I've just had a look at the page on the the BBC website, which doesn't say that the current government hasn't been made aware of the figures; it just says they haven't released them. (There may be other reports saying they claim not to know the numbers).
On the other hand, the page does report does say that the Movement for Democratic Change part has requested a recount in one seat. Which implies they've been told the counted result in at least that one place. In which case, presumably, they've been told other figures. Why aren't they leaking the numbers?
The MDC have had people getting the posted (local) results from day 1 but the electoral commission (I'm not clear how separate this is from the govt) won't release the results. MDC claim they took 50.3% of the vote, enough for outright victory.
My expectation would be that the results be announced publicly and at national level. If any are disputed then that rider could be given. Right now we don't even know whether the results being disputed would affect the result - presumably they would, but why is it kept secret?
applez's comment is, sadly, the answer. It looks as though the govt are intent on swinging the vote over the 50% mark through cheating, to force a second-round vote, which they can then fix using intimidation. And yet the president of S. Africa says "no crisis!". Horrific.
But, in that case, I don't understand why the government is publicly calling for a recount. In this scenario, why not, err, quietly[*] burn down shacks, stuff ballot boxes, etc, and then declare that these have been the results all along.
Answering my own question: maybe the recount is the only way they can justify the delay.
I think the answer is that they've somehow been backed into the corner of posting results locally before the national result is answered, so it would be hard for them to falsify the results after the fact. The recount call helps them cast doubt on the announced results, with hopefully enough doubt that there will be a second round (after all even the MDC are only just claiming a first-round victory).
Recount = more eyes to blackenapplezApril 15 2008, 02:07:59 UTC
Well, there are bound to a few more shacks to burn to the ground, ring-leaders to beat, threaten, and murder still. Then the 'real' electoral results may emerge.
Re: Recount = more eyes to blackencardinalsinApril 15 2008, 13:06:34 UTC
Yep. War veterans being given police jobs as a cover from which to threaten voters. There has to be a recount, and a second round, apparently - but who can argue with that if no results are announced. Never mind, we can keep going until we get the right result.
Comments 6
On the other hand, the page does report does say that the Movement for Democratic Change part has requested a recount in one seat. Which implies they've been told the counted result in at least that one place. In which case, presumably, they've been told other figures. Why aren't they leaking the numbers?
Reply
My expectation would be that the results be announced publicly and at national level. If any are disputed then that rider could be given. Right now we don't even know whether the results being disputed would affect the result - presumably they would, but why is it kept secret?
applez's comment is, sadly, the answer. It looks as though the govt are intent on swinging the vote over the 50% mark through cheating, to force a second-round vote, which they can then fix using intimidation. And yet the president of S. Africa says "no crisis!". Horrific.
Reply
But, in that case, I don't understand why the government is publicly calling for a recount. In this scenario, why not, err, quietly[*] burn down shacks, stuff ballot boxes, etc, and then declare that these have been the results all along.
Answering my own question: maybe the recount is the only way they can justify the delay.
[*] For relative values of quietly.
Reply
Reply
Reply
Reply
Leave a comment