New details on Mugabe’s extra votes

THE Research and Advocacy Unit (Rau) has released a new report which questions the source of President Robert Mugabe’s controversial one million extra votes in the disputed July 31, 2013 general elections compared to the 2008 polls.

Owen Gagare/Wongai Zhangazha

Titled Numbers out of Tune?, An examination of the vote in Harmonised July 2013 Election, the report examines some of the numbers and voting patterns from the July 2013 poll.

It is based on an analysis of published results in the presidential elections from 2008 and 2013 and voter registration statistics.

Mugabe got 2 110 434 votes while his closet rival former Prime Minister Morgan Tsvangirai polled 1 172 349 votes. In the first round of the 2008 elections, Mugabe had managed only 1 079 730 whereas Tsvangirai polled 1 195 562.

Rau says since Tsvangirai’s vote remained virtually unchanged, there were limited number of possibilities for the huge jump in Mugabe’s numbers, possibly that; there was large increase in the number of registered voters; that large numbers of people who were registered as voters in 2008 did not vote in March 2008, but turned up to vote in 2013.

It says there could also have been numerous fraudulent ballots cast last year.

The think tank says an analysis of the voters roll and voter registration figures shows that a total of 779 279 new voters were added since 2008.

“With these considerations and numbers in mind, one can now consider the claim that Mugabe’s 1,03 million extra votes came from the large number of Zanu PF supporters added to the roll during the registration drives. If the pattern of bias claimed by Zanu PF during the first registration drive (4:1) continued during the second exercise, and one extends these ratios to the total of 779 279 new voters, then 623 423 of the new voters would have been Zanu PF supporters,” notes Rau.

“This would leave the source of 407 281 votes for Mugabe unexplained. Even if every one of the new voters added to the roll had voted for Mugabe, some 251 425 votes still would require explanation.”

Rau rejects the notion that a lot of voters who voted for Tsvangirai could have changed allegiance during last year’s polls.

“At the outset, it must be noted that the vote tally for Tsvangirai remained little changed from 2008, dropping by 23 213 votes. This constant in the Tsvangirai tally limits the possibilities when attempting to explain Mugabe’s tally.

In particular, it means that Mugabe’s tally cannot be explained by two simple parameters only: the increase in voters and a switch in allegiance from Tsvangirai,” says Rau.

“Since Tsvangirai’s total is almost unchanged from 2008, any gap caused by a switch in allegiance by former loyalists reducing Tsvangirai vote, would need to be filled (if confined to these two parameters) by new voters casting a ballot for Tsvangirai.

This then reduces the number of the new voters who could have voted for Mugabe, and thus reduces the number of these votes available to explain his tally.

“In other words, reallocating the votes within the pool cannot explain the increase in Mugabe’s tally, as the pool itself is too small to explain the vote. There must be some other source besides a switch in allegiance and an increased voter population to explain the 1,03 million additional votes.

“If all 779 279 newly registered voters are added to Mugabe’s tally for 2008 (1079730), the total is only 1 859 009, some 251 425 votes short of the official count of 2 110 434, and leaving the source of these votes unexplained.”

Rau says the fact that 206 901 voters were “assisted” to cast a ballot and may be assumed to have voted for Mugabe, does not change anything as it effectively constitute shifts in allegiance which cannot explain Mugabe’s tally.

The think tank adds that a transfer of votes by those that voted for the other outside presidential candidates in 2008 (221 973) cannot explain the increase in Mugabe’s votes as only 93 989 of these votes did not go to outside candidates in 2013.

“Even if all are attributed to Mugabe, 157 436 votes are still unexplained,” Rau says.

“In short, examining this explanation for the results, the sources considered thus far from which Mugabe’s votes are drawn, constitute a pool too small to explain all of his additional 1,03 million votes.

“If a more complex scenario is assumed, and all the possible sources for Mugabe’s final tally are included, the problem of the unexplained votes still does not go away.

Even if one attributes every single vote from all obvious sources to Mugabe – loyalists from 2008, newly registered voters, assisted voters, and switches in allegiance – the source of some 134 223 votes of his tally still remains unexplained.”

Rau also tables the number of unaccounted votes by province which shows there were anomalies countrywide.

It says the unexplained votes can only be derived from fraudulent votes – either ghost polling stations or multiple voting – or from people who were registered in 2008 but did not vote in 2013.

It highlights that circumstances were propitious for multiple voting as shown by the following:

An examination of the electronic roll as at the end of May 2013 showed the voters roll to be massively inflated;

Against an international norm of 10%, 35% more ballot papers were printed than there are voters on even this inflated roll. This would ensure that, if an “unexpected” number of voters arrived at a single polling station, there would be sufficient ballot papers to accommodate them;

Voters whose names were not on the roll were allowed to vote using voter registration slips. Election officials were thus unable to guard against multiple voting by checking to see whether the names of these voters had been crossed off the roll.

The slips also contained no information by which the election officers could determine the ward in which the voter was to cast a ballot, allowing voters to “ward hop” and there were no security features to prevent forgery;

During the election, 20 to 30 Zanu PF supporters were found with fraudulent voter registration slips allegedly distributed by a Zanu PF parliamentary candidate;

The main means by which multiple voting is prevented is by the use of the ink into which voters dip a finger before voting. The ink should contain specified quantities of silver nitrate.

This silver nitrate chemically combines with skin cells and cannot be washed off. Zec allowed the test for the chemical quality of the ink to be conducted by the Zimbabwe Republic Police, the very body whose members are alleged to have engaged in multiple voting.

Several anecdotal reports suggested that the ink was easily removed, and possibly due to inadequate supplies, had been diluted, and
The UV machines used in 2008 to test for silver nitrate residue on voter’s fingers, and utilised when a suspicion or allegation of a prior vote was raised, were inexplicably not used in 2013.

'

,

27 Responses to New details on Mugabe’s extra votes

  1. Siqoqodo April 11, 2014 at 8:17 am #

    Voting rigging is the only source that could allow Mugabe to win any election after his disastrous economic policies. We are happy that the economy is refusing to be rigged, those mercenaries from ZNA and CIO will soon be paid in the Zim dollar.

    • Reason April 11, 2014 at 8:07 pm #

      Guys to tell you the truth you will not like it or believe it, Mugabe had a total of 1 700 000 votes in favour of him and his party. The main architecture was the director of CIO, he visited the zim printers and orders more ballot papers to be printed on the eve of the election. All the answers are on the voters roll, they are busy as I write now trying to fix the voters roll to match their thieving. Dear Zimbabweans do not cry, they have started receiving their punishment already wait and see in the corridors, dont say I did not warn you, some would want to chicken out but they will not be able to run away. Mugabe can kill so as protect his ego.

      How does mugabe feel knowing that he garnered less than a million of votes, Iko kusanyara kani, murume mukuru,

      • Phillip Dzenga April 16, 2014 at 12:00 pm #

        Wabaya Reason!

  2. goodlife April 11, 2014 at 9:12 am #

    hopefully the mangomas of this world and those western diplomats who are aspiring to disrupt the peoples’ project will have a second thought

    • Phillip Dzenga April 16, 2014 at 12:04 pm #

      Though the ballot was stolen in broad daylight, Goodlife, Zimbabweans still need better leadership than has been demonstrated by the bungling Tsvangirai so far. We can go places with good leadership. Just look at little deserts like Botswana that managed to leapfrog us economically in a short space of time!

  3. hanga April 11, 2014 at 10:30 am #

    Mugabe should be isolated by the world, why is he doing this to zimbos, we are suffering mhani. mbwa

  4. Goredema April 11, 2014 at 11:26 am #

    Mugabe has always been a thief since 1980!

  5. peter george April 11, 2014 at 1:48 pm #

    Analysis lacks sense.

    • Neymar April 11, 2014 at 2:02 pm #

      The analysis is good and makes a lot of sense. People do not vote for poverty and Mugabe has taken us back to the stone ages in terms of development. There is simply no logic in the number of votes that Mugabe got, Zimbos are not stupid.

    • Phillip Dzenga April 11, 2014 at 3:56 pm #

      @ peter George
      You lack sense yourself.

    • Chen Chikezha April 11, 2014 at 4:01 pm #

      How does it lack sense, it as simple as one can ever get straight forward arithmetics from old school. There is no equations here Petrus waGeorge, where can you not add the numbers or unless you are saying the number of eligible voters is nowhere in the report but remember some are dead and most of you are in the diaspora.

  6. Phillip Dzenga April 11, 2014 at 3:55 pm #

    Bob’s inflated figures came from Nikuv and the Chinese Communist Party activists.

  7. Mac April 11, 2014 at 7:07 pm #

    Hogwash,pure bovine excrement! Ndove chaiyo!!! Mdc’s lost fair & square to Pres. Mugabe and ZANU PF. This RAU thing is singing fo its supper. Why didnt they analyse the 2008 votes the same way they r doing to the 2013 votes? Only the weak,and narrow-minded believe in these shallow and sham researches with no scientific formula.

  8. samaita April 11, 2014 at 7:56 pm #

    peter george u are a zimsec product

  9. Reason April 11, 2014 at 7:59 pm #

    Mac, stop to be fooled or trying to fool others just because you hate the truth. Let me tell you where mugabe and zanu did their most rigging, Mat North, Mat South, Manicaland, Masvingo, one million votes were already in favour of Mugabe before the election and 700 000 were marked in favour of mugabe on the election date. If these guys of zanu pf were not driven by an evil spirit they will confess this.

  10. Brian April 11, 2014 at 9:00 pm #

    This is a very pedestrian analysis. We performed similar calculations in the privacy of our homes in the aftermath of the elections. It does not require a “think tank” to come to the conclusion that the numbers look fishy. What we need is actionable information that would withstand the scrutiny of a court battle. We need strong evidence of where and how the vote was stolen/added and not this “haa it doesnt make sense” analysis.

  11. TSVINA chaiyo April 11, 2014 at 9:12 pm #

    zvakasara izvi munyori- get a life-ZANUPF kwakuseri kwemakore

  12. shasha April 12, 2014 at 2:20 am #

    Like it or hate it,u will frail and whail but Mugabe won clean,u cnt expect tht clown to win against a revolutionary party!Mugabe did wht he was suppossed to do and Tsvangirai did the opposite,musatvage muroyi vehama,vaMugabe vanodiwa nevanhu,th only prblm ndeyekuti vanodiwa nevekumamisha vakawanda ,evasina kudzidza seni!

  13. Educated April 12, 2014 at 8:32 am #

    Brian are you kidding please read above
    1) they are busy doctoring the eveidence
    2) If you win by more than 1M would you not be confident enough to allow for all scrutiny but the packed Bench refused.
    3) Still no Electronic Voters roll
    4) RG refuses to give up Voters roll to Zec because he know once at ZEC everyone will see.
    5) the did a dry run in the refendum: http://www.theindependent.co.zw/2013/03/28/referendum-figures-manipulated-biti/

    So 2018 no matter who is leading MDC-T they will “loose” again unless there is a wholesale change.
    Morgan did not loose in 2008 and 2013 we all know that (some say even 2002). Ask Ncube he was rigged-out in Mat South as well.

    Zpf prepared well they did a dry run in referendum to see how to rig see link on (5) above in a referendum you only need an ID to vote.

  14. Educated April 12, 2014 at 8:47 am #

    Here is another link
    http://www.sokwanele.com/zimbabwe-elections/2013/resultscomparison

  15. Educated April 12, 2014 at 8:56 am #

    Zpf maths nevers add up see here http://www.theindependent.co.zw/2013/03/28/referendum-figures-manipulated-biti/

    Also in this link http://www.sokwanele.com/zimbabwe-elections/2013/resultscomparison

    Notice how even where they lost zpf figures record almost 3 digit growth across the board epworth, harare south, mat south, mudzi, the list goes on

  16. chari April 12, 2014 at 9:54 am #

    kutsvaka mhosva pasina kundimanikidzakubvuma zvandisina mhai……………..

  17. mhike April 13, 2014 at 10:56 am #

    Its little too late for these analysis

    • lovemore April 14, 2014 at 1:55 pm #

      Its never too late for any analysis. However as mentioned above by others we did the maths just after elections. What we need is actionable information but obviously without a voters roll everything is speculation. Is it no wonder the national computer crashed with no back up.

      Vanhu kusvora Tsvangirai kusvora zvedu asi in a real election Chamatama will win.

  18. atz April 14, 2014 at 3:43 pm #

    Any sane thinking zimbo will tell you even a grade zero kid that the elections were highly rigged even mugabe was even scared of the rigged result. a thief doesn’t care about the extent of the damage he may afterwards no wonder they are clueless about the means to breathe life in our dying economy.

  19. atz April 14, 2014 at 3:43 pm #

    Mugabe never won an elections since 2000. Ask Dabengwa

  20. Farmer April 15, 2014 at 4:17 pm #

    The think tank did not tell us how many people voted for Simba and that other guy from Vic Falls. On the basis of that the research is biased and therefore conclusion not valid.

AMH logo

© 2016 The Zimind. All Rights reserved.