ANALYSIS OF 2012 VOTER TURNOUT

REGION	DISTRICT		2012 REGISTERED VOTERS (provisional list)	2012 ACTUAL VOTES, PRESIDENTIAL (excludes invalid votes - unavailable by district but 4.7% of total)	2012 VOTER TURNOUT (excludes invalid votes - unavailable by district but 4.7% of total)	2007 VOTER TURNOUT, first round, presidential
East	Kailahun	146,055		116728	79.92%	77.6%
	Kenema	249,065		209535	84.13%	78.1%
	Kono	164,983		115529	70.02%	75.6%
	TOTAL EAST	560,103		441792	78.88%
North	Bombali	222,703		188873	84.81%	76.5%
	Kambia	139,355		108039	77.53%	65.9%
	Koinadugu	140,013		103305	73.78%	66.9%
	Port Loko	239,068		202532	84.72%	74.5%
	Tonkolili	187,804		157054	83.63%	75.1%
	TOTAL NORTH	928,943		759803	81.79%
South	Bo	249,763		219582	87.92%	79.3%
	Bonthe	73,991		65477	88.49%	77.4%
	Moyamba	131,865		109545	83.07%	73.3%
	Pujehun	82,126		67993	82.79%	72.3%
	TOTAL SOUTH	537,745		462597	86.03%
West	Western Rural	164,891		136395	82.72%	75.1%
	Western Urban	509,617		441141	86.56%	79.1%
	TOTAL WEST	674,508		577536	85.62%
	GRAND TOTAL	2,701,299		2241728(excluding invalid votes)	82.99% (ex invalid) 87.3% (inc invalid)	75.8%
The SLPP has claimed massive overvoting and ballot stuffing by its opponents in Kono, the North and the Western Area. We have spent some time analyzing the figures released by NEC and do not find evidence in the voter turnout to back this up. There is no clear bias in the voter turnout figures in the different regions. Indeed the highest turnouts, 87.92% and 88.49% are found in Bo and Bonthe districts, two SLPP strongholds. By region the North at 83.63% had a lower turnout than the South (86.03%) and the Western Area (85.62%). The East (78.88%) was affected by a relatively low turnout in Kono district. It is true these turnout figures generally are high when compared to the same figures from 2007, especially so when one considers that the 2007 figures include invalid votes, whilst the 2012 figures given above do not, as they are not yet available by district from NEC. The overall invalid vote 2012 percentage is given as 4.7%, and as an approximation this could be added to the 2012 turnout by district above to find the overall district figures. This would put some districts into the 90%+ region, a good 15% more than their 2007 figure. However, with the exception of Kono the figures are uniformly higher than in 2007, rather than this increase being restricted to just the APC areas, as the SLPP protests might lead us to believe. What might have caused this large increase in 2012 turnout compared to 2007? Possibly an increase in voter interest, although both elections appeared to be equally keenly contested with fervent support on both sides. Another possible explanation could be over registration (as opposed to over voting) in 2007 compared to 2012, when the biometric registration was introduced. Over registration might reduce turnout because some of those multiple registrants would presumably have some difficulty actually voting more than once on the single day that is allotted for the actual election. This theory of over registration in 2007 is also supported by the very small increase in voter registration numbers between 2007 and 2012, much less than the expected population increase. All the above does not exclude the possibility of over voting and ballot stuffing in 2012 in individual polling stations and centres. But the available figures do not seem to support the contention that this could have been widespread enough to materially alter the outcome, as published by NEC. * an explanation of the methodology used in the table above. The registered voter figures are taken directly from the provisional list posted on the NEC website. These figures were later adjusted, but the adjusted figures by district have not been made public. The adjusted national total is calculated to be 2,692,584, or only 9000 odd less than the original provisional figure, so the percentage difference is very small and results in a very slight underestimate in the district turnout figures given above. The actual votes for 2012 uses the NEC figures but without including the invalid votes, which are not currently available by district. The invalid votes are given as 4.7% of the total, so we should expect this sort of magnitude underestimation in our figures for district turnout. ** The NEC chairperson’s statement erroneously gives 2,350,626 as the valid votes cast. However, when one adds the individual district numbers to the total invalid votes given it becomes clear that this figure is the total votes cast, valid plus invalid.