Renard Sexton: A recount may not alter the result of the election
Digg
del.icio.us
Facebook
Reddit
Google
Stumble Upon
Fark
Newsvine
YahooBuzz
Bebo
Twitter
Independent Minds
To understand why everyone is still struggling to work out what has happened in Iran, consider this: reports online yesterday suggested that some provinces recorded a turnout of more than 100 per cent. As a result, the announcement that the Guardian Council had authorised a recount of Friday's ballots has drawn a sigh of relief from many observers. Although the election results had been certified by the Supreme Leader and his support for the incumbent had been made clear, the theocratic leadership had relented.
But it is still not clear whether a recount of existing ballots will be able to even approximate, much less accurately correct, the dubious vote totals that were previously regarded as the official results.
Two main quantitative factors have called Friday's results into question. First, since 1985, voter participation in Iranian presidential elections has consistently risen. At the same time, electoral competitiveness has also increased.
As a result, even as reformers boycotted it, the 2005 election culminated in the first-ever runoff round of voting. With nearly 85 per cent turnout last Friday and polling data suggesting a softening of President Ahmadinejad's support, all indications were for a competitive first round this time, too.
More convincing, however, is that the provincial vote counts that were released on Monday were in some cases simply bizarre. The cleric Mehdi Karroubi, a reform candidate, nearly beat Ahmadinejad in the 2005 election, losing by just 700,000 votes. He posted commanding numbers in the western portion of the country, winning 11 of the 30 provinces, including in his home province of Lorestan. Karroubi beat Ahmadinejad in these provinces by an average margin of over 20 points, with Ahmadinejad averaging just 13.0 per cent. In 2009, however, the vote totals told a completely opposite story.
Earning between 53 and 71 percent of the vote, Ahmadinejad pulverised Karroubi's totals in those same 11 provinces. Ahmadinejad posted an incredible win in Karroubi's home province of Lorestan, where the regime claims he won by a margin of more than 65 points, a more than 110 point swing in support between 2005 and 2009.
As such, calls for a re-run of the election, rather than a recount, have been widespread. Unfortunately, it is not clear that either approach will in fact produce an accurate outcome. Either way, the fundamental question of whether top level manipulation has occurred already or would occur in a re-vote or re-count has not yet been answered.
While all signs point to a tainted election, the allegations of fraud have not yet been proven. And it is not yet clear is if the measures suggested would offer the public any real relief.
Renard Sexton is a Geneva-based analyst on international issues for polling website FiveThirtyEight
View all comments that have been posted about this article.
Offensive or abusive comments will be removed and your IP logged and may be used to prevent further submission. In submitting a comment to the site, you agree to be bound by the Independent Minds Terms of Service.
- Print Article
- Email Article
-
Click here for copyright permissions
Copyright 2009 Independent News and Media Limited
Comments
Why is there "no evidence of fraud" yet "all signs point to a tainted election"? Because many commentators and politicians in the West would really, really have like Mousavi to win. And the big worry - casting doubt on the legitimacy of the electoral process weakens opposition over here to Western interference in Iran's political process. The US and UK overthrew a democratically elected government in 1953 in Iran and back then the press played along in explaining how that government was illegitimate too.
Before writing irresponsible columns like this, journalists should do a bit of actual investigation. A popular president receiving 60% of the vote! How could this be!
There exist such fraud-proof voting systems, but the West and China are terribly afraid of such systems, since they would eliminate pro-western dictators as well as anti-western dictators. Of the many many dictators globally (including the anti-western Ahmadinejad), 95% are pro-western dictators.
The west has resorted even to political assassination to keep such voting systems from seeing the light of day. But eventually justice, freedom, democracy and development will win out. Maybe Obama will have a hand in this, if he can cast off the very strong influence of the CIA, MI6, and Deuxieme Bureau.
Mr Alex Weir, Harare and Gaborone
But as to "political assassination" and "fraud-proof voting systems", you need to provide references / link so that people can determine whether what you say is right or not. It would be interesting to read more.
- Many people in Iran do reveal their true voting intentions to pollsters for fear if intimidation or punishment by the authorities, even if the poll is supposed to be secret. They simply would not take the chance.
- Up until the last 3 weeks before the election the others candidates, Mousavi et al, hardly had any media or press coverage. The regime in Iran controls the media and it was all about Ahmadinejad, who received around 90% of the coverage compared to the others. It was only in the last 2/3 weeks prior to the election, when the TV debates were aired, that Mousavi and other candidates finally got some nationwide publicity. So the others candidates could well have picked up many votes in those last few weeks.
- Events of 1953 have nothing to do with the present day tyranny of the Islamic Republic and in no way justify the repression it is wreaking on the people of Iran.