By I read recently, with a feeling of nostalgia, an article in a national daily, titled “e-voting, e-crisis at MAPOLY”.
Ordinarily, I wouldn’t have joined issues with the writer, but in order not to mislead members of the public and not to put MAPOLY in bad light I am also writing this because of my involvement in the entire election process thereby becoming imperative for me to iron out the grey areas in the write-up.
Firstly, Friday, 10th March, 2017 was the first time the e-voting system will be used for Students’ Union election in the Polytechnic – as enshrined in its recently amended constitution. No doubt, this is a welcome development and definitely may witness some teething problems which am sure will be improved upon in subsequent elections.
Secondly, it is unfair to indicate the interest of the Polytechnic’s Management in a particular candidate as events leading to, and activities on the election day showed that the students (through SUELECO) were the ones doing their thing. If indeed, as perceived in the article, the ‘management’s candidate’ won, why is he yet to be sworn into office? The Rector, from what we gather, is interested in things been done rightly and in line with the provisions of the constitution.
The problems surrounding the six-digit pin should be put on the door steps of the ‘biased’ SUELECO who should have given the full statistical analysis of the election viz-a-viz total number of voters, total votes cast, total void votes (if any), accredited voters, etc before the pronouncement of results.
Fourthly, the writer painted a picture of massive breakdown of law and order, which was not the case as we, the ‘aggrieved electorates’, only indicated our displeasure through comments made to the PRO, Security Personnel and DSA. It must be on record that all these happened at the election venue and no where else.
In addition, the constitution of the Students’ Union of our Polytechnic provides for a Students’ Union Electoral Petition Committee which is currently addressing petitions written by some aspirants – a result of which (as stipulated in the constitution) will still get to the academic board.
The write-up also added that some results were undeclared, this is not true. All the ten positions contested for had their results declared (announced) by the SUELECO Chairman on that day.
Finally, it is criminal to make spurious allegations against a management which has shown its desire to continue to improve the status of the Institution, and is currently grappling with its transition status to a University of Science and Technology.
Olatunde Fiwajoye
Writes from the Department of Mass Communication,
Moshood Abiola Polytechnic, Abeokuta.
