Page 221 - kpi377

candidate receives a lot of votes, it should not be taken as a sign that voters individually
decided that he or she was the most worthy candidate. Instead, it should be seen as a clear sign
that electioneering and canvassing took place.

Should, then, all non-voters be deprived of their constitutional rights in accordance

with the election law? It surely is a serious matter to revoke constitutional rights of individuals.
But it is much more serious to do so on a broad scale. Have any appeal procedures been
established? Can voters who feel that they have been unjustly treated bring their complaints to
court? And what should we do about the administrative aspect of this whole procedure? The
PECs have to provide staff to receive request from voters concerning their inability to cast
their vote on election day. They will also have to follow a multi-step procedure for identifying
non-voters, and asking them, via a public announcement, for the reasons that led them to miss

voting day. It must then be announced who lost their constitutional rights. And in the next
elections, whether national or local, voting behavior will have to be checked again in order to
decide whether to continue withholding each individual's rights or to reinstate them. All this
constitutes an awful amount of addidional administrative work.

In conclusion, elections to the Senate are scheduled for March 4, 2000. They will be
a test case of how well the ECT and the PECs can fulfill their responsibility of conducting just,
clean, and fair elections. Lessons learned will be applied to the MP-elections latoer that year.

Together, both elections will indicate whether the hopes that led to establishing the ECT were
justified. The elections will also play an important part in determining the degree of trust
citizens will have in the new institutional order. Finally, disappointed hopes and a lack of trust
may lead to calls for amending the constitution.