So Many Questions

The Constitutional Court has made scathing comments about the Independent Electoral Commission after its botched handling of by-elections in Tlokwe in 2013. Chris Barron asked IEC commissioner and vice-chairman Terry Tselane . . .

The Constitutional Court says you failed to adhere to the high standards required of you by the constitution. Why?

The court found that we did not supply the candidates, or the political parties contesting the elections, with a voters roll on time or with addresses.

That’s a fairly basic requirement for an election, isn’t it?

We have never had to provide political parties with a voters roll with addresses since the inception of our organisation.

But the Constitutional Court in effect says this is unconstitutional?

Absolutely.

Does this mean you’ve been running elections unconstitutionally for 20 years?

No. The argument we have raised previously is that there are areas which do not have conventional addresses. Areas such as informal settlements and villages.

Is it possible under these circumstances to have a fair election?

Yes. All over the world there are areas where we have been as observers or technical advisers where the voters roll is there but it does not necessarily have the addresses.

Why did you ignore complaints from the candidates that the elections were not free and fair?

No, no, we reacted. Our reaction was to do an investigation.

Which found that a third of newly registered voters didn’t actually live in the wards where they were registered. What then?

We directed them to section 65 of the municipal electoral act, which says if a party or candidate is aggrieved, they can lodge a complaint that the outcome of the election has been compromised. But the Constitutional Court said we were being bureaucratic and too technical.

So they found you wanting?

They found the yardstick we were using to measure whether the election was free and fair did not take account of all the environmental factors that could impact . . .

Surely by now you must understand what the constitution requires of you in terms of running a free and fair election?

The Constitutional Court says there is no definition of free and fair elections. So it does its own definition, and it’s a definition that we have not necessarily been following. The definition we have always followed has always been at a technical level.

So in terms of the court’s definition none of the elections we’ve had have been free and fair?

The Constitutional Court expressed itself in relation to Tlokwe and its eight by-elections.

Why has it taken almost three years to resolve this matter?

The court says there was a delay in resolving this issue in the Electoral Court because of the death of Nelson Mandela.

Why should Mandela’s death have stopped the Electoral Court from hearing such an urgent matter?

I don’t know why they could not hear it as a result of the funeral arrangements of Mr Nelson Mandela, but this is something that is outside the capacity of the IEC. And nowhere does the Constitutional Court blame the IEC for delaying the process.

It does say that you seriously breached your statutory obligations. Criticism can’t get much worse than

that, can it?

We accept what the Constitutional Court has said. But I think every person who has followed and read the judgment understands the difficulty the commission had to go through in terms of the verification of the addresses of people in areas where there are no conventional addresses.

It makes it very difficult for parties to canvass, doesn’t it?

Yes. But the Constitutional Court says the commission is only obliged to provide addresses where it is possible. So that limitation is recognised by the Constitutional Court.

So why did it find you had seriously breached your statutory obligations?

Because the Constitutional Court introduces a new concept which says the electoral commission is obliged to find sufficient particularities of voters’ addresses in order for us to be able to allocate them to the correct voting district.

Does this put the legitimacy and integrity of next year’s municipal elections in doubt?

I don’t think so.

The Constitutional Court seems to think so?

No, the Constitutional Court has not expressed itself in relation to the 2016 elections.

Doesn’t it say that the legitimacy and integrity of the electoral process is now in doubt?

No, it would not use seven wards in Tlokwe to make a determination about the whole country.

Surely flaws in the system pose questions about the legitimacy and integrity of next year’s elections?

We accept certain sectors will want to interpret the Tlokwe outcome in a way to say: “Can we trust the outcome of the elections?” Therefore it is our responsibility to rectify the identified weaknesses.