Technology has become an integral part of
just about every aspect of contemporary society. Computers are used in nearly
every line of work, smartphone adoption is at an all-time high, and a growing
number of tasks are being performed over the Internet, including online banking
and passport renewals. The use of technology in elections is also growing on a
global scale.
In Bulgaria, a referendum was proposed
last year that would posit three questions as they related to elections in
the Balkan nation. Since that time, the referendum has been further revised to
include only
one question to be asked of the Bulgarian people: are they in favor of or
are they opposed to the adoption of electronic voting technology in future
elections? This may also include the possibility of remote e-voting too.
While it may have once been assumed that
the people of Bulgaria would only be able to vote in this referendum if they
are physically present at a polling station in Bulgaria that was not the case
when the referendum was held on October 25. Indeed, 312
polling stations were opened in 45 countries around the world to allow
Bulgarians to voice their opinion on the issue from abroad. These included
polling stations in such nations as the United States, Germany and Turkey,
among dozens of others.
The point here is that the results of this
referendum and the profound ramifications that it could have on the electoral
process in Bulgaria affect not only the people who live and work in the country
itself, but also for expatriates and overseas workers. Expatriate voting has
become a hot issue in recent months with dramatic
changes in Canada and an increased push for voting for Swiss
living abroad. By opening the referendum to Bulgarians in 45 other
countries, the government has clearly indicated that expatriate and absentee
opinion matters.
The referendum also highlights two other
important topics. First, it could serve as a viable experiment for how e-voting
and remote voting could be best implemented in actual elections and not only in
referendums. Second, it could also help to build popular interest in the
advancement of e-voting in the nation of Bulgaria and for Bulgarians living
abroad.
The potential was there. The opportunity
was there. This referendum could have marked a major milestone for Bulgaria,
helping to propel its democracy ahead today and into the future.
Unfortunately, despite the efforts of
opening overseas polling stations and working to increase public interest in
the mechanics of democracy, the referendum ultimately did not live up to its
promise. This was attributed to insufficient
voter turnout. Even though 69.5 percent of those who participated did vote
in favor of remote online voting, only 40 percent of eligible voters responded
to the referendum.
The laws are such that the voter turnout
must be at least at the same level as that of the last parliamentary elections.
In this case, 48.66 percent of voters turned out for the 2014 parliamentary
elections and thus the referendum came up nearly 9 percent short of this mark.
President Rosen Plevneliev is undeterred, stating
that “voters want to be asked and expect to be heard.” Even though the
results of the referendum are not binding, Plevneliev says that it would be a
“big political mistake” to ignore them. And so, the saga toward increased
e-voting and remote e-voting in Bulgaria continues. If nothing else, this
referendum indicates that voter apathy must be addressed and the issues surrounding
technology in the democratic process must continue to be pushed to the
forefront of the conversation.
