• All conditions required to hold the poll are being put in place
• Initial preparations being carried out in orderly, timely manner
• Geared to handle issues relating to fake news and hate speech
• SDIG appointed for elections; security discussions being held
• Commission equipped and ready to count preferential votes
• Steps being taken to address election-related violations
• Election Commission will not safeguard errant State officials

The conditions required to hold the Presidential Poll 2024 are being put in place and all the initial preparations are being carried out in an orderly and timely manner, asserted Commissioner General of Elections Saman Sri Ratnayake, in an interview with The Sunday Morning. 

Towards this end, the Election Commission (EC) is making preparations to handle issues relating to fake news and hate speech via print, electronic, and social media, along with challenges that can be posed by Artificial Intelligence (AI), and also looking at how community guidelines of tech companies and local laws can be made consonant during the election period.

As for the cost factor, Ratnayake said the initial estimate of Rs. 10 billion for the Presidential Poll could change. “In our experience, the cost has usually been lower (than the estimate). We have summoned all internal officers regarding expenditure and advised them to be prudent in their spending,” he added.

In terms of security, he said that the commission did not need to consult the Supreme Court for clarity on the uncertainty surrounding the Inspector General of Police (IGP) and that a Senior Deputy Inspector General (SDIG) had been appointed in relation to the polls, while discussions had also been held with the SDIGs in charge of the nine provinces and arrangements made with the security forces.

As for the process to be followed in the event no candidate polls 50%+1 of the vote on first count, he said that the commission had the necessary knowledge, training, and equipment required to calculate the preferential votes of candidates in anticipation of such a scenario.

“Even though the general public sees the current situation as something out of the ordinary, this is run-of-the-mill work for us and not a situation we have not anticipated. We are ready to count the preferential votes at any time. The material resources needed for this have been put in place and we are ready for any eventuality,” he assured.

Ratnayake also revealed that steps were being taken to address election-related violations and warned that in the event these matters ended up in court, the EC could present clear and correct facts to the court and that it would not safeguard or protect offending or errant State officials under any circumstances.

Following are excerpts of the interview:

Given the complexity and decisiveness of the upcoming Presidential Poll, how prepared is the EC for the election?

The conditions required to hold the poll are being put in place. We also announced the election date and the nominations acceptance period. 

We have held discussions with the stakeholders and institutions connected to the poll – for example, the Police Department, Department of Government Printing, Department of Posts, Ceylon Electricity Board, Sri Lanka Transport Board, Telecommunications Regulatory Commission of Sri Lanka, and all other relevant institutions – and we have taken the requisite decisions in relation to conducting the election. 

At present applications for postal votes are being accepted (postal vote application acceptance was concluded on 9 August). All initial preparations are being carried out in an orderly and timely manner.

Is the EC geared to face the challenges that digital media and AI could pose during the election?

The EC, along with its Technical Division and the polls monitors/observers, has already made the initial preparations and we even held a discussion in this regard today (7). We have also held discussions with the Sri Lanka Press Institute, fact-checking organisations, People’s Action for Free and Fair Elections (PAFFREL), and the Centre for Monitoring Election Violence (CMEV) in relation to print, electronic, and social media and how this situation should be managed.

At the same time, we are also having discussions with all tech companies including social media companies in relation to how their community guidelines and our laws can be made consonant during the election period. This includes the parent companies of TikTok, YouTube, Meta, Google, and so on.

We will especially be monitoring hate speech and fake news and we are holding discussions with the tech companies on taking the necessary action in relation to these issues.

Does the EC have the human resources and the required infrastructure to monitor this?

Yes. We are sourcing our requirements from the State sector. In terms of transport, district-level school transport and so on will be utilised and we are in discussion with those groups in relation to the transporting of ballot boxes, etc. Technical equipment will be sourced from the relevant institutions. There are no issues in this regard.

When it comes to the cost factor, the initial estimate for the Presidential Poll was Rs. 10 billion. However, with an anticipated rise in printing costs and allowances for State officials on election duty, has there been an increase in the polls budget?

This is only an estimate. It can be higher or lower than that. However, in our experience, the cost has usually been lower. We have summoned all internal officers regarding expenditure and advised them to be prudent in their spending and that expenditure must be brought down.

How is the EC tackling the security aspect, given the controversy over the IGP? Will the commission be going before the Supreme Court for further clarity on the matter?

There is no requirement to go before the Supreme Court because, as per the provisions of the Police Ordinance, the duties and functions of the office of the IGP can be divided among the Police Department at any time.

In this backdrop, we have held discussions with the National Police Commission and the other relevant authorities and an SDIG has been appointed in relation to the elections. Furthermore, we have held discussions with the SDIGs in charge of the nine provinces and also made arrangements with the security forces.

Given that there doesn’t seem to be a clear frontrunner at this poll, with none of the candidates having a 50% support base, how will it affect the outcome?

In general, from the perspective of the EC, there has never been a clear winning candidate. All candidates will attempt to obtain 50%+1 of the vote. 

We have, at all times, the necessary knowledge, training, and equipment required to calculate the preferential votes of candidates in anticipation of a scenario where no candidate polls the required percentage to win at first count. There is no change this time.

Even though the general public sees the current situation as something out of the ordinary, this is run-of-the-mill work for us and not a situation we have not anticipated. We are ready to count the preferential votes at any time. The material resources needed for this have been put in place and we are ready for any eventuality.

What is the process in the event no candidate polls 50%+1 of the vote which is required to win?

This is in the Constitution as well as the Presidential Elections Act. The two candidates who poll the highest number of votes will remain in the running while the rest will drop out. Then, the second and third preferential votes will be tallied from among those who drop out, in order of the number of votes each of them has received. When that is done, a winner will emerge among the first two. 

Post-election, for how long will the EC monitor and observe the ground situation?

Generally the requirement is a period of a week. However, given the Regulation of Election Expenditure Act that is in place this time, we will continue to monitor the situation beyond this period. 

What are the steps being taken to address the ongoing violations and misuse/abuse of State resources during the ongoing election period?

Thus far the violations have been in relation to the misuse of public/State property. We have held discussions in this regard with State officials and the relevant ministry secretaries have been summoned for discussions as well.

Guidelines and instructions have been given on what can be used and how when it comes to State/public property. We have also held discussions with those in charge of the resources coming under the purview of each ministry.

In the event these matters end up in court, the EC can present clear and correct facts to the court and under no circumstances can it safeguard or protect offending or errant State officials.