Bulgaria's Voting Innovations Slash Invalid Votes Amid Disinformation Onslaught

The adoption of voting technologies in Bulgarian elections has notably enhanced the efficiency and accuracy of vote counting and tabulation, leading to a substantial decrease in the number of invalid votes. In the National Assembly elections on July 11, 2021, invalid votes constituted a mere 0.34% of the almost 2.8 million votes cast—a significant improvement when contrasted with the 2019 local elections, where the absence of voting machines resulted in an alarming 15% of votes being declared invalid. This advancement marks a considerable step forward in bolstering the integrity of Bulgaria's electoral process.

Since first implementing voting technology in 2014, Bulgaria has expanded the use of electronic voting machines with a distribution of roughly 9,500 devices nationwide as of recent elections.

According to the Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe (OSCE), the implementation of machine voting in the 2021 Presidential and Early Parliamentary Elections was largely successful despite logistical challenges. Significantly, the OSCE's statement acknowledges that machine voting prevented the possibility of casting an invalid or blank ballot, emphasizing the effectiveness of this technology in fostering more valid voter participation.

International observers from the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe (PACE), also praised the impact of voting machines, describing it as "positive" and underscoring their role in eliminating invalid ballots, which has been an ongoing issue in prior elections.

However, the advancements in Bulgaria's voting technology landscape have been somewhat overshadowed by disinformation campaigns. Particularly during the 2021 elections, representatives from the GERB party made several allegations of machine manipulation without presenting any substantiating evidence. These unsubstantiated claims have fueled skepticism and have potentially hampered the public's trust in the efficacy and integrity of the voting machines.

The spread of election disinformation linked to voting technology in Bulgaria appears to be driven by political agendas. During the 2022 Bulgarian general election, Goran Georgiev of Sofia’s Center for the Study of Democracy closely observed the unfolding events. In a marked display of skepticism, GERB’s leader Borisov condemned the employment of voting technology and alleged, without presenting evidence, that unauthorized individuals had manipulated the voting machines. Georgiev highlighted the significance of this election, as it was the first in over a decade where GERB failed to secure a parliamentary majority.

Overall, while electronic voting machines in Bulgaria have demonstrated a notably positive impact on the electoral process, it is crucial for Bulgarian authorities and international stakeholders to address the challenge of disinformation to safeguard the progress made in modernizing elections.

Anatomy of election fraud: How manual counting abetted poll-rigging in Belarus

 

Kommersant Photo / Polaris/Newscom

In a massive outpouring of indignation, hundreds of thousands of protesters have occupied the streets of Belarus demanding the resignation of President Alexander Lukashenko, who was recently elected for a sixth term in an election tainted by allegations of rigging.

Yet even as the high-stakes political drama plays out before the watchful eyes of the world, the nuts and bolts of how the alleged rigging was executed is likewise worthy of investigation.

The European Union has already rejected the results of the elections and is set to impose sanctions. Steffen Seibert, German Federal Government’s Press and Information Officer, declared that the minimum standards for democratic elections were not observed during the vote and believes the claims of the opposition about election fraud.

The Belarus election fraud debacle throws into sharp focus the inherent vulnerability of hand-counted elections to manipulation and the damage it brings to the integrity of the whole electoral process. Add this to the fact that manual elections are notorious for its lack of mechanisms to audit the results and you have a perfect storm for massive electoral fraud.

Ihar Barsuk, who served as a precinct election commission during the presidential election, revealed exactly how fraud was committed in his precinct. “According to my calculations, Lukashenka received about 10% of the vote. I do not remember the details but about 9-10% were stolen from opposition candidates. Just like that, in front of the entire commission and observers,” said Barsuk. Barsuk went on to say that commission members did not get to sign most of ballot papers, which raises serious questions on the chain of custody. But the major violations took place after the vote count where, according to Barsuk, his numbers “were very different to the results voiced by chairman of the commission.”

Outraged, Barsuk requested for a recount which the Commission granted. The recount revealed the discrepancy between Barsuk’s count and that of the chairman, which prompted correction of the official count. Barsuk made sure to document the attempted fraud by writing a note in the final protocol.

An election observer stationed in a Minsk precinct, Zmicier Sauka describes how the elections at his station were rigged. He claimed that 13 of the 15 observers were from the Belarusian Republican Youth Union and similar government organizations, precluding an independent observation of the proceedings.

Also, Sauka observed how he counted 710 people drop ballots in but was surprised to see the official tally at 1,046 voters, noting the difference of 336 “pseudovotes.” Worse, he noted that early voting votes for opposition candidate Karatkevich, which totaled 36, were not counted in the official tally which only reflected the in-person votes.

He believes that one person was enough to perpetuate election fraud in the precinct and laid the blame on the commission chair – the head teacher of secondary school 28 in Minsk.

The same fatal flaws of manual elections made evident in Belarus has provided the impetus for a growing number of countries to modernize their electoral processes and adopt automated election systems in one form or another. It remains to be seen how the Belarus will resolve the political upheaval. Either way, the international community is expected to put more and more pressure on the landlocked Eastern European country to fix its broken election system.

E-voting scores another triumph in Belgium

Since 1991, Belgium has been experimenting with voting technologies to automate their elections. And last weekend, the stage was set for another e-voting triumph as millions cast their vote electronically in the election with the highest turnout in the EU. A staggering 90% of the eligible voters headed to the polls, while the rest of the union averaged a mere 43%.

During the elections, Belgium elected three parliaments, the regional, the Federal and the European. To do so, over 1,000 polling stations in Brussels and Wallonia were set up using technology developed by Jites. Also, more than 3,000 polling stations across 153 communes in Flanders and Brussels used technology and services provided by Smartmatic (over 17,400 voting machines). In addition, authorities hired Stésud to deploy a system for the digital transmission and recording of results which is called CODI.

All voting systems and software programs were certified by an independent advisory body, PWC (Price Waterhouse Coopers) on the following dates:

Jites: April 4, 2014

Smartmatic: April 4, 2014

CODI (Stésud): April 30, 2014

Due to a change in Belgium´s voting legislation, it was possible to publish partial results of electronic voting. According to the IBZ website, once the results of 10 centers within a district were available, they were reported. Also, thanks to the digital transmission system, the election results were announced earlier this time around.

Some interesting facts about the election:

• The electoral roll comprised 8,000,458 voters. 7,871,504 residing in Belgium and the rest living abroad.
• Total number of electronic polling stations: 4,482.
• Total number of manual polling stations: 6,301.
• Municipalities took important initiatives to improve accessibility for disabled voters, such as:

            - Provision of priority parking
            - Customized access to the polling station
            - Guidance for using the voting booth

• Between 6.30 am and 9.30 am, while setting up the polling stations, there were 234 incidents requiring technical support. In 2012 -for the same time interval- there were 463.
• At 4.00 p.m. all electronic polling stations were closed. The traditional polling stations closed an hour earlier to start the manual count.
• A red pencil was used for manual voting. Red is considered by authorities to facilitate reading, and deter electoral fraud. 
• Paper ballots were produced using green energy (wind energy). A high quality paper that incorporates several safety features including a watermark with a Belgian insignia and a slogan was used for the ballots in manual precincts.
• All results were published in the website http://verkiezingen2014.belgium.be/nl/
• At 16.10 p.m., the first official results of the election regarding Belgians who voted in embassies abroad were known.
• European stock markets moved higher Monday as election results rolled in from the European Union and Ukraine.
• Despite numerous prior testing and certifications by PwC, a minor inconsistency present in the digital transmission and recording system was not identified until e-day. In consequence, the totalization of the preferential votes in several cantons using Jites voting machines was erroneous, causing the temporary suspension of the results proclamations. Stésud corrected the bug after a few hours.