Introduction
In
December 2004, the National Electoral Commission (NEC) completed a seven-step
electoral reform plan, which was based on a lessons learned process following
the May 2004 local elections as well as recommendations pending since the 2002
national elections. The NEC’s 2004 plan provided the foundation for
comprehensive electoral reform, which a UNDP project was put in place to
support from 2005 to 2007.
The
lessons learned report following the 2007 Presidential and Parliamentary
elections noted that “2007 elections had an extraordinary and historical
significance for the consolidation of the peace and democratization process of
Sierra Leone.”[1] At the
same time, the lessons learned report cautions that the longer-term challenges
faced in the consolidation of the democratic process in Sierra Leone have not
been fully addressed and notes that “paradoxically, the needs to sustain the
positive results achieved with the 2007 elections are even stronger than
before.”
Subsequently, in 2010 a Needs Assessment Mission (NAM)[2]
was fielded and based on the findings of the NAM the current UN Electoral Support
programme concentrated on the three areas, which included establishment of operational Regional Results Management
centres for the 2012 Elections. Under this NEC was supported in identifying appropriate locations, procurement
of required equipment, technical expertise, contract management, monitoring and
oversight Regional Results Management
centres.
With respect to results, a criticism of the 2007 Elections in Sierra
Leone was the time taken for the results process. In fact, in some cases it
took several weeks for Results Sheets to reach the Central Tally Centre situated
in the capital Freetown. This caused delay in the announcement of the results
and created apprehension amongst those seeking office and their supporters increasing
uncertainty and thereby the risk of electoral violence. The NEC estimated that
by decentralizing results tally centres to the regional level the time between
the polling and announcement of results could be cut by one-third. The UN programme
therefore supported NEC in establishing the four Regional Tally Centers.
However, at very late stage of the electoral process, two months before the
Elections, NEC decided on the establishment of District Tally Centers.
It is worth mentioning
that Result Tallying process in 2012 Sierra Leone Election involved tallying of
results for 542 elections or 542 different ballot papers. Given the low
literacy rate ballots were colour coded representing a specific election. To
further alleviate workload of polling staff after a daunting day of managing a
complex election a decision was made to preprint all of the Ballot Papers and
various Result Forms with the candidate names. This decision added further
complexity in the distribution process which was managed through a tracking mechanism
ensuring correct ballots reaching the correct polling station. This was
instrumental in managing a smooth running of regional/district tally centres.
Concept of Sierra Leone Decentralized Election Results
2012
On November 17th 2012 Sierra Leone saw for the first time
four rounds of elections held on the same day. There were some 36,000 Results
Forms produced in almost 9,000 Polling Stations throughout the country, electing
four levels of government. The Commission decided to set up a decentralized
result and tally centres at the following levels:
District level - The district tally
centres were linked to the national and regional centres. Results were tallied
at the district centres using the district copies of the polling station result
forms for the purpose of producing certified district results as required by
Sec. 94 of Public Election Act of 2012.
Regional level - The regional tally centre, one
in each Regional Capital, used the double blind data entry procedure to tally
all district results from the regional copies of polling station result forms
and transmit output to the national centre.
National level - The national tally centre was
linked to the four regional centres via satellite link and performed quality
control and consolidation of all regional outputs.
The National Tally Centre, the Regional Tally Centres and the District Tally
Centres received copies of the Reconciliation and Results Forms from Polling
Stations within their respective areas of responsibilities. The
responsibilities and activities at each level, National, Regional and District,
varied depending on the logistic and ICT infrastructural resources that the NEC
had the capacity to put in place at those locations as well as considering the
experience of staff who were engaged in the process.
At District Tally Centres
District tally centres’ objective was to capture the details of a TEE
Bag (Tamper Evident Envelope Bag) for reference purposes. Detailed captured
included centre code, details of the courier, time of delivery, status of TEE
Bag (e.g. Sealed, Suspect/Tampered-with), and number of result sheets. Each
result sheet was captured appropriately using a Camera/Scanner and stored on
Sierra Leone Voter Collation (SLVC) application.
Data Entry Operators captured actual result information from Result
Sheet per Polling Station using the scanned copy of the result sheet. Data
Entry Operators captured the results of a polling station for each election.
A supervisory approval was instituted to vet that the data entered by
the data operators is consistent with the details on the results sheet. The
supervisor compared the data entered by the data entry operator with the
scanned copy of the results sheet. If the entered data is found inconsistent
the supervisor was allowed to edit the information entered by the data operator
prior to approval, and such approval and changes were confirmed by the District
Electoral Officer/ the District Returning Officer.
The District Returning Officer received and dispatched TEE bags of
station and centre results to regional collation centre, supervised the
collation of station results at District level, approved/disapproved changes
made by a Supervisor and flagged/un-flagged results from a polling station if found
to be inconsistent. The District Returning Officer also generated numerous
reports based on entered data or the lack of it, viewed and printed the
collated/aggregated results for an election, transmitted by e-mail a complete
collated result of an election to the Regional Returning Officer for perusal/comparison
and announced provisional results of election types after reconciliation
through the Regional Returning Officer and confirmation by the Commission. The
District Returning Officer also printed and signed the certified District election
results and distributed them to the relevant stakeholders.
The establishment of the District Tally Centres was supported by the Government
of Sierra Leone (GoSL) with technical support provided by the Nigerian Election
Commission, INEC.
At Regional Tally Centres
Four Regional Tally Centers were established at the cities of Bo,
Kenema, Makeni and Freetown. The Regional Tally Centres were equipped with desk-top
computers, linked by a local area network and via a VSAT link to the National
Tally Centre. The Regional Election Officer was responsible for establishing
and managing the Regional Tally Centre. The Regional Election Officers received
the Tamper Evident Envelopes from the District Office for each of the Polling
Stations within its Area of Responsibility. The Regional Election Officers
accounted for each Tamper Evident Envelope received as well as for its
contents.
Each Regional Tally Centre had approximately 24 data entry clerks who were
responsible for the data entry of the Polling Station Reconciliation and
Results Forms. A clerk entered the data from each of the four Results Forms.
The Results Forms for the Presidential and Parliamentary Elections were
prioritized ahead of those for Mayoral and Councillors Elections. The data from
each Form was subsequently re-entered by a second data entry clerk. The
database compared the two sets of data for miss-matches of data, transposition
errors and for mathematical or accounting errors. Reconciliation and Results
Forms that have been double blind data entered and for which there were no
miss-matches of data or mathematical or accounting errors were identified in
the database for inclusion in the Final Results.
Forms that failed the cross-checking process were taken for Review and
Correction and experienced electoral staff were employed to review the forms
for miss-matches transposition errors and for mathematical or accounting errors
as well as for drafting errors performed by the Polling Station Presiding
Officers. Where Reconciliation and Results Forms failed the above process they were
held in a Quarantine Area for further action and possible subsequent
investigation.
When Regional Election Officers were unable to resolve discrepancies in
the blind double data entry process or where Results Forms from Polling
Stations failed the audit process, they were, upon confirmation from the NEC (Chairperson
or delegated Commissioner) task the District Officers with undertaking an
investigation and/or re-count of the Polling Station material in order to
provide a detailed report of findings and/or a “revised” Result Form for
inclusion in the Final Results.
At The National Tally Centre:
The National Tally Centre was co-located at the NEC Headquarters in
Freetown. Staff working at the National Tally Centre provided oversight to the
results process, analyzing and assessing the progress of data entry process as
well as providing summaries and reports for the NEC, Party Agents and
Observers. Results Forms for the National Tally Centre were stored at NEC
Wellington warehousing facility which also housed the Central Results
database.
The establishment of the Regional and National Tally Centres was
supported by the UN Electoral Support programme.
At a Polling Station
At the close of polls and at the conclusion of the counting process the
Presiding Officer completed the Reconciliation and Results Form (RRF) for each
of the four elections conducted in that polling station. These forms were
completed in accordance with the Polling and Counting Procedures.
One RRF, which contained an original and four carbon copies, was
completed for each election. Each Election RRF had 4 copies. One for Region
(top and original copy), one for National (second copy), one for District
(third copy), one for Polling Centre (fourth copy) and one for the ballot box
(fifth copy). The top copy of each election (Presidential, Parliament,
Mayor/Chair and Councillors) was sealed into the Tamper Evident Envelope (TEE)
1. The second copies of all elections were put in TEE2, third copies of all
elections were put in TEE3, the fourth copies were sent to Polling Centre
Manager and the fifth were put in the ballot box. All TEE’s were sent to the
Polling Centre Manager.
In addition, all Presiding Officers completed a further two versions of
the RRF each with four carbon copies which were distributed to Party/candidate
agents and /or Observers. Therefore, in principle it was possible that there
will be up to fifteen copies of the results in circulation after the count was
concluded at the polling station, five copies for NEC purposes and a further
ten for agents and observers.
At a Polling Centre
The Polling Centre Manager copied the fourth copy of each polling
station for each election onto a respective Polling Centre Summary Sheet and
pasted the fourth copy along with the summary on the wall. The original summary
sheet was placed in a TEE7 and together with all the other TEEs from the
Polling Stations, and was sent to Ward.
At a Ward
Ward only acted as a concentrator and a transit point. The Ward
Coordinators were responsible for collecting the sensitive materials from the
Polling Centres and arranging their safe onward delivery to the District
Offices.
At a District
District located in Regional Capital City
District Election Officer received all the TEE’s from the Polling
Stations in the district, routed through Polling Centres and Wards, TEE1’s and
TEE2’s were passed on to Regional Centers. TEE3s’ were opened and data entered
into the District Tally System starting on Election Night and continued 24/7.
TEE3s were opened and separated so that Presidential RRFs could be given first
priority, then Parliament, the Mayor, then Councillors Results.
District outside Regional Capitol City
District Election Officer received all TEEs from the Polling Stations.
TEE1s and TEE2s were passed on to Regional Centers but in batches. UN provided
extra logistics to help in retrieval of TEEs. TEE3s were opened and data
entered into the District Tally System only during daylight. No night entry was
performed for the risk of electricity outage and generator failure. TEE3s were opened
and separated so that Presidential could be given first priority, then
Parliament, the Mayor, then Councillors Results.
At a Regional Tally Centre
TEE1s and TEE2s were received and the TEE2s were passed on to Wellington
for National Storage and Queries. TEE1s were opened and separated so that
Presidential could be given first priority, then Parliament, the Mayor, then Councillors
Results. Regional Data Entry started on Election Night and continued for 24/7
until all results were entered and issues were resolved.
Verification Procedures for Regional Tally
Centre and District Tally Centres
Results were to be electronically and automatically cross referenced at
Regional level when District Tally Systems presents entered results. When
no discrepancy exists, the Regional were to send back a positive answer and
mark the results as such. If a discrepancy was detected, the Regional
Tally System was to send back a negative answer highlighting the
discrepancies. Both sides would be flagged for investigation. Both
sides were to investigate. District were to offer the corrections (or no
corrections if Regional was in error) and if solution was found, the
discrepancy flags were be cleared by both systems and the results were to be
published.
Regional Tally Centres were using satellite based independent
communication system whereas Districts Tally Centres were relying upon a local
telephone operator which was prone to disruption. Therefore, in case of no
communication between the Regional Tally Centres and Districts Tally Centres
Regional Tally Centre were to proceed with publishing of results.
Election Result Management Software
Results were entered at regional level from RRF retrieved directly from
Polling Centers using the Result Management Software. The software was developed as a web based
interface and the database was designed in such a way that NEC could enter
multiple elections held on one day. The
system is also capable of retaining all the results for future use allowing
cross reference between various elections simultaneously.
Every Result and Reconciliation Form (RRF) could be tracked in the
system, once entered. The reporting
pages could pinpoint exactly how many and what RRF’s were still outstanding in
the field. This was done by entering the
RRF’s as they arrive in the Material Tracking page at Regional Tally Centers. The receiving staff inspected the TEE in the
presence of observers for tampering before opening it. The contents were then recorded to indicate
the presence of the four RRF’s expected.
Any missing data or obvious tampering was recorded in the system.
The software provided a double blind entry mechanism for the actual
election result entry and the candidates appeared on the entry screen in the
same order as the ballot paper, result form and consolidation forms, courtesy
of the integrated design. The RRF was
mathematically checked against the prescribed formulae. By initial design the software did not warn
the operator of any mistakes, except for asking the operator to put a black
sticker on the form if the form did not make mathematically sense, or blue if
all was fine.
RRF’s could have been quarantined for various reasons such as missing
information, wrong polling station code, does not make mathematically sense or
duplicate entry. These quarantine cases
were displayed in report form and the data centre staff could focus on specific
areas to solve them.
The software calculated the cut-off point where the outstanding RRF’s
including the ones in quarantine, would not make any difference to the
outcome. The first milestone was to
determine whether to expect a run-off.
This was important for the procurement process to be kicked off as soon
as possible in order to have the run-off ballot papers in the country. The second milestone was to determine if the
outstanding RRF’s would make a difference to the outcome of the presidential
contest.
VSAT Based Result transmission
It was also the first time in Sierra Leone that a satellite based data
communication (VSAT) system was introduced into an election result management
system. The VSAT system was required for
the Regional Result Tally Centers to transmit regional election results to the
National Result Tally Centre for consolidated Election Result Management. In
total six (6) VSAT sites were established i.e. one at each Regional Result
Tally Centres location, one at central datacentre facility and one for the
Disaster Recovery Site at NEC HQ.
Announcement of 2012 Elections Results
Presidential Results at Districts and Regions were only posted or
published after the official NEC HQ announcements which were the final results.
All other elections (Parliament, Mayor/Chair and Councillor) results were
announced as preliminary results by District Returning Officers after
respective Regional Tally Centre and District Tally Centre were in
agreement. The official and final announcement came from the NEC HQ.
Strengths of the Sierra Leone Results Management System
- The establishment of four regional Result Tally
Centers significantly improved the result management for the 2012 elections.
NEC significantly benefited from the establishment of a decentralized regional
Result Tally Centers and was able to announce the Presidential final results on
the 23 November i.e. 6 days after the polling. 80% of provisional results were
announced with in 42 - 48 hours after the polling closed. Whereas under the previous centralized result
system no provisional results announced which caused great anxiety at the time.
- The use of double blind entry at regional level flagged
very quickly typing mistakes and the software was “clever” enough to point out
possible causes for the errors. The
software was able to direct the supervisors in the right direction for fault
finding.
- The time consuming process of transporting
Results Forms from polling stations to the National Tally Centre have been eliminated.
- Greater responsibilities are bestowed upon
Regional Election Officers and their staff in the consolidation and provision
of results.
- Improved transparency even at regional level, as
Tally Centers had dedicated results computers for observers and party agents to
run queries.
- The National Election Commission of Sierra Leone
has its capacities, staff and resources, built at regional and district levels.
- A sustainable election results system is put in
place and provides the building blocks for future operations for result
management system.
- Observers and Party Agents are able to witness
and oversee the Results Tally System from polling station to District and Region
- The double blind data entry at Regional Tally
Centers has given observers and party agents greater confidence in the accuracy
of the results process.
- Individual polling station results forms entered
at the Regions formed the basis of the final results and were therefore offered
greater transparency.
- Though the number of Reconciliation and Results
Forms, in tune of 36,000, was be greater than in any previous election in
Sierra Leone the division of labour through four Regional Tally Centers provided
more timely results than any past election.
Weaknesses of the Sierra Leone Results Management
System and recommendations
- While considerable capacity enhancement has been
witnessed in NEC overtime, it should be recognized that the technical
complexity of the new elements introduced through the heavily IT based
decentralized result management system meant NEC still required targeted
international technical assistance.
- Renewed efforts are needed to improve retrieval
of materials from 10% polling stations. This could allow NEC to announce future
election results within 72 hours after polls are closed. For 2012 Election, 90%
of election results forms were received by regional tally centres and tallied within
24 hours after polls were closed. It was
the retrieval of the remaining 10% of results forms which took four additional
days.
- Majority of the quarantine cases proved to be a
mathematically mistake on the form. It
would be recommended to have more focused training on the mathematical part and
to train the staff on what the consequences would be or the effect would be
should they make a calculation error.
- Decentralized regional tally centres host large
data centres requiring constant supply of electricity which is an issue in
Sierra Leone. The maintenance of
generators, especially since the running hours accumulate very fast, and the
running cost of fuel and lubricants are a big burden on the budget.
- The integrated district and regional tally
centre operation was adopted but district tally software interface was not implemented
in time. This hampered electronically and automatically cross-referencing process
between regional and district tally centres.
- Two different types of
data-entry software were used at district and regional levels negatively
affecting timely release of results, in addition to complicating training as
different trainings rather than a standardized one, which also had cost
implications.
Typical Layout for Regional Tally Centre
Organizational Chart at a Regional Tally Centre
[1]
Lessons
Learned from the 2007 Presidential and Parliamentary Elections in Sierra Leone,
Post Election UNDP Report, November 2007.
[2]
Recommendations
of Electoral Support Needs Assessment Mission to Sierra Leone (NAM), 22
February to 3 March 2010. The NAM
included the participation of UNDP’s Bureau for Development Policy (BDP) and
Bureau for Crisis Prevention and Recovery (BCPR).
