THE EDITOR, Sir:

I SERVED as a presiding officer in three local government elections and as a supervisor in the last general election. My involvement started with volunteering to serve as a CAFFE observer. I indicated that I would serve in other capacities of the election because I felt that it would be more meaningful if I actually took part to ensure that what is done is correct at a time when there was so much concern about the irregularities affecting the will of the people in the elections. I would have agreed to work anywhere required were it not for the fact that I would have to be sequestered overnight in a hotel.

For these many years, I kept putting off my concerns to bring to public attention some aspects of the election process which I felt need to be addressed if we truly meant to protect "the right to secrecy" of all voters, and if we really want to reduce the possibility of voters intimidation, to live up to the slogan 'Free from Fear'.

1. A year ago, a Gleaner freelance writer wrote about "How to Vote Electronically".

But the Electoral Office needs to make it its duty to educate the public extensively and publish the established procedures for voting so that everyone would know, ahead of time, what are the correct things to do. The procedure would then be more effective, transparent, and time-saving.

2. In most elections all over the world, we hear the term 'To cast your vote'. The voter marks his ballot and deposits it in the box provided.

In our Jamaican elections, it is the responsibility of the presiding officer to place the ballot into the box after ensuring that it is the same ballot he gave to the voter, and that the voter has dipped his finger in the ink.

In past elections 'high-profile persons' have been allowed to put their ballots into the box for the fun of it. It was considered a mockery of the electoral process, and an insult to the integrity of the presiding officer, election workers and all those witnessing.

And when such photos were published in the newspapers without any correction by the Electoral Office of Jamaica (EoJ), people can be misled.

3. A blind factor: In the case of a blind elector who came with a friend to assist in marking the ballot - an oath is administered to the friend to maintain secrecy of the poll, as well as not to assist any other blind person in that capacity in that election. However, such a person is not required to give his name or put anything in writing, and there is no record of who this person is who is not supposed to vote again for another blind elector in that election. The procedure needs to be re-examined.

4. An elector with other physical disabilities, other than blindness, who is unable to mark his ballot, is required to announce his vote to be heard by all persons present. These include the presiding officer, poll clerk, scrutineers of the two or more parties, and all independent observers present. The ballot is then marked by the presiding officer and witnessed by all present.

This requirement violates the voter's right to secrecy.

There must be many disabled voters who, because they have problems marking their ballots, didn't bother to register to vote because they do not want their votes to be made public and expose themselves to intimidation.

It is ironic that we have just passed a law to punish severely those who exposed their votes, but at the same time, we force others to tell us which party they are voting for.

On point number four, I am relieved that some corrections will be made since I started this letter some time ago.

I am, etc.,

D. CHANG

Kingston 8