a ballot paper and a vote. For instance, Section 123 of the Australian Electoral Act of 1992, formally distinguishes between a valid and an invalid vote. It states in subsection (4) thereof that “[i]f a ballot paper has effect to indicate a vote, it is a formal ballot paper.” And in subsection (5) it adds that “[i]f a ballot paper does not have effect to indicate a vote, it is an informal ballot paper.” That Act then goes on to provide that an informal ballot paper does not count. A ballot paper is therefore counted as a vote if it is filled in accordance with the set down procedure. [169] In the US, the criterion for making the distinction between a ballot paper and a vote is the clear and discernible intention of the voter. This is manifest from the case of Brown v. Carr82, cited with approval by the US Supreme Court in Bush v. Gore 83 , in which the Supreme Court of Western Virginia stated that: “It is equally well settled that, in determining whether a ballot shall be counted, and, if so, for whom, depends on the intent of the voter, if his intention can be gleaned from the ballot being considered, or, in some special instances, from facts and circumstances surrounding the election. Courts decry any resort to technical rules in reaching a conclusion as to the intent of the voter, and in respect thereto follow a liberal policy, to the end that voters be not deprived of the exercise of their constitutional right of suffrage.” Adding that the investigation of the intent of the voter should be confined to the ballot itself, the court added: 82 83 Brown v. Carr, 43 S.E. 2d 401, 130 W. Va 455.   Bush v. Gore 531 US 98(2000).   Presidential  Petition  No.  1  of  2017                                                                                                                                                                                                            69  |  P a g e