Most of the comments on the ruling in the petition over the last general election seem to agree with the judge that in extending the voting hours of the election at a number of polling stations, the Elections and Boundaries Commission (EBC) acted unlawfully and illegally. I humbly beg to disagree.
To begin, the EBC is the executive authority for the conduct of elections; the authority is not the President, not the Parliament nor the Cabinet (sub-sections 11 and 12 of clause 70).
The judge ruled that in extending the time for voting on the day of the elections, the EBC acted illegally although it would not have been illegal if rules issued before the election had indicated that in those circumstances the hours of voting would be extended.
The circumstance that prompted the decision of the EBC was the high rainfall in those areas on the day of the elections. It would have been appropriate, according to the judge, for the EBC to state in advance that in the event that one or more of those circumstances arising, that the voting hours would be extended.
Maitland in The Constitutional History of England, makes it clear that they, the EBC, have as prerogative the right to make such decisions. Friedrich in Tradition and Authority makes it clear that the test for the exercise such discretion is one of reasonableness. This is the test that the judge should have applied.
Lennie M Nimblett,
St Ann's