Home H.S. Chapman Secure Voting Vote Tracing Disputed Elections Postal Voting Manipulated Elections Solution Articles Links Contact

Disputed Elections

Machinery of disputed elections in the ‘secure vote’ and ‘secret vote’ systems
and its efficiency in reducing fraud.  The UK parliament approved machinery
of the secure vote to trace voting fraud in 1872.
 

The Conservative Leader in the House of Commons, the Duke of Richmond, insisted on an amendment in the bill, for ‘vote-tracing’. He argued: “That impersonation was deemed by the promoter of this Bill to be so serious an offence that it was declared in the Commons Bill of 1872, that it was a felony punishable with two years’ imprisonment with hard labour. That being so, it seemed to be absolutely necessary to provide some machinery by which the vote could be traced, because without this the offence could hardly be proved.” 

  • Today, there is now no such ‘machinery’ by which any vote can be traced.
  • Defeated candidates must find their own evidence of possible fraud within 40 days.
  • This is impossible because neither candidates nor parties have the time or money to track evidence in proof.

A climate of denial, that significant fraud occurs, exists in recent reports to, and by, the Commonwealth parliament. This is no longer the case in the UK where the conduct of the May 6, 2010 election is currently under investigation by police in 50 constituencies.. 

1. Department of Prime Minister and Cabinet
The Department of PM and Cabinet published a massive 260 pages long ‘issues and options’ document entitled ‘Key elements of the Electoral Reform Green Paper – Strengthening Australia’s Democracy on September 2009. This document, which was produced by unidentified people, makes the following extraordinary statement:


“One point to note is that there has been no evidence of widespread subversion of electoral laws in Australia. The most common breaches of the Electoral Act have tended to be inadvertent or unintentional
(such as the instances of multiple voting discussed in chapter 11) or transgressions by individuals that were not intended to have a broader impact on the outcome of an election or the actions of others in the political process (such as failure to vote). More serious offences have tended to be isolated events (Chapter 14 14.10.”) 

2.  The Joint Standing Committee Report on the 2007 election. 
“The years leading up to the 2007 election saw the creation and perpetuation of the mythical ‘straw man’ of electoral fraud. The 'straw man' has been used to create and perpetuate an erroneous view that electoral fraud is commonplace and to overstate its potential effects. It is worth quoting from the AEC’s first submission to the Swagman inquiry in which the AEC states categorically: ‘turning first to entitlement, it can be clearly stated, in relation to false identities, that there has never been any evidence of widespread or organized enrolment fraud in Australia p.”
 

The H.S. Chapman Society has exposed such false denials of fraud for 14 years viz: 

"That the electoral system is open to manipulation is beyond question
 ... Fraudulent enrolment is almost impossible to prevent."

(NSW Electoral Commissioners, Messrs R. Cundy and Ian Dickson, NSW Government Inquiry 1989)

Contact Us  |  Website developed by CSM Computers