The Single Girl District (of 0745011)

There is an entire voting district in Perak/Lumut/Sitiawan/Astaka, where there is only one voter, a 22-year-old female, on an air field, which is the only locality in the whole voting district.

It looks like an honest mistake by the SPR, which somehow orphaned an entire district code, and a single, newly registered voter, out on an isolated air port garden.

This is the only result when we search SPR-issued MS-Access database gazetted on 2008 Feb 5, to list all localities and all voters in the DM of 074/50/11:

Kodlokaliti	Negeri	NamaParlimen	NamaDUN	NamaDM	NoSiri	IC	NamaLokaliti
0745011024	Perak	Lumut	Sitiawan	Astaka	2502	860513335894	Tmn Lapangan Terbang

In the result above, we have left out voter name (Nama), NoRumah, Tahunlahir, etc, to reduce the exposure of voters' privacy.

You can confirm this problem through SPR's voter verification Web page. However, for this voter alone, the SPR Website does not publish the parliamentary, DUN, DM, locality details. (The boxes are left blank).

Still, you will be able to find the erroneous details in the MS Access file of "PERAK2.mdb". We display the Kodlokaliti and NoSiri to help you confirm these cases if you are using SPR-published Access file. We have not confirmed this voter appears in the PDF file.

Key issue is rectifying the mistake and finding the source or procedure that led to this very odd mistake. Very often, an odd mistake is only the tip of the iceberg for an underlying problem.

• How did the mistake come about?
• What background data restructure inside SPR had created such a weird set of codes and specific locality name? Was there a major re-organization of locality division?
  
• Could it be the tip of an ice berg of other related errors?
  


• How is the problem DM related to another existing DM of 074/50/02 (vs this problematic 074/5011), also named Perak/Lumut/Sitiawan/Astaka?
  
• Why is there a gap in locality number between 074/50/02 and 074/50/11, both having the same parliamentary name, DUN name, and DM name? (See table below)
  


• Why are details partially missing from SPR verification page served by the SPR database server, when the info is apparently valid data base format, even if the information is logically erroneous? In contrast, why does the info remain inside the MS Access formatted data file when it can go missing from a Web database server?
  


• What is the nature of this "Tmn Lapangan Terbang"? Was it an old and abandoned locality/street, or a new and emerging residential street area?
  


• Overall, even if it was an honest mistake, what procedure and logical process had produced such a stark mistake?
  

Table: 074/50/02 and 074/50/11 share the same locality names and TM, but why the gap in code?

Code	Negeri	Nama Parlimen	NamaDUN	NamaDM	TM
074/50/01	Perak	Lumut	Sitiawan	Sitiawan	Sekolah Menengah Kebangsaan Ahmad Boestamam, Sitia...
074/50/02	Perak	Lumut	Sitiawan	Astaka	Sekolah Menengah Kebangsaan Tok Perdana Sitiawan
074/50/03	Perak	Lumut	Sitiawan	Simpang Lima	Sekolah Jenis Kebangsaan (Cina) Simpang Lima
074/50/04	Perak	Lumut	Sitiawan	Pekan Gurney	Sekolah Jenis Kebangsaan (Cina) Pekan Gurney
074/50/05	Perak	Lumut	Sitiawan	Simpang Dua	Sekolah Jenis Kebangsaan (Cina) Chien Hua Simpang ...
074/50/06	Perak	Lumut	Sitiawan	Taman Pegawai	Sekolah Kebangsaan St. Francis Sitiawan
074/50/07	Perak	Lumut	Sitiawan	Kampong Koh Utara	Sekolah Menengah Kebangsaan Methodist (Acs) Sitiaw...
074/50/08	Perak	Lumut	Sitiawan	Kampong Koh Selatan	Sekolah Jenis Kebangsaan (Cina) Uk Dih Kampong Koh
074/50/09	Perak	Lumut	Sitiawan	Kampong China Utara	Sekolah Jenis Kebangsaan (Cina) Uk Ing Kampong Chi...
074/50/10	Perak	Lumut	Sitiawan	Kampong China Selatan	Sekolah Jenis Kebangsaan (Cina) Uk Ing Kampong Chi...
074/50/11	Perak	Lumut	Sitiawan	Astaka	Sekolah Menengah Kebangsaan Tok Perdana Sitiawan