By Tom Cowie
As the old tongue-in-cheek saying goes, “vote early and vote often”. But if you’re going to do so, then it is probably best to change your handwriting.
The penmanship on ballots lodged during last October’s council elections, along with voters who apparently didn’t know their own dates of birth, is among the evidence the Victorian Electoral Commission alleges they uncovered in a voter fraud investigation.
An allegedly fraudulent voting envelope.Credit: Victorian Electoral Commission
The results of two elections, in the councils of Whittlesea and Knox, remain under a cloud after the VEC alleged that ballots had been stolen from people’s mailboxes and then sent in with fake voter information.
In Whittlesea, where the outcome in the Lalor ward was decided by just 39 votes, it is alleged that enough votes were stolen to sway the result, leading to a potential byelection if the fraud is proven.
The VEC has applied to the Victorian and Civil Administrative Tribunal to have the election in Whittlesea voided, and a hearing is set for later this month to hear evidence of vote tampering.
The result in Knox’s Baird ward was not close enough for the scheme to affect the outcome. However, the VEC is seeking a finding that there was attempted or actual interference in the election.
Electoral Commissioner Sven Bluemmel speaking about the voting irregularities.Credit: Luis Ascui
“Electoral integrity is paramount, and it must be upheld to maintain the community’s trust in their elections,” Commissioner Sven Bluemmel said.
“The VEC is committed to safeguarding electoral integrity, and we have a range of measures in place to detect and respond to suspected fraud.”
Documents filed by the VEC in VCAT detailing the allegations were released to The Age after a successful application to have the information made public.
The VEC’s evidence includes copies of allegedly dodgy ballots and falsified declarations on voting envelopes returned by post.
According to the VEC’s statement of contentions, the schemes were discovered when an unusual amount of “multiple returns” were lodged in the Whittlesea and Knox elections.
Multiple returns are when more than one ballot envelope is received from a voter.
When the VEC checked the voter declarations accompanying the returns, it found that many had provided the wrong date of birth, sparking a fraud investigation.
The probe discovered further inconsistencies, including signatures that didn’t match a voter’s enrolment record, as well as similar styles of handwriting used across several of the declaration slips.
Council candidates Nicholas Hajichristou (left, Whittlesea) and Andrew Church (Knox).
Both schemes also centred around specific geographic areas, according to the VEC.
In Whittlesea, the ballots were stolen from a 2.5-square-kilometre area west of Edgars Road in Lalor, while the Knox fraud happened in a similar-sized zone north of Boronia Road in Boronia and Bayswater.
In total, the VEC says 81 votes in Whittlesea and 39 votes in Knox were stolen. The alleged beneficiaries of the schemes were unsuccessful in getting elected.
According to the VEC, the first preferences on the stolen votes were allocated to Nicholas Hajichristou in Whittlesea and Andrew Church in Knox.
The VEC’s map of where council voting ballots were stolen in Whittlesea.Credit: Victorian Electoral Commission
Hajichristou finished last out of three candidates, while Church finished fourth. The successful councillors were Stevan Kozmevski in Whittlesea and Peter Lockwood in Knox.
The VEC is not claiming, and The Age does not suggest, that either Hajichristou or Church were responsible or involved in the fraud, however Victoria Police and the Local Government Inspectorate can investigate the allegations of tampering.
The maximum penalties include five years’ imprisonment and a fine.
When contacted by The Age, Church denied that he was involved in the fraud. “It was happening without my knowledge or consent,” he said.
“I guess someone may have been doing it, and they may have a vested interest in me being elected.”
Hajichristou declined to comment.
It’s not the first time that postal ballots have been subject to potential fraud.
In 2020, an unrelated vote-tampering scandal resulted in Milad El-Halabi being unduly elected to the Moreland Council.
It took until March 2023 – more than two years after the election – for VCAT to find the Labor candidate had benefited from voter fraud.
El-Halabi resigned from the council 18 months after the election when police laid charges. He was spared jail this year after entering a guilty plea but was fined $20,000 with an 18-month community correction order.
Bluemmel said sophisticated systems were in place to catch voter fraud.
“We continue to improve those systems,” he said.
“To those who seek to subvert Victoria’s electoral processes, it is not worth the risk, there will be consequences for their actions. We will detect their efforts, and they will be caught.”
A government spokesperson said postal voting delivered a higher rate of participation in council elections and was more convenient than in-person voting.
Start the day with a summary of the day’s most important and interesting stories, analysis and insights. Sign up for our Morning Edition newsletter.