{
    "success": true,
    "data": {
        "id": 1417878,
        "msgid": "slow-ballot-counting-1447893297",
        "date": "1999-06-21 00:00:00",
        "title": "Slow ballot counting",
        "author": null,
        "source": "JP",
        "tags": null,
        "topic": null,
        "summary": "Slow ballot counting In addition to the frequent explanation given in the media about the slow ballot counting by the General Elections Commission, which uses a computer network system with a centralized and closed architecture, the following explanation needs to be mentioned: 1.",
        "content": "<p>Slow ballot counting<\/p>\n<p>In addition to the frequent explanation given in the media<br>\nabout the slow ballot counting by the General Elections<br>\nCommission, which uses a computer network system with a<br>\ncentralized and closed architecture, the following explanation<br>\nneeds to be mentioned:<\/p>\n<p>1. The reason for the tardiness in vote counting is the manual<br>\npath from, respectively, the polls station (TPS), to the local<br>\nelections committee (PPS), from the PPS to the subdistrict<br>\nelections committee (PPK), from the PPK to the district\/mayoralty<br>\nelections committee (PPD II), where the data is fed into a<br>\ncomputer terminal.<\/p>\n<p>2. In the latest concept of information system design, it is<br>\nnecessary to distinguish the flow of information and the flow of<br>\ncontrol or the flow of validation. These two flows, depending on<br>\nthe context, may constitute one path or separate ones.<\/p>\n<p>3. In vote counting, in which accuracy and high speed are very<br>\nmuch expected while tardiness is, theoretically, often identical<br>\nwith decreasing accuracy, the flow of information should be<br>\nseparated from the flow of validation.<\/p>\n<p>4. What has been made a scapegoat in point 1 above should be the<br>\nflow of control or the flow of validation, while the flow of<br>\ninformation can always be separated by providing a TPS with a<br>\ncellular phone or an SSB radio; or in the absence of these<br>\ntelecommunications devices, by making use of the closest<br>\ntelecommunications nodes such as a local telecommunications stall<br>\n(Wartel) (of which there about 80,000), or mobile or stationary<br>\npostal outlets (about 27,000), etc., so that one second after the<br>\ncounting of ballot papers at each TPS has been completed, the<br>\nresult can be reported to the PPS. In this way, the possibility<br>\nof manipulation in vote counting by state apparatuses may be<br>\nminimized because the witnesses, the monitoring personnel and the<br>\nlocal community are still present when the result is reported to<br>\nthe PPS.<\/p>\n<p>5. Separate paths will enable mutual checking between these two<br>\npaths. In addition, the flow of information will usually be<br>\nfaster and more accurate because the participation of the local<br>\ncommunity is still intense, the source of primary data and the<br>\ndata are still fresh and are unlikely to be manipulated, while<br>\nthe use of different tabulation forms may lead to a deliberate or<br>\ninadvertent error.<\/p>\n<p>Around March 1999, we, of the National Coordination Office of<br>\nPopular Economic Posts (PER), along with our colleagues from the<br>\nCommunity Concerned Over Elections (Mapelu), made an offer that<br>\nthe network of the community of PER, made up, among others, by<br>\nthe Wasantara-Net network, which covers 107 cities from Aceh to<br>\nIrian Jaya plus 27,000 mobile and stationary outlets, the Telkom<br>\nMultimedia network, which reaches 12 cities with 1,140 ports, the<br>\nBukopin Swamitra network, which goes down to subdistrict in rural<br>\nareas, BRI, BNI, BTPN, the network of some 80,000 Wartel and<br>\n2,500 PER nodes, of which about 500 nodes are e-mail-connected,<br>\ncould participate in vote counting.<\/p>\n<p>At that time, our delegation was received by Adnan Buyung<br>\nNasution, accompanied by, among others, Hendra Dharsono, who is<br>\nresponsible for the vote counting information system. Dharsono<br>\ntold us then that UNDP could not accept a new proposal because<br>\nthe fund allocated for the information system was very limited<br>\nand that new participation was always possible on condition that<br>\nthe fund was made available by the aspiring new participant.<\/p>\n<p>In the meantime, through a number of colleagues, who represent<br>\na number of political parties, we have also suggested that vote<br>\ncounting monitoring should be conducted both in the manual path<br>\nand in the electronic expertise path. It is always likely that a<br>\ncomputer expert will move the votes given to a particular party<br>\nto another party through a simple programming algorithm which is<br>\nmade to look complicated. This is usually known as &quot;computer<br>\nfraud&quot;.<\/p>\n<p>JUSTIANI<\/p>\n<p>Popular Economic Posts<\/p>\n<p>Jakarta<\/p>",
        "url": "https:\/\/jawawa.id\/newsitem\/slow-ballot-counting-1447893297",
        "image": ""
    },
    "sponsor": "Okusi Associates",
    "sponsor_url": "https:\/\/okusiassociates.com"
}