If it may please the Court, I wish to make a brief submission:
In
ILP v. DoFA, this Court decided a similar incident regarding campaigning in the voting booth.
In your opinion, I believe you announced a constitutional standard that can be easily applied here (and future cases on the matter), namely you described the vote in that case as containing "analytical and persuasive remarks", and this appears to have been your reasoning for ordering the vote discounted. It is my opinion that you should once again apply that standard and judge whether the vote contains "analytical and persuasive remarks" to determine whether it is campaigning in the voting booth.
