Maijol (second right) with Chin (left) outside the Election Court yesterday.
Jaimis
KOTA KINABALU: Parti Keadilan Rakyat candidate petitioner Datuk Maijol Mahap said at his election petition trial yesterday that the non-delivery of Form 14 to his counting agents had affected the result of the Kota Marudu parliamentary seat in the May 5 general election.
Maijol told Election Court judge Yew Jen Kie that because of the non-delivery of Form 14 to his counting agents, he was unable to officially see exactly how close the voting was at many of the polling stations.
“As a percentage of the total votes cast, the winning majority was only 842 votes out of 33,125 or 2.5 per cent. If my election agent had the copies of all the Form 14 that night, he could have had a basis upon which to scrutinize the results further,” said Maijol, who is a senior practicing lawyer, in his written witness statement.
He also testified that at that time, if the Form 14 had been given to his election agent, he (the election agent) could take whatever action was necessary and appropriate, like to request a recount of the ballot boxes at the counting center.
The election petition trial between Maijol and the Returning Officer (RO) for the Kota Marudu parliamentary constituency and the Election Commission (EC) entered its fourth day yesterday.
Maijol, in seeking to nullify the result for the seat, had filed his petition on May 12, naming PBS-BN winner Datuk Dr Maximus Ongkili, the RO and the EC as respondents.
In his petition, Maijol, who was represented by counsel Fulton Mark Sitiwin, among others, raised the issues on the use of indelible ink, money bribery and the failure to observe election laws, which he claimed had affected the result of the election as a whole.
On Aug 13, Yew allowed Ongkili’s preliminary objection and struck him out from the petition as Maijol had not pleaded enough facts on the allegation of corrupt practice against Ongkili.
However, she ordered a full trial against the RO and EC. The Kuching-based High Court judge also ruled that Ongkili’s name would still remain in the petition as it would depend on the evidence adduced during the trial.
Further in his statement, Maijol disagreed if the respondents would say there was no difference between the Form 14 results and the final gazetted results.
“Having seen all of the Form 14 when compiled and calculated, I observed that there was already a gross discrepancy between the Form 14 vote tally and the final gazetted results,” said Maijol.
“I believe and state that this gross discrepancy was caused – at least in part – by the non-delivery of the requisite From 14 to which I referred to earlier,” he further said.
Maijol said the non-delivery of the said Form 14, in his opinion, had either already affected the result of the election or had the potential to do so.
“In these polling stations (channels), there was a discrepancy between the unaccounted or not returned ballot papers that appeared in Form 14 and the gazetted results. The Form 14 results from these polling stations showed that there were 1,476 not returned or unaccounted for ballot papers, but the gazetted results only showed that there were 48 ballot papers,” Maijol further explained.
He strongly believed that this discrepancy was caused by the non-delivery of the Form 14 in question to his election agent.
“The proof of this is the discrepancy itself in the final tally of the unaccounted or not returned ballot papers. If my election agent had the full picture on election night (the copies of Form 14) he would have raised this matter more forcefully.
“But because he was denied that opportunity, that is why I believe the election result was affected or could have been affected had all the Form 14 been properly delivered to my election agent. This is evidenced by the gross discrepancy between the unaccounted for or not returned ballot tallies appearing on the aforesaid Form 14 and the final gazetted results.
Maijol also said he believed the final gazetted election result for P168 Kota Marudu was irregular and not in accordance with the Election Rules.
“Because of the failure of the said presiding officers to deliver to my election agent the requisite Form 14 as stated earlier, I think the whole process lacked transparency and accountability.
“This is turn, casts a shadow of irregularity and doubt over the whole process and I say the results could have been different if the rules were followed.
Maijol said he was told by his election agent that at least 20 of his counting agents had not been given the Form 14.
“After the final result, my election agent informed me that he had asked the RO if he could get the official certified copies of the Form 14 or alternatively, if he could see the Form 14 in the RO’s possession of which he did not have a copy. The RO replied with words to the effect of: “You don’t need to see the Form 14; if you are not satisfied with the result, then go ahead and lodge an election petition in court. You don’t know the Election Rules.”
Maijol, who was present at the counting center five minutes before the final result was announced, further said the RO did not allow his election agent to see the Form 14 which he had requested, and the RO had asked police personnel to evict Maijol, his group and election agent from the center.
“In fact on April 22 at about 12.30pm at a meeting room at the Kota Marudu District Council office, we were briefed, among others, the procedures regarding Form 14, and on April 30 at 2.30pm, I also went to the same office to tell that copies of Form 14 must be given to my counting agents,” he added.
Meanwhile, the election agent testified that the non-delivery of the official certified copies of Form 14 had affected his duty as he could not properly observe, scrutinize, confirm and verify the tallying and counting of the final votes.
Jaimis Sinteh said the official certified copies of Form 14 were his reference point.
“Without the copies of the form, I could not properly scrutinize and challenge the tallying of the votes from the various polling stations. If I wished to challenge the results from a particular polling station, I was handicapped because I didn’t have the corresponding Form 14,” said Jaimis, adding that the basis to scrutinize, verify and confirm the final vote tally was the Form 14 copy, without which he was unable to properly perform his duties as an election agent.
Senior Federal Counsels Zawawi Ghazali, Zetty Zurina Kamamruddin and Noerazlim Saidil and federal counsel Intan Illani Mohd Azani represented the RO and EC while counsel Chin Teck Ming held a watching brief for Ongkili.
The trial continues on Aug 26