each step of one same election in many other countries. So, who would like to volunteer? politically speaking, the transitional government seems to falter, and requires technical points, namely from the Electoral Commission and from the transitional interior ministry.

The genuine problem which led to the electoral register related issue is, as a matter of fact, the poor coordination between a transitional interior ministry and an overburdened Electoral Commission. And the low level of commitment from Fokontany officials only made matters worse. Moreover, agents sent by the Electoral Commission to complete the census had a poor knowledge of the neighborhood they were expected to serve in. Whoever could not be reached during their service time was automatically out of the register. This census used to be carried out by the concerned districts’ natives. Commissioning local Fokontany officials to complete their own local register would seem no bad idea.

Typewriters’ errors and the extent of their caused damages should not be underestimated either. The electoral code requires electoral cards to be as filled up as dog tags are, yet in scores of cases, they are not. This matter of fact leads to a couple of theories: either the voters’ data got erased or the electoral card is a fake.

The genuine number of voters left out of the electoral register has not been valued, or not revealed. Arguing that this number would represent the absolute number of voluntary refusal to cast vote would not be true. It is however not held as relevant enough to turn the odds. The error margin remains so far lower than the 6 percents high gap between the second runner up Hery Rajaonarimampianina and the third one, Hajo Andrianainarivelo, according to the temporary results’ current stand. Many supporters of the Ravalomanana political sphere happen to be part of those left out of the electoral register. Until further notice, the political sphere was officially in for boycotting the elections. The late involvement of the Ravalomanana couple into Dr. Jean Louis Robinson’s electoral campaign revived its supporter’s electoral commitment, but how late?