Andrew Limo
18 January 2008
opinion
Nairobi — The new Speaker of the National Assembly, Mr Kenneth Marende, in his acceptance speech, said the voting process in Parliament would have been less tedious had the process been conducted electronically.
His remark has kept Kenyans thinking: can technology be used to enhance democracy? Will voting technology ensure transparency or will it be a conduit for flaws and fraud?
If used correctly, computer-based voting systems increase the integrity of an election while reducing costs. E-voting is easy and convenient and the results are instantaneous.
One of the most common online systems is the use of a Direct Recording Electronic (DRE) machine, where all a voter needs to do is walk to a polling station and key in a candidate of choice on a touchscreen terminal.
The poll is immediately transmitted over a network to national election headquarters where a master computer automatically runs the tallying. This method is fast and involves less human intervention and less paper work.
Unless a bad expert hacks into the system, the process is normally less prone to suspicion or manipulation, but the good thing is that the machine keeps a clear trail of the entries which can be audited.
The acrimony of whether to use secret ballot or not would not have been an issue during the opening of the 10th Parliament because voting on the computer is by default a secret affair.
There would be no argument on if a voter marked X or Y since the computer faithfully sends what the voter touches or punches in, not the poor handwriting.
Brazil introduced electronic voting in 1996 where about 110 million voters used the computer to elect leaders - from mayors to the president.
The DRE machines were not error-free, but Brazilians have continually addressed the technical shortcomings (and scandals) and now believe e-voting works.
In 2006, President Lula da Silva won the Brazilian election by 62 per cent, becoming the first leader outside the US to be elected solely through the DRE machine.
The 2000 US presidential election which was hotly contested by Republican candidate George W. Bush and his Democratic counterpart Al Gore, and which took five weeks to count, recount and tally, was blamed partly on technological hitches (computer hanging) and human error (unfamiliarity with equipment and wrong programming).
It was a voting disaster, especially in the state of Florida and Americans today are not sure who really won that election.
Many countries all over the world are trying out on electronic suffrage. The UK has tried out on mobile phone voting. There are obviously some challenges, but there are also solutions and benefits.
In future, people will vote from anywhere and at their convenience. With electronic voting you do not have to be a registered voter at a particular polling station.
You can vote anywhere in the same way you withdraw cash from automated teller machines (ATMs) so long as you put the correct password or digital signature in case of the online voting.
The Electoral Commission can even provide a mobile voting van to help the nomadic communities and other people who may have been displaced.
People who cannot stand the long queues and are privileged to be connected to the internet can vote at the office or from home.
Candidates will be fighting over Kenyans in the diaspora, "the virtual electorate", who could determine a win or a loss from Melbourne or Chicago.
I am almost certain that the next General Election in 2012 will involve computers in one way or another. The election will be fought on the "cyberspace public rallies" by a new dotcom generation.
They will set up blogs (personal websites) to discuss issues and blacklist MPs who never kept their promises or stole CDF (Constituency Development Fund) money. Scandals, behind-the-scenes petitions and viral e-mail will be in the air.
If I were a newly-elected MP, I would start going the e-way straightaway. I would set up my personal website and make sure it is updated regularly with my appointments and engagements for all, including journalists, to visit and keep abreast of my development initiatives.
I would engage my constituents, always working hard to reply to the avalanche of requests and complaints through e-mail. Of course, some will be hoaxes, spam and viruses, but there is no better way to nurture accountability and transparency in public administration than being open. And the internet is a great tool for subjecting oneself to public scrutiny.
A legislator who communicates with the electorate on the internet is seen as more friendly and modern. And who does not like the attributes?
Be the first to Write a Comment!
Copyright © 2008 The Nation. All rights reserved. Distributed by AllAfrica Global Media (allAfrica.com). To contact the copyright holder directly for corrections — or for permission to republish or make other authorized use of this material, click here.
AllAfrica aggregates and indexes content from over 125 African news organizations, plus more than 200 other sources, who are responsible for their own reporting and views. Articles and commentaries that identify allAfrica.com as the publisher are produced or commissioned by AllAfrica.
