your say 'This reluctance to use indelible ink confirms suspicions that diehard Umno-BN voters are used to do multiple voting.'

Doubts over 'removable' indelible ink claim

Cascara: Why would the 'unnamed European firm' come out with this statement for no apparent reason? Is it an interested party? Did someone call out to them to help undermine Bersih 2.0's efforts? Are they trying to sell their own security or biometric system?

I believe the indelible ink used in the Indian elections is applied on the thumbnail. It cannot be rubbed off as it will permeate into the nail even if you are a thumb sucker. Besides if it contains AgNO3, or silver nitrate, it cannot be removed by organic solvents.

AgNO3 forms a black pigment on contact with skin or nail. You could, of course, try concentrated sulphuric acid or nitric acid to remove the stain... and your skin.

4thForce: This ‘unnamed European-based firm' must be named so that every country that uses indelible ink is made aware of such possibility. If it is true, then such practice must be stopped because it provides a false sense of security.

But if it is not true, then the producers of these indelible ink can sue this ‘unnamed European-based firm'. Would this ‘unnamed European-based firm' be willing to make this claim openly and stake its reputation worldwide?

Kgen: Who is that unnamed European company? Any company making such a discovery would be proud to announce its name rather than hide its head in shame.

Why specifically submit the findings to Malaysian authorities? Do they have anything to do with Election Commission (EC, which doesn't want indelible ink?

Tkc: This matter could be settled by organising a ‘face-off' between the unnamed European firm in one corner and a reputable indelible ink manufacturer (from India, not Afghanistan or Europe) in another corner.

All political parties, media and independent observers will be invited to witness the event. At the same time, we should also get a few of our brightest students to conduct experiments on the ink by using all kinds of detergents, stain removers and solvents sourced from supermarket shelves, DIY (do it yourself) and hardware stores.

For maximum transparency, this event should be televised live to the whole nation so that the rakyat can judge for themselves, instead of listening to hearsay.

Hmmmm: I fully agree with Tkc. If the EC doesn't want to do the ‘face-off' event, then just implement the indelible ink. After all, this is what the rakyat want and if the indelible ink really comes off, then it's no fault of EC.

They can later say, "I told you so". But make sure the indelible ink is from credible sources.

Lim Chong Leong: I am sure that the type of ink and the manufacturer reputation are also very important factors.

The EC also can test samples before using the ink. Not using the indelible ink based on just some reports or as in the last elections, on mere rumours, is irresponsible and suspicious to say the least.

Disgusted: If Bersih and all other parties clamouring for use of indelible ink want it, just use it - if it can removed by some, so be it. They can't fault EC for it.

So what is the issue here and why is EC so against it unless they want to help BN to cheat through multiple voting. At the last elections, the government spent millions of ringgit to buy the ink and did not use it at the last momentm giving a host of excuses.

I believe there was heavy cheating in 2008 elections. If the indelible ink was used and postal votes were carried out honestly and transparently, I believe BN would have lost a lot more seats in Parliament as well as the state assemblies.

BN, especially Umno big guns, are helped by EC to protect them from losing unless the votes against them were so overwhelming that even EC couldn't do anything, like what allegedly happened to Shahrizat Abdul Halim in Lembah Pantai.

This election we will see a new kind of cheating. Besides phantoms, we have illegals-turned-instant citizens and voters to contend with. God help this country!

Nil: Whether the ink come off easily or not would have to do with strict quality control.

When the new type of stick-on road-tax ‘disc' was first used some years ago, JPJ (Road Transport Department) assured that the printed information would not fade despite constant exposure to sunlight. As many would concur, that was not the case.

Nik V: Again, the indelible ink is an added precaution, which may not be 100 percent foolproof. Nothing ever is 100 percent foolproof. Neither are the locks or alarms systems we have in our homes. They don't stop the thieves but serve as deterrents and obstacles.

The goal of the indelible ink is to provide sufficient security against mass multiple manipulation. Why wouldn't any good government want such a precaution unless they have something to lose?

Clean&Clear: This reluctance to use indelible ink confirms suspicions that diehard Umno-BN voters are used to do multiple voting.

If indelible ink is used, that leaves only the armed forces/police, whose postal votes will still be amassed and they can vote again in their own constituencies to double up their votes. Of course, this is backed up with ‘newly-minted citizens' being loaded on at will.

Malaysian Born: Given its extensive use in India, the world's largest democracy, without any major issues, I believe it is silly to resist the use of indelible ink for our elections until something more technically advanced can be worked out and tested.

I hope the EC just get on with it - an election cannot be allowed to proceed with such glaring problems and negative perceptions when such easy measures can be used to resolve them.

Anonymous_40a7: To those who have read the article on The Star , here's something to think about - why in the left picture, the left finger is painted with the ink, but the picture on the right shows a clean right finger?

See it for yourself here .

http://thestar.com.my/news/story.asp?file=/2011/9/14/nation/9494265&sec=nation

AB Sulaiman: The EC and others who are dead set against the use of indelible ink have one common fear.

It's that the ink would be smeared and seen on the fingers of Bangladeshi, Indonesian, Nepalese, Filipino and other otherwise unauthorised voters on election day.