104 election disputes a worry

THE fact that 104 disputes have been lodged with the Court of Disputed Returns is a cause for worry.
That means that almost all members of parliament will be engaged at some time or other with these disputes if the court allows most or
all of them to proceed to trial.
If we are to judge from past experiences, some electorates such as Wewak and Yangoru-Saussia in East Sepik and Tewai-Siassi in Morobe were not represented for full terms of parliament as these disputes see-sawed for years on end.
The sheer volume of the cases before the court suggests that the process is going to be quite lengthy.
We can be quite sure many members of parliament will be in and out of court until 2017.
It also means that the state will have to part with public funds in the tens of millions to support the Papua New Guinea Electoral Commission’s defence of its conduct in every one of these disputes.
The only good to come of all these will be that there will be some pretty rich lawyers at the end of the exercise.
We dare say the funds will go towards funding the entry of a lot of lawyers in the next general election come 2017.
There are some real serious national security concerns.
There is the real potential that should even a third of these disputes are successful, it is possible parliament will lose a third of its membership.
Many ministers and governors may lose their
seats.
The countryside will be filled with angry clashes by supporters of petitioners and MPs.
These will only intensify if by-elections are declared in those electorates.
The by-elections will be extra cost to the state.
The cost of security
operations will be astronomical.
It is, therefore, we make a suggestion that we would most normally be loathe making to the court, not the least because we might incur the wrath of the court itself in the first place.
We suggest to the court that it is imperative that these matters are expedited in the speediest manner.
We suggest that three or four judges be engaged to take carriage of election disputes.
We suggest that stringent and uniform rules are applied across the entire range of matters before the court whether they proceed or are dismissed.
There should be no doubt in anybody’s mind that PNG went to the elections ill-prepared.
That is the fault of
the PNG Electoral Commission.
It failed to produce a sound common roll among a whole lot of other issues.
While writs were about to be issued, quality checks on common rolls for some areas were still going on.
The multiplicity of cases before the courts also point to weak administration by the Electoral Commission during the election period.
Many disputes were raised, mostly peacefully, during the period.
Some were mundane matters that would not have required much time to resolve.
Instead, all the time the favourite line that came from the mouths of electoral officials was: “If you do not like it, you can always bring it to the court of disputed returns.”
And, so, this is exactly what has happened.
Aside from the 2012 elections being very expensive with cost overruns adding to a K0.5 billion budget deficit, it has created a welcome atmosphere for an equally, if not more, expensive exercise post-election through the Court of Disputed Returns and through by-elections.
The PNGEC has put to tomorrow a series of small administrative problems that could have been resolved then so that now, they have become a grave problem that affects services to the districts, eating away into budget and has the potential to create unrest right across the country.
We leave it to the reader to form an opinion on what the 2012 elections have been like in the planning, the management and in the ramifications it has left.
The implications are dire for the country.