Heads I Win Tails You Lose

Very strange don't you think? We have Election Courts to look into cases involving the elections of State Reps and Parliamentarians but before the judges could even take their seats, we cuff them. We do not provide them with enough authority to deal with these cases.

The Sanglang case is a clear cut case of cheating and yet the Judge is not empowered to deal with it conclusively. Now correct me if I wrong, I am made to understand that during the last elections the Pas Candidate, Uz Hashim Jasa actually won with a majority of 51. For some reasons only known to them but suspected by many, the Election Officer for that constituency declared the BN candidate as winner with a majority of 150+ votes.

I don't think the Election Officer in that place failed his maths at the UPSR, PMR and SPM level, but lets just say, he did fail his maths. Lets just say that all this time his children and wife has been short changing him every time they give him the change for any purchases they did for him. Lets say after taking 7 days annual leave out of his 35 days, he still believes that he has 34 days left, that doesn't mean that there were no calculators there at that time? He had so many assistants and not to mention the reps of both candidates.

I mean this is just a matter of adding up votes from various lorongs and tallying them up. Come on, is that difficult. I wonder if he was sweating gathering up all the people in the hall and adding up their fingers and toes? Then the next step is to deduct the lower number from the higher number. Could be that he did not know which is higher and which is lower.

After all these, you declare the person with the higher number of votes the winner and the majority is the difference between the totals.

I really think he is not that stupid. Okay, lets move on. In 2003, a certain idiot decided that there should be special election courts to decide election cases. I am all for it because it speeds the whole process up, but don't you think that every case should be dealt with conclusively?

If in the case of Sanglang isn't it common sense that the Pas candidate is the winner by virtue of him getting more votes than his opponent? I mean that is the whole idea right?

I am not blaming the judge since he is bound by rules and if the rules forbid him from making a conclusive decision then what is he to do. I am questioning why is it that these judges are not given this authority? Is it a mean to cheat? I see it that way.

Now that the court has made its decision, the ball is back at the EC's feet. Does this mean that the same officer would be given the task of declaring who the winner is, or does this mean that the EC would have the opportunity to declare that, "since the court declared it invalid then the EC has no alternative but to declare the whole process as null and void and that a by-election or re-election is necessary"?

If the same officer is given the task of finalising this unfinished job does it mean that the EC has to spend millions to acquire a supercomputer for that nincompoop to finally get his maths right?

In all fairness, the EC has to declare that the Pas candidate as the winner because he got more votes, then gazette the result as soon as possible so that he could attend parliament and vote for the motion of no confidence in the PM.

Even if the EC decides to declare the Pas candidate the winner, I doubt it would be attended to speedily. Suddenly that Tan Sri fellow would fall sick or has a meeting to attend in Timbuktu or decided to go for a second circumcision or anything just to delay the whole thing.

What I fear most is that they would decide that for it to be more conclusive than mere conclusive, as if there is a difference, there should be a re-election.