By: Toby Ley
Some confusion surrounds the actual numbers of candidates and parties contending the 2012 Vanuatu elections. Before getting into that though, it’s important to acknowledge the valuable work done by the Vanuatu electoral office in extremely difficult circumstances. Having faced a set of major challenges, not limited to but including: overstretched resources, distant constituencies, disorganised political parties and intense political pressure, the electoral office has managed to do its job relatively well and helped to ensure that the 2012 election will take place on the set date. However, following the release of the office’s initial candidate list, a significant number of people successfully appealed their disqualification from running in the election and a second list had to be put together just 72 hours later. The supplementary list did not include candidates that had appeared in the initial list, meaning that anyone wanting to find total numbers had to work from two distinct lists, increasing the potential for human error to occur (for convenience, PiPP has compiled the information into one simple list). It seems that releasing these two separate candidate lists on different days may be a contributing factor to the current level of confusion.
Number of candidates – 346, not 348 (probably)
Most media outlets are quoting the number of candidates as being 348. According to PiPP’s independent findings, the actual number of candidates is 346. The reason for the confusion likely stems from people adding up the number of candidates according to the headings above each constituency in the electoral office lists. However there appear to be a couple of mistakes in these headings.
In the first candidate list released, the heading for the constituency of Epi states that there are two seats and nine candidates. But if one takes the time to check the list, there are in fact only eight candidates (number three is missing). Then, in the second candidate list released, the heading for the constituency of Pentecost notes that there are four seats and two candidates but only one name is actually listed. It is conceivable (though unlikely) that two names have been accidentally left off, but no name on the list means no name on the ballot paper so in any case, there are 346 named candidates in the 2012 Vanuatu election.
Also interesting is the Facebook and social media factor. Many people and organisations are making their own lists, tables and maps and errors appear to be common. One table shared on a popular Facebook election page for example, provides an interesting history of the growing number of independent candidates since Vanuatu achieved independence. However, among other information, the table lists the total number of candidates in the 2012 election as being 446; not a small difference when compared to our figure of 346. Where these numbers came from isn’t clear but what is clear is that many people reading this post and others like it, appear to be accepting such information immediately and unquestioningly.
How many political parties? 32 (maybe)
The actual number of political parties vying for election this year is another mystifying element. A major source of confusion seems to be that several political parties have more than one name and acronym for themselves and that these differences have been reflected in the official candidate lists. Things are made even more difficult by parties having both Bislama names and English ones (and therefore different acronyms too). A couple of examples:
The electoral office names a candidate in the ‘Banks/ Torres’ constituency as belonging to the ‘Kristin Demokratic Pati’, but then in the second candidate list, another candidate in the same party from ‘Port Vila’ is listed as belonging to ‘KDP’. Meanwhile, in newspapers and in conversation, the party is often referred to as ‘CDP’, reflecting their English acronym. Confused yet? This is just the tip of the iceberg.
How about a party having the acronym ‘NPP’ in Malekula but at the same time being called ‘VPP’ in Epi? How can people not get confused when one party has two such different names? Then there is a party listed beside its various candidates as, ‘Green Confederation’, ‘VGC’, and ‘GC’, all in the same document. It might seem obvious that these are all names for the same party and one might be tempted to assume, from the beginning, that Green confederation, VGC and GC are all one entity but when you consider that VDP, VGC, VDALPC, VFFP, VLP, VPDP, VP, VPP, VNP, VPRFP, VRDP and VRP are all completely DIFFERENT parties, you realise how dangerous it is to assume anything. See this table if you are interested in a breakdown of the number of candidates and parties vying for seats.
Do you have a headache yet? We’re not done. This year, the electoral office listed 65 candidates as being ‘Independent’. In the lead up to the election we’ve been talking to some of these candidates and at least two of them referred to themselves as being in parties – ‘MU’ and ‘VFP’, for example. Since the release of the official candidate lists, we have heard that the two parties mentioned have been listed as ‘Independent’, apparently because they only have one candidate in their party. However, the complete list of candidates and party names, reveals six ‘parties’ consisting of only one candidate: (Muvmen blong ol chiefs, Makitotsan, RUMPV, VFFP, VPDP, VPRFP). It is unclear at this stage why these single candidates are considered as ‘parties’ and not as independents in the same way that ‘MU’ and ‘VFP’ are. It is possible that they are actually further examples of a single party having two or three different names but at this stage we don’t think so. We’re still working on it…
If you have additional information or have found mistakes with some of our findings, please don’t hesitate to let us know by emailing us at this address: campaign2012@pacificpolicy.org
Thanks for the election blog – PiPP is doing an excellent job to keep those of us far away informed, and in a lively and entertaining way. Keep up the great work!