Voter trafficking ruling today
Oarabile Mosikare | Wednesday June 4, 2014 15:56
The voters in question have been dragged to court by two Ramotswa residents, Philip Mokgalagadi and Rosinah Tlage, who allege that they were registered irregularly. The duo say the voters were registered in polling stations that were not in their areas of residence.
The respondents, through attorney, Martin Dingake, counter that in the past, they voted in Ramotswa constituency by registering in various polling stations.
They say they have not been served with the applicants’ objections as required by the mandatory provisions of Section 18 (4) of the Electoral Act. “In this regard, I do not understand the basis of the objection to my registration as a voter at a polling station I have always registered and voted in the previous general elections,” reads an affidavit from one of the respondents.
It says the objector must indicate that his or her name appears in the roll of the constituency in which the objection relates. “In terms of Section 18 (1) of the Electoral Act this has not been done. I do not know, nor does the applicant demonstrate, if the objector’s name is in the roll.”
The respondents say there is no evidence that as a matter of fact, an objection exists in terms of Section 18 (2) of the Electoral Act because nothing has been delivered to them. They say no deposit has shown to have been paid and there is no indication if the objection relates to a roll of a general or supplementary nature and falls within the prescribed timelines within which an objection may be taken.
“The principal registration officer has failed to forward to me the objection against the letter and spirit of Section 18 (4) of the Electoral Act. For these reasons the objection must be dismissed for non-compliance with Section 18 of the Electoral Act,” they say.