Canberra, 23 August 1967
United [Nations] Visiting Mission to the Trust Territories of Nauru and New Guinea 19681
I wish to refer to my memorandum dated 28th July,2 and to telephone discussions between your Mr Wilson3 and Mr Rose of this Department.4
2. The views expressed in cables UN.10165 and UN.10246 were conveyed to the Administrator of Papua and New Guinea. His views are set out in the attached telex message.
3. This Department would prefer that the United Nations Visiting Mission does not visit New Guinea during the elections—and in any case would wish it to visit Nauru first.
4. We consider that the views expressed by the Administrator in Paragraphs l to 3 of the attached telex message are reasonable and would of course have to be accepted if the visit takes place during the elections. The Visiting Mission would have to understand that if it visited the Territory during the election, it would not be accorded treatment which visiting missions usually receive, that the election itself will have disrupted normal activities in the Territory and that the results of the poll will not be known until towards the end of March.
5. So far as the whispering vote is concerned,7 we would not wish to put ourselves on the defensive. We recognize it as essential and unavoidable and would think this should be stated in reply to any criticism which may be voiced. We should, however, be glad of your views on this aspect.
Attachment
TELEX, HAY TO DOT
Port Moresby, 22 August 1967
421.
… Administration has no objection to UNVM arranging its itinerary so as to see some electioneering and polling during House of Assembly elections but following points need careful consideration
(1) During polling period virtually all district staff and district transport resources are necessarily diverted from normal duties. Before arriving Mission will need to understand clearly that if it wishes to tour districts during polling period, Saturday February 17th to Saturday March 16th, it cannot expect to receive the red carpet treatment normally accorded a UNVM, and it will not be able to engage in any activities that could be construed as interfering with the conduct of the elections or influencing voters. Mission’s ability to hold meetings with indigenous leaders and officials will be necessarily limited, and it would be highly improper for any UNVM members to make public statements on the elections or on Territory constitutional developments during the polling period.
(2) Polling in all main townships will start and finish on Saturday February 17th, after which polling teams will disperse to pre-arranged polling stations throughout each district. This liable to complicate Mission’s movements.
(3) Counting of votes will not commence until voting period finishes on night of Saturday March 16th and results will not be known until declaration of poll towards end of March.
(4) Major problem will be probable criticism and exploitation by Liberia of whisper ballot system which is used when illiterate voter requests assistance from presiding electoral officer in marking ballot paper. Whisper ballot necessarily used to some degree all polling stations including major towns where large numbers illiterate migrant labourers record absentee votes. In rural areas electoral officer recording whisper ballot frequently must use interpreter. Quite apart from UNVM aspect rapidly increasing nativisation of electoral staff has underlined need to eliminate whisper ballot as much as possible. Matter has already been given considerable thought. Obvious modification is association of symbols with photos of candidates, and reproduction of these symbols against names of candidates on ballot papers. This approach still leaves many unsolved problems regarding such matters as possible special significance of some symbols in particular areas, inability of some primitives to recognise photographs, inability of illiterates to write figures or even to handle a pencil, etc. These aspects still being studied. Appreciate your comments above points. Note that all above election dates are as yet tentative and could be varied by House of Assembly at forthcoming meeting.
[NAA: A452, 1967/4226]
1 For background, see Document 129.
2 It commented that the possible effect of the visiting mission on efforts to finish polling on time was ‘causing concern’ and requested DEA to ask the Australian Mission at the UN to suggest that the visiting mission arrive no earlier than 15th March, the day before the start of voting (NAA: A452, 1967/4226).
3 A.C.F. Wilson, Acting Head, Dependent Territories Section, DEA.
4 Not found.
5 It conveyed a response to the suggested arrival time of the visiting mission. New Zealand, which was expected to provide the chairman of the mission, remarked that such timing would be a ‘pity’, as it would deprive the mission of ‘seeing what will be a well conducted and free election in the Territory’. Second, ‘if the mission does not arrive until after the election is over, then at least one of its members, Liberia, and most of the Fourth Committee will think that Australia has something to hide’, which would mean Australia ‘would get no credit for the fact that an honest election has been held’. The New Zealand Mission to the UN proposed that the decision be reviewed (Australian Mission to the UN New York (UNNY) to DEA, 16 August 1967, ibid.).
6 It referred to the views of Paul Gaschingnard, officer responsible for colonial and trusteeship questions at the French Mission to the UN, who said ‘practical difficulties’ should not prevent the visiting mission from ‘seeing something of the elections’. He predicted a ‘bad reaction amongst some of the Africans who would interpret our difficulties, however real, as an indication that we had something to hide even from the Trusteeship Council’. The cable noted that Gaschignard ‘is close to many of the Africans and we have respect for his views’ (UNNY to DEA, 18 August 1967, ibid.).
7 See attachment.