Another set of elections has come and gone and all the hype at the counting hall has now died down. Overall, the electoral process worked well, but certain questions raised about the work of the Electoral Commission need to be clarified.

It all started the week before the election, when the early voting took place. The commission sent press releases with the 2pm and final turnouts. The following day it issued corrections, and the mistakes in the figures were quite substantial. Chief Electoral Commissioner Joseph Church said that the commission does not usually issue turnouts for early voting, adding that there was a mistake in the system.

A week later, something very similar happened. The 2pm turnout was sent at 7pm, and the final turnout for the election that closed on Saturday at 10pm were sent on Sunday morning at around 7.15am. In past elections, the 2pm turnout was sent at around 3pm and the final turnout was sent by 11pm, in time for the Sunday newspapers.

To make matters worse, the figures provided, which were also sent to Brussels, were incorrect once again – the early voting was had not been factored in – and the figures were revised once again.

And the turnout provided for the Pembroke local council election was also completely off the mark. The first figure given was 36% but this was later revised to 65%. The commission yesterday apologized for this mistake.

On Saturday, most newsrooms pushed back their printing times in hope that they would have the final turnout on the Sunday papers. But this was not to be. And worse still, there was no one we could contact. Believe it or not, the Electoral Commission does not have a press contact person. We tried in vain to contact some officials whose phone numbers we have, but they could not be reached. We were placed in a position where, after having pushed back our printing schedule, we could not even confirm whether the turnout figures would be sent or not. And in fact they were not.

Fast forward to Sunday. We had previously been told that the final result would come in at around 11pm. This was not to be, and the results came much later than that. But we would have not known this had two of our editors managed, after something similar to a treasure hunt, to get hold of someone from the Electoral Commission. Because, apart from not having a press contact, the commission also does not have an information desk at the counting hall.

The Department of Information also failed to give us a heads up about the delay.

There were other issues as well. The scanners used for the first time in the new electronic vote-counting system were flagging up as dubious many ballot sheets that were perfectly fine. Thousands of them, in fact. This was the main reason why the counting process was delayed by so long.

The slightest printing mark on the paper was being picked up by the software as a dubious vote, meaning that the ballots sheets had to be manually adjudicated. Now we understand that every new system has teething problems, but rigorous testing could have prevented this.

And with regard to the late and incorrect turnout figures, we have been given no explanation yet.

These issues must be addressed before the next general election, where tens of thousands more will be casting their vote, and where the repercussions of deficiencies in the system could be greater.

We believe that the commission should appoint someone specifically to deal with the media.

It should also find out why certain mistakes were made and to rectify the situation.

We also believe that some form of responsibility should be taken. Passing the buck will not cut it.