Dump EVM case; take to the streets.

I am a computer, dear Reader; so are you. We both follow a logical process to arrive at decisions that we make. Almost daily we are "hacked" by those who successfully deceive us, albeit temporarily. Sometimes we need external inputs (leakers of otherwise inaccessible information) to recover from such hacks. Sometimes other recovery algorithms kick in to raise enough doubt to force us to investigate and "plug" the hack-hole. And yet we are the most sophisticated computer known to man, i.e to us!

So if the Electronic Voting Machine (EVM) is a computer (and only Gabriel Seeletso thinks it is not) there is no  disputing the fact that it can be hacked. There is no need to prove that fact. A computer made by man is infact a hack into the brain of man! And if it is a hack into something more sophisticated than itself, it stands to reason that that something will not have any problem whatsoever hacking it (the computer) as long as access to the computer by the brain is provided.

Access by the brain to the EVM is fundamental to the "correct" functioning of the EVM. Left on its own, the EVM would probably not know that Jack has voted and that the person now waiting to vote is Jill and not Jack again! Some human input will have to constantly tell the EVM to "reset and get ready for next voter". Therein lies human access to the EVM; therein lies a potential hack opportunity. Even if it was to be assumed that the EVM will be so sophisticated as to be hooked to face-recognition software, there is still the human access necessary to extract the vote tallies. That is an opportunity for a hack.

That a computer can be hacked is not reason enough for a judge to rule that the EVM may not be used in the 2019 elections. Why this is so, is quite obvious. If the litigants manage to get hold of the exact model of EVM that is going to be used during 2019 elections; get hold of an expert who successfully hacks the EVM; then the EVM manufacturer can simply assure the judge that come election time, that particular "hole" in the EVM software will have been "plugged". And once revealed, that particular hole will most certainly be plugged. But that does not mean that there are NO other holes left. Most importantly, a judge may want to know if litigants would not want to fly in an aircraft with autopilot installed, just because such autopilot is controlled by a computer and is therefore susceptible to hacking.

What I am saying here is that no further effort should be expended in trying to "show" that a computer can be hacked. That would be wasted effort. The litigants' effort should instead be applied to show that the use of EVM would be unconstitutional in other ways. For example, the EVM is going to eliminate the "problem" of spoilt ballots.

To my recollection spoilt ballots have always been a feature of past elections. They were counted and reported.  A  ballot is not always spoilt unintentionally. Given a list of candidates, all of whom are unacceptable to the voter, a voter "abstains" by spoiling his/her ballot. It is a legitimate act by the voter, and therefore it is constitutional. How then is the EVM going to elliminate spoilt votes without infringing on the constitutional rights of voters?

I know next to nothing about the intricacies of our constitution. However, I believe that our contitution has to be constitutional. Contradiction? No. You see, our constitution, i.e. the real (unwritten) one was forged in the streets of Francistown and Mochudi in the late 1950's - early 1960's. Some of us are old enough to have witnessed that struggle; -bo- P.G. Matante; -bo-Podiephatshwa; -bo-Tumelo; -bo-Bobby Mack (who later became a judge in Zambia). They marched in "Sotoma". They sang; they got whipped; they were incacerated. Those were our parents fighting for our freedom, for our independence.

If, as seems to be the case now, the written constitution subsequently veered off from the expectations of those who sacrificed so much for its attainment, then the people should take to the streets once again to reclaim their freedom, to kick out the EVM and its proponents.

As I have pointed out before, there could be a well calculated, sinister motive behind the rulers' insistance on the use of EVM in 2019. They could just be buying time; buying time so that none is left for implementation of the recommendations made by the African Union Election Observer Mission, following the 2014 general elections. Whether or not that is the real motive of the ruling party is open to debate. However, the legal route (and not a political one), that was embarked upon to fight the EVM debacle, played right into the hands of the enemies of our democracy! Now all they have to do is wait while the legal route saps the nation's energy to protest and resist.