Can we rely on By-election results being correct?
On Sunday 22July 2018 on SkyNews, doubts were cast whether we can trust the results of the looming five By-elections.
“Our Electoral Rolls lack integrity, thus enabling Vote Frauds,” said Lex Stewart, President of Vote Australia on the Outsiders program, where Rowan Dean asked questions about a list of 16 Electoral fraud cases in Australia, while Ross Cameron provided horrific information about Vote Frauds in USA.
“It is not just me who is concerned. Reports by the Australian National Audit office state that the Electoral Rolls are in a shambles.”
“Official advice to me recently is that the Electoral Roll contains at least 248,000 incorrect enrolments, many of which have been deliberately falsified.”
Salim Mehajer, Deputy Mayor in Auburn, was sent to jail a month ago for deliberately adding fraudulent names to the Electoral Roll.
Noreen Hay in Wollongong is another example of many that Vote Australia could provide.
“Also Australia is one of the few countries in the world that lacks a requirement on voters to identify themselves when they go to Polling places to vote,” said Mr Stewart.
“Voter ID is required in most countries. Kenya and Iraq introduced it last year.”
Using Vote Frauds, marginal seats can be won by candidates who are not the ones for whom the majority of voters truly voted for.
“Our voting systems are simply not capable of delivering true Democracy,” said Mr Stewart.
“The government needs urgently to consider amending the Commonwealth Electoral Act to curb Vote Frauds.”
from Australians for Honest Elections
· AEC not capable of detecting false enrolments that we found previously
· Audit Office reports show AEC did not act on recommendations to fix things
· cheating by multiple voting (18,770 at last election) can be expected again
As the deadline has now just passed for people to get their names onto the Electoral Roll, elections-monitoring body Australians for Honest Elections points to long-standing problems in the Electoral Rolls and questions the Australian Electoral Commission’s capacity to adequately cleanse the Rolls of false enrolments.
“There is always a last minute rush to get many thousands of enrolments onto the Electoral Roll before the deadline. We have evidence that the AEC accepts last-minute rush enrolments at face value and does not properly check them, and that some of these enrolments are then rapidly removed after the election, having been used to vote in false names. It seems that the AEC has neither the willingness nor the capacity to properly check that many enrolments are genuine,” said Lex Stewart, President of Australians for Honest Elections.
“There were 18,770 multiple votes at the last election yet nobody was prosecuted and no remedial measures have been introduced to stop it happening again!”
“With lack of ID to vote, such false enrolments and multiple voting could swing the results in marginal seats and pervert the election outcome,” said Mr Stewart.
The Australian National Audit Office conducted investigations into the “Integrity of the Electoral Roll” in 2002, 2004, 2010 and 2014 and found massive problems, and made recommendations, yet the AEC did little to fix things up.
EVEN WORSE the ANAO report of 4/11/2015 was ignored by Parliament and the media. The report states in unusually harsh language for a Canberra bureaucracy that the AEC inter alia has “not adequately and effectively addressed the matters that led to recommendations being made.
“Special Ministers of State have been ‘asleep at the wheel’ for years, allowing the AEC to get away with negligence of which the bungled WA Senate election fiasco was only one prominent example of many that this organisation has evidence of”
“Putting it bluntly, the AEC is simply not capable of running an honest, fair election with a clean Electoral Roll,” said Mr Stewart.
Major parties panic, change voting rules as intelligent electors join forces with disenchanted voters
People and the party faithful now are awakening they are being controlled by the major parties who are feeling this serious trend.
With battle lines being drawn in the Senate the major parties are experiencing their power base being dismantled by independent senators out of their control that has forced desperate action for survival at the coming election. Again they shift the goal posts by changing the rules to allow themselves preferential treatment on the senate ballot paper.
Liberal and Labor become allies when their decades of government dictatorship become threatened by the people.
The cross benchers represent people in parliament not party rooms engaging the agendas of big business.
Attracting detrimental comments from the threatened party room machines who control the stream of intimidating press releases from their spin doctors and fiction story tellers, the cross bench threat to the parties needs to be removed.
“If you play by their rules, you lose”
“Your rules apply on polling day, and they lose”
Make the most of it.
Will you vote with the SHEEPLE or the PEOPLE ?
December 20, 2015 Yoni Bashan and James Hooper The Sunday Telegraph
HIGH-profile deputy mayor Salim Mehajer has been charged with forging documents to rig the 2012 Auburn Council ballot that got him elected.
An Australian Federal Police investigation has also charged Mehajer’s sister Fatima, his brother-in-law Jamal Elkheir and five other associates and school friends who ran as candidates in the council poll.
The Mehajer siblings are accused of forging documents, a crime that carries a maximum penalty of 10 years in prison.
The rest of the group is charged with falsifying their candidate information sheets to claim they resided at addresses in Auburn, making them eligible to run.
The deputy mayor first came to the attention of the wider public earlier this year when his wedding, featuring helicopters, sports cars and a military flyover, all being filmed by a professional movie crew, brought parts of Sydney to a standstill.
However, the AFP has been watching Mehajer since 2012, when officials at the Australian Electoral Commission noticed a large number of online and postal applications in the weeks leading up to the poll from people requesting to change their enrolment address to Auburn Council’s first ward, where he was standing as a candidate.
Further checks allegedly revealed that several dozen of the online applications had been submitted from a computer located at the Mehajer family’s home and another at their business address.
When AFP officers later raided Mehajer’s property at Lidcombe they located a printer that appeared to have the same security identifier as some posted application forms.
Phones were also seized that revealed text messages allegedly relating to the suspicious applications sent to the AEC.
A second part of the investigation focused on Mehajer’s close associates, who ran with him and his sister as group independent candidates.
Scrutiny of their candidate information sheets revealed they had been falsified to say they lived in Auburn, allowing them to run in the ballot as part of a group, police claim.
Mehajer’s group of six contained four people now charged as part of the investigation. His sister’s group of five contained two now charged.
As the head candidates of their respective groups, both Mehajer and his sister were given a box “above the line” on the ballot paper, putting them in a favourable position to earn votes. The vast majority of voters at that year’s council election — 77 per cent — voted by ticking a box above the line, according to AEC data.
While Fatima Mehajer was unsuccessful, her brother was elected to the fifth and final spot on council by more than 500 votes.
The brief of evidence for the investigation was served on the DPP for assessment in February, several months before Mehajer shot to notoriety with his lavish wedding.
The investigation, which has been running since August 2012, culminated with court notices being served on all eight people on December 9 and 10.
The others have been named as Jamal Elkheir, Fatima Kandil, Shi Lao, Abhinav Mehta, Arjun Mehta and Ahmad Trad.
“All eight are scheduled to appear in the Downing Centre on 2nd February,” an AFP spokeswoman said.
The Mehajers have each been charged with 76 counts of using forged documents and one each of using false or misleading documents.
The remaining six people have been charged with one count each of using false or misleading documents.
Mehajer responded to the allegations last night on behalf of his sister and his brother-in-law, saying the charges were false and motivated by a hidden agenda.
“Allegations will continue to grow in anticipation to tarnish us however, this will not in any way, shape or form, threaten us to step down,” he said.
“They are false and misleading with hidden agendas to bring us down. We shall remain focused on our roles and responsibilities.”
Eleven candidates ran across two groups in Auburn Council’s first and second ward. Group H was led by Salim Mehajer and had a total of six candidates running in the first ward.
Group G was led by Fatima Mehajer and had a total of five candidates running in the second ward.
Of these 11 candidates, eight were closely known to each other and have each been charged by the AFP.
Salim Mehajer – Facing charges of using forged documents to commit electoral fraud and producing false or misleading documents. Ran as lead candidate for Group H (first ward) in 2012 Auburn Council elections.
Fatima Mehajer – Salim’s sister. Ran as lead candidate for Group G (second ward) in 2012 Auburn Council election. She is facing the same charges as her brother. Salim’s sister. Ran as lead candidate for Group G (second ward) in 2012 Auburn Council election. She is facing the same charges as her brother.
Fatima Kandil – Salim’s school friend. Ran in Group H with Salim. Charged with producing false or misleading document.
Jamal Elkheir – Fatima’s husband, who ran beneath her in Group G in the 2012 Auburn Council election. He is Charged with producing false or misleading document.
Ahmad Trad – Fatima Mehajer’s ex-partner. Ran in Group H with Salim. Charged with producing false or misleading document.
Abhinav Mehta – Ran in Group G with Fatima. Charged with producing false or misleading document.
Arjun Mehta – Ran in Group H with Salim. Charged with producing false or misleading document.
Shi Lao – Salim’s school friend. Ran in Group H with Salim. Charged with producing false or misleading document.
Now the AFP have proven to be effective with election fraud investigation, can we expect this to continue into federal government election fraud?
Strictly speaking, and barring some rare, isolated cases, there is no electoral fraud in Australia if by that one means ‘illegal interference with an election process’. None of the defining instances of ‘electoral fraud’ is present in Australia — not intimidation, vote buying, misinformation, misleading or confusing ballot papers, ballot stuffing, mis-recording of votes, one million or more bogus names on rolls, compulsory voting, destruction or wrongful invalidation of ballots. And pigs are flying. It is ‘the electoral process’ itself which is fraudulent by engineered legislation to maintain the two party preferred duopoly.
In this must read final part of his six part series on Australian fascism, Dr George Venturini looks at Australia‘s undemocratic electoral system – [HERE].
Letter to Sydney Morning Herald Editor
Some serious maladies in our voting systems are shown by your story “AFP finds no one to charge despite many cases of voting fraud” (26 Feb).
The AEC has admitted 18,770 cases of multiple voting in the 2013 election yet now one-and-a-half years later we find out that they can prosecute nobody.
Endemic problems in the AEC could no longer be hid when they lost ballot papers causing a new WA Senate election at a cost to taxpayers of $23million.
However this was not the first time.
For over 10 years Australians for Honest Elections Inc (AFHE) has been pointing out previous cases of losses of ballot papers, multiple voting and other problems, but the AEC has been inert.
However, far worse than multiple voting is the woeful state of the Electoral Rolls, partly due to false enrolments.
For example, the AEC admitted in a parliamentary committee on 13 November 2014
that there are “139,898 more electors on the NSW State Roll” (kept by the NSW Electoral Commission) “than on the federal Roll” (kept by the AEC).
Also, when one of our AFHE members doorknocked less than 10% of the Kingsford-Smith electorate in early 2013, he found 500 definitely false enrolments, and another 1,000 enrolments worth investigating. He took these lists of names and addresses (see photo attached) to the AEC, asking that they check and cleanse the Electoral Roll. The AEC refused to act, and we sailed into our September 2013 election with unknown amounts of false enrolments.
How confident can we be of a fair and honest NSW State election?!
Lex Stewart, President, Australians for Honest Elections, www.afhe.org.au
Strange vote patterns defeated Pauline Hanson?
· Higher than normal postal votes in Hanson’s electorate, Lockyer
· Loopholes in the law make postal voting frauds easy
· A week after the election, some polling booths not yet included
· Election experts claim postal voting fraud rife in marginal electorates
Pauline Hanson beaten by 180 postal votes that kept arriving in mail until closing day of February 9. No post marks are required by the Queensland Electoral Commission on envelopes containing ballot papers.
Strange patterns among postal votes in the Queensland State election are leading some election analysts to suspect that Pauline Hanson (and others) are being unfairly culled out.
“We issued a media release before the Queensland election warning that Vote Frauds would be likely to occur in the area of postal votes, due to large loopholes in the recently-amended Queensland Electoral Act,” said Mr Lex Stewart, President of Australians for Honest Elections.
“We warned that the new ID requirements of sections 107 and 3A of the Act are ineffective in preventing vote frauds because they do not apply to POSTAL voters, where no such identity proofs are needed! Whereas the Commonwealth Act requires people to have a reason to apply for a postal vote, we warned that section 119(1) of the Queensland Act allows anybody, including false enrolments, to apply for a postal vote without any reason at all!”
The Commonwealth Electoral Act requires a postal vote envelope to be postmarked BEFORE the election, but Postal votes in Queensland can even be posted AFTER the election!!
“Therefore, where a close contest became evident in a seat on election night, did we have party hacks filling in Postal Votes on the Sunday and Monday after the election?” asks Mr Stewart.
Voting figures from the Queensland Electoral Commission as at 4:13pm 6 Februaryhttp://results.ecq.qld.gov.au/elections/state/State2015/results/district45.html
show that Lockyer has a surprisingly high number of postal votes, 3,225 which is 10.7% of the total votes, and also that the rate of informal voting among postals is rather low.
“Lockyer’s percent of postals 10.7% is higher than the statewide average of 8.7%, yet it is a fairly small electorate, only 60km from north to south, and one would expect more postals in larger rural electorates, like Cook in far north Queensland, which runs almost 1,300km north to south, and has only 801 postal votes, or 3.5%. – or has counting not finished yet?” said Mr Stewart.
“The Queensland Electoral Commission is negligent in that in Lockyer (and other electorates) not all polling booths have been included in website figures a week after the election!!
Pauline Hanson with 49.65% of the votes is running neck-and-neck with the LNP at 50.35% but only 59 out of 61 polling booths have (as at 6 Feb 4:13pm) been included.
Where have the ballot papers from these two booths been for a week? Who has had access to them? And could they have been tampered with to the detriment of Pauline Hanson?”
“Postal voting has long been recognised as fertile ground for vote cheating, and for this reason many countries around the world do not allow any postal voting.
UK Election Commissioner Richard Mawrey QC (who sent people from both sides of politics to jail in the UK for vote frauds) said during his visit to Australia 4 years ago that the ‘system of postal voting is a recipe for fraud … the system is highly vulnerable at a number of critical points’.”
Without doubt this commentary on vote fraud by the AEC is compulsory viewing. Mark Aldridge could be described as a perennial political candidate nevertheless his hard hitting expose of both major parties reveals their depth depth of fraud. The AEC, finally after recent events in West Australia and comments by Clive Palmer, Member for Fairfax show conclusively the department riddled with massive corruption and collusion.
Having attempted to find justice he has been denied it due to stacked courts. In his never ending pursuit of a peoples government to replace the two party controlled parliament, Mark reflects factual evidence to viewers naming the crooks and the crooked deals he has uncovered.