Failed council candidate Raj Rajwin has ‘conspiracy’ claim thrown out

A failed council candidate has had a bid to have his election loss overturned in the NT Civil and Administrative Tribunal due to a ‘possible conspiracy’.

A FAILED Palmerston council candidate has had a bid to have his election loss overturned due to a “possible conspiracy” that saw him placed last on the how-to-vote cards of all of the other candidates knocked back.

Raj Rajwin appealed the loss in the NT Civil and Administrative Tribunal, asking the tribunal to “cancel the election results” based on “the closeness of the result and a perceived error”.

In his “quixotic complaint”, Mr Rajwin also sought a “clarification” based on “his perception of the unfairness of the preferential voting system and the ‘possible conspiracy’”.

“Mr Rajwin asserts that ‘Candidates joined together and suggested people give me no 12 through their how-to-vote card’,” tribunal member Mark O’Reilly said.

In his submissions to the tribunal, Mr Rajwin complained that he had lost the election with 8.6 per cent of the vote, “against three candidates who won with 3 to 4 per cent of the vote”.

“The difference in between (sic) the last winner and me is too closer (sic) These can be error (sic),” he said.

“The error was identified the website (sic) declared my count as 1202 on the 9th Aug and on the morning 10th Aug but currently counting shows 1197.

“Means the difference of votes which is in the last 50 vote counts (sic) it shows potential error up to 10 per cent. 12000 (sic) votes are too many to not have a. Error (sic) of 38 votes which is needed to win the election.”

Serial candidate Raj Rajwin.

But Mr O’Reilly said Mr Rajwin could only point to a “potential error” in the count, which “amounts to speculation”.

“He posits that, because there was a shift in numbers during the counting process, and because the result is close, a recount may identify an error which has impacted the final result,” he said.

Mr Rajwin also went on to express his “deep disappointment” in the preferential voting system, claiming 90 per cent of people do not understand it, “including lawyers, judges, police, lecturers, graduates, council candidates, council members (and) even few (sic) of the ex-Mayors”.

“Whenever someone from the people of the people and for the people stands to take over the representation, he is attacked from everywhere because he can ruin the system of easy life for the existing politician and start talking about the people,” he said.

But Mr O’Reilly said while the other candidates’ preferences may have contributed to his loss “notwithstanding a reasonably high first preference vote”, it was not a basis for NTCAT to intervene.

“Mr Rajwin has provided no evidence of any collaborative decision amongst other candidates to place him last on their how-to-vote cards but the fact remains that he was so placed,” he said.

“Whether that occurred coincidentally, deliberately, strategically or organically in response to his policy positions is of no consequence to this application.

“There is nothing in the act or regulations to prevent candidates from reaching a common position about the placement of other candidates on a how-to-vote card.”