Translate

Arm Ukraine, zap Putin

Stolen Votes

berklix.com logo

berklix.org logo

No Cookies

Flag UK DE

BSD-PIE

BSD

GNU

Linux

No Tracking

Disclaimer

IBU

Consol

How To Choose A Good Returning Officer To Run A Proper GEA Election

Introduction

I offer the following advice as a starting point for GEA Committee members to read & discuss with each other, before appointing Returning Officers.

Why Do I Do This ? Who Am I To Suggest This ?

  • I, Julian H. Stacey, have run several annual elections for the GEA committee, & have before & since seen some Returning Officers do a good job, & other Returning Officers do a poor or rotten job.
  • As some of both good & rotten Returning Officers have been appointed by committees more than once, it seems likely some GEA committee members over the years have had little or no idea what criteria to use when selecting & appointing a _Good_ Returning Officer to run the annual elections [hence I wrote these suggested guidelines].
  • I also have some relevant experience outside the GEA:- I chaired the University of Kent At Canterbury Student Union Standing Orders Committee for over a year around 1979/80, where we ran numerous elections for constituencies varying between 1000 & 4000 electors, with over 1500 or 2500 ballots counted for the annual executive & sabbatical elections alone.)
  • Whilst we should perhaps not take our little GEA social & sports club elections too seriously, democracy in general is ill served & under-mined when for no good reason, groups permit elections to descend to un-verifiable results requiring blind faith.
  • My guess is it's likely also a breach of German law for any Verein, whether registered or not, to deliberately suppress the numeric results of an annual election for the Vorstand.

Aim

  • There are always some in an electorate who don't know & or don't particularly want to trust any particular returning officer.
  • One can & should exclude the possibility of any one person having the possibility to be suspected of irregular behaviour.
  • So use procedures that makes an election provably fair, & impossible for any one single individual to be capable of undetected un-trustworthy practice.
  • Correct open procedure protects the returning officer & assistants from suspicion, & the electorate have no need to trust any one individual running the election.
  • Incorrect non-open procedures IE secretive counting & suppressed numeric results, arouse suspicion, & are an abuse of & imposition upon the electorate, who then have no option but to challenge the election, if they want to ascertain if the election might have been fair.
  • The election process should not merely be fair, but be seen to be _Provably_ fair. "Vertauen ist Gut, Kontrol ist besser" applies. `Glasnost` applies: Complete openness (except in voting booth !)
  • It is foolish to accept or permit electoral methods that require the electorate to have to trust a Returning Officer, when more open methods can ensure _provable_ fairness.
  • Anyone who accepts authority over the electorate in being Returning Officer, owes the electorate the duty to perform to a good standard, & must be prepared to accept concomitant public scrutiny &/or criticism.
  • GEA election procedures should avoid being so sub standard they would be condemned by such as the Electoral Reform Society, &/or Real (geographicly appointed) returning officers.

Criteria To Select A Returning Officer

  • Appointing a returning officer is not about soothing egos, choosing a friend, or someone committee members personally trust etc. It is about choosing a returning officer who can deliver the electorate a _provably_ honest & correct election; not accepting someone the committee merely _hopes_ might run a fair election.
  • Any prospective returning officer who advocates secret counting & suppressed numeric results should be regarded as suspect, & motives questioned as to why they propose to deny the electorate their right to a provably fair election.
  • The committee should also beware appointing a returning officer who is likely to deliberately breach German law, (that I guess covers election procedures for Vereins, whether registered or not)
  • The first person to be suggested or volunteer at a committee meeting is not necessarily the best person to run the election.
  • A retiring committee member is Not a good choice: `Befangenheit', decline their offer, & suggest they instead could apply to run the election a year later, allowing time to become a more neutral election official.
  • The boy/ girl friend/ spouse/ brother/ sister, boss/ employee/ business partner etc of a candidate is not a good choice: (Potential bias for or against, if not actual, that could be suspected by some)
  • A competent organiser is needed, there's plenty to forget or do wrong, unless well organised.
  • A strong character is helpful, some years there is considerable pressure / problems from any/ all of candidates, some committee members &/or normal membership.
  • The committee should interview prospective returning officers, to determine who would do a _good_ job. (Some years the committee announces publicly in the programme, that those interested/ willing to run the elections should make themselves known, thus ensuring a wider selection of potential returning officer.)
  • The Returning Officer must be independent & has total responsibility for & control of the elections, the committee individually & together must have no formal say (except suggestions) in the running of the election, except that a quorate committee can appoint & sack the Returning Officer.

Conduct Of The Election

  • Running the election is not about the returning officer having a good time, When the returning officer sets him/ herself over the electorate, the returning officer owes the electorate to do the _provably_ fairest job possible: not adopt procedures that force the electorate to choose between blind trust & wondering if the election might or might not be fair.
  • The returning officer should assume there is at least one person in the electorate who does not trust him/ her, & some others who may be doubtful, & do everything scrupulously, so that no one has any chance for doubt. To require blind faith of the electorate is an abuse of the electorate.
  • The returning officer shall prepare & bring ballot papers of a format not known (ie not reproducible) to at least one deputy.
  • That deputy shall bring a rubber stamp & pad of shape & colour unknown to the returning officer. At no time does deputy give rubber stamp to returning officer.
  • Any ballot form not bearing the rubber stamp will be invalid - thus no single person can be suspected of stuffing the ballot.
  • [Optional - To be decided sometime _before_ balloting starts, & particularly important when we have less candidates than posts available] :
    Anyone with less than 10% of the ballot is not elected (normally approx 5 or 6 votes - this to keep out complete no-hopers - remember our unusually open, non selective, total lack of any club membership/ entry criteria ... so we are open to more than our share of weirdos! ... but they can't raise more than a few votes usually)
  • The returning officer turns our lockable ballot box turned upside down, & shows it empty at commencement of ballot & announcement is made that balloting has started. (A little theatre done right, amuses & interests the electorate in voting).
  • [Optional Ballot paper or Returning officer could suggest to voters: "Suggestion: Think first, then vote only for people you believe would make _Good_ committee members. Voting for people you have merely met once or twice & know nothing else about, may not elect the best candidates."
  • Voters should vote in secret in the voting booth that must be provided by Returning Officer (often a giant plastic bag taped to table & held to ceiling with string).
  • Returning officer announces ballot closed, & invites witnesses to escort box up stairs to counting area.
  • Returning officer recruits counters from a wide selection of GEA members, not just his/ her personal friends. Even recruit people you are on bad terms with ! An electorate that knows your count is certified even by people you don't get on with, is an electorate certain that the vote is totally fair !
  • Votes are publicly counted, no attempt is made to prevent anyone observing numeric count done by teams of 2, with returning officer presiding, not counting, public can lodge requests for clarity with returning officer, only returning officer to talk to counters.
  • Returning Officer makes No Attempt to hide or keep secret numeric count at any stage.
  • 2 or more counters/ deputies at table co sign duplicate copies of the finally tally, & retain these personal verification copies.
  • Ballot papers are returned to locked ballot box in case of later recount/ challenge (got to put them somewhere to keep it tidy anyway).
  • Returning officer goes downstairs in company of some counters, one of whom has a spare tally to check announcement against), & announces numeric results in alphabetic (ballot paper) name order; Then summarises with 2nd shorter list of people elected. (Thus at no time do we explicitly announce the name of `losers') Returning officer thanks all candidates, particularly those (un-named) who have not been elected this time, & thanks them for increasing the candidate number sufficient to make it a real election. (Returning officer might also congratulate them on escaping duty this year, or wishing them luck for next year, whatever).
  • Returning officer sticks numeric results on notice board, & forwards to email/ web & GEA programme compiler.
  • Returning officer co-ordinates with old GEA secretary re next booked committee venue, & may preside at 1st meeting of new committee, 1st & only order of business that the returning officer chairs, being committee choice of a new chair. (Sometimes they're not ready to choose, so get them to appoint a temporary chair just for the first meeting). Hand over list of names phones & emails of committee members, (particularly any absent) from nomination forms, & leave :-)

Further Suggestions

I welcome suggestions for changes to this http://www.berklix.com/gea/elections.html particularly if it's emailed in Ascii ready to cut & paste into this existing document. It was written quickly, there's doubtless room for improvement.
Last edited on or after: Sat Feb 3 18:12:05 CET 2001

Stolen VotesBerklix.Net Computer AssociatesDomainsApache: Web ServerFreeBSD: Operating System