Perception of Electoral Integrity Index

Poorly implemented e-voting systems should not deter advancement

A couple is walking down the street, looking for a place to have dinner. They spot a rather dodgy-looking Japanese restaurant that happens to have a terrific special on sushi. Despite some hesitation, the couple decides to eat there. The food isn't good. The service isn't good. And one of them gets horribly sick afterwards. Given this experience, would it be fair for this couple to swear off of sushi entirely for the rest of their lives? Or was this experience only indicative of the poor quality of fish and food handling at this specific restaurant?

You might be wondering why a hypothetical story about a man and a woman eating dinner at a Japanese restaurant is appearing on a blog that discusses electronic voting technologies and innovations around the world. It is because many “experts” and “analysts” are just as quick to jump to these sorts of conclusions in regards to e-voting and i-voting technology based on isolated incidents. A negative e-voting experience in one jurisdiction should not lead to the absolute dismissal of e-voting in its entirety.

As with any developing or even established technologies, e-voting is certainly not without its challenges. Issues have arisen in Ireland and Canada, for instance. In the instance of Brockton, Ontario in Canada, there have been reports of voter fraud. However, many of these problems could have been prevented and mitigated if the proper precautionary steps were taken beforehand. And even if they were not, these incidents can serve as lessons for the future implementation of e-voting and i-voting technology in other elections around the globe.

There are many factors that come into play when implementing an e-voting system and governments are advised to follow the E-Voting Readiness Index proposed by Robert Krimmer and Ronald Schuster of the Competence Center for E-voting and Participation in Vienna, Austria. There need to be systems and infrastructure in place to best handle a suitable and reliable e-voting dynamic as part of a major election.

Indeed, a robust and properly supported e-voting infrastructure is ultimately more reliable and more secure than its analog counterparts. However, an e-voting system that has not been properly audited throughout the process and one where vendors have not been suitably vetted and tested can lead to many problems. Governments should only work with reputable vendors with proven track records, ones that have clearly demonstrated their ability to run secure, reliable, accurate and transparent elections elsewhere.

To uphold the integrity of the democratic process, several criteria for choosing e-voting technology and e-voting vendors must be followed. A wise and informed decision must be made based on accessibility and transparency, for instance, in addition to cost-efficiency and accuracy. In an effort to stay within budget, some jurisdictions may opt for less-tested vendors and solutions, but this can prove to be more costly in the long run and it can result in errors and issues. A proven vendor with a proven solution can help to instil greater confidence in e-voting among the voting population and this can help to encourage further development in improving the system.

It begins with the administration and ensuring that the electoral process itself is a debate that is suitably addressed among government officials. The decision cannot and should not be taken lightly. And this is why conferences like EVOTE 2014 in Austria are so valuable, as it facilitates the open discussion among international governments regarding how best to implement what electronic voting technology in their own elections. By leveraging their combined expertise, fewer problems will be experienced by all and the number of poorly implemented e-voting systems will fall to the wayside in favor of more robust, reliable and secure technologies.

The role of technology in 2014 elections

Source: Google Images

Democracy will once again be a very powerful force in 2014 with elections directly impacting forty-two percent of the world's population. Citizens in some forty countries around the globe will be heading to the polls to vote in 16 presidential elections, 26 legislative elections and four referendums, exercising their right to choose who governs them. This includes elections in such countries as Costa Rica, Slovakia, Afghanistan, Panama, Colombia, Fiji, Tonga and New Zealand, as well as the legislative election for the European Union.

While many of these elections will involve traditional pen-and-paper ballots, technology will also continue to play an increasingly important role in the world's democracies.

Indeed, technology can be leveraged to help combat political apathy. One such example is Brazil, a country that has had a long history with e-voting technology and should be continuing with that tradition in its presidential and legislative election in October. Further to this end, government-sanctioned “hackathons” are being organized wherein computer programmers and software developers can get together to collaborate on how to improve public services and communities. The use of openly available public data facilitates greater transparency and better voter engagement, above and beyond the ease of access that e-voting can provide.

Switzerland has several “popular initiatives” in February, including ones related a rail network, health coverage and mass immigration. To best capture the will of the people in the most efficient manner possible, Switzerland is set to use Internet voting as its primary vehicle. Indeed, 90% of Swiss voters cast their ballot online. This has been very effective in increasing accessibility.

Indonesia's third direct presidential election is scheduled for July 9 and it will elect a new president for a five-year term. Incumbent president Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono is barred from seeking a third term. Indonesia has been working on increasing automation in its elections and a new e-voting system should be implemented in this year's elections. The system will be based on electronic identity cards (e-KTP) issued to eligible voters. They have already been distributed in the districts of Padang, Denpasar, Jembrana, Yogyakarta, Cilegon and Makassar. This includes the populous areas of Bali, Java and West Sumatra.

If the 2012 provincial and municipal elections are any indication, the May 2014 Belgian federal election could also involve e-voting technology. Over 17,000 voting machines were used by three million voters in 155 cities in 2012. Belgium has committed to a contract with Smartmatic to automate its elections until at least 2026.

Leading up to the European Parliamentary election in May, a website was erected that allows Europeans to “decide who YOU want to vote for.” Dubbed Debating Europe, the website focuses on Vote 2014, the “first ever pan-European online e-vote.” The voting here is based on political ideologies and the result can “act as a high-profile barometer of voting intentions.” Some of the 28 member states of the EU may also implement varying forms of automation and e-voting technology.

The United States will be holding its midterm elections in the early part of November. As has been the case in the past, the American elections will be incredibly complex. Many different mechanisms can and will be used, as the decisions are made by the local authorities in each state. Some will use traditional paper ballots marked by each voter, but these ballots may be tabulated by a machine rather than by a human volunteer. Other states may use direct-recording electronic voting machines (DRE), some with a voter verifiable paper trail and others without.  

This year will be a busy one for voters and governments all around the world, from Central America to the European Union, the nations of Africa to elections in Southeast Asia. Following the examples set in countries like Belgium, Estonia and the Philippines, electronic voting technology will continue to gain in popularity and adoption for all the world's elections. 

Pre-electoral audits, a missing piece in the integrity of the US election system

Source: NorthJersey.com

The 2000 elections were a turning point in the way elections are administered in the US. After the contested race between Al Gore and George W. Bush had to be decided by the US Supreme Court almost a month after Election Day, numerous initiatives such as the Help America Vote Act (HAVA), the creation of the Electoral Assistance Commission, and the proliferation of watchdog and electoral transparency groups, dramatically improved the electoral landscape of the US.

In spite the progress, there is still room for improvement. Audits, a crucial step to certify the correctness of election outcomes, are still scarce and do not cover, in most cases, the electoral process in its entirety.  

At the moment, audits standards and procedures refer mostly to the process of hand-counting a sufficiently large random sample of the cast paper ballots and contrasting it with the digital record electronic voting machines provide. Although post-electoral audits are important, instead of focusing only in detecting fraud, a greater emphasis should be placed on preventing malfeasance of any kind of error from happening.

According to Verified Voting, the most important benefits of a thorough audit processes are:

• Revealing when recounts are necessary to verify election outcomes.
• Finding error whether accidental or intention.
• Deterring fraud.
• Providing for continuous improvement in the conduct of elections.
• Promoting public confidence in elections.

Voting technologies, which continues to gain popularity across the 3,600 jurisdictions of the US, provide numerous opportunities to review the components of the voting systems, and guarantee that the outcome of the electoral processes exactly reflect the will of voters. Those opportunities should be exploited. From the configuration of the electoral roll and electronic pollbooks, passing through the creation of voting instruments, source code of voting machines, and post electoral audit, every step of the election should be audited.

During the 2012 general elections, more than half of the states conducted post-election audits, however, authorities have not agreed on how to enforce pre-electoral audits. The focus of authorities has been on certifying that the technology in use complies with the minimum standards, but little or no attention has been given to each election and especially to the numerous steps of the electoral cycle preceding the event.

As voting technologies continue to spread around the world, a considerable body of knowledge is being developed. The US should take advantage of this by sharing experiences with Brazil, Belgium, the Philippines, Venezuela or Estonia, and every other nation trying to improve election administration through the adoption of technological solutions. Venezuela stands out as an example of what can be done in terms of pre-electoral audits. In a recent article published, available at forbes.com, Eugenio Martinez (a seasoned Venezuelan reporter) points out that for the Presidential Elections in Venezuela, before Election Day, more than 17 audits were performed to certify all elements of the voting platform worked properly. This was one of the main reasons why a contested election, in the midst of a heated campaign and a highly polarized political environment, ended with immediate official results being accepted by all parties minutes after polls closed. Reviewing the Venezuelan voting platform and developing ties with Venezuelan electoral authorities and its technology provider Smartmatic could be a great start. The US cannot afford another electoral meltdown as it has all the means to avoid it.

Worldwide acclaim of Venezuelan e-voting

Flag, by Guillermo Esteves

All eyes were set on Venezuela last October 7th as its citizens elected their president for the next 6 years through electronic means. With 55% of the votes, Hugo Chávez was declared winner against Henrique Capriles. The event received the biggest citizen participation in history: 80% of Venezuelans voted at this election. After this massive date with democracy, media outlets all around the world gave their approval to electoral technology, as Venezuela proved that nationwide automated elections are possible.

“Venezuela and its society are leading the Latin American electoral processes and technology,” were the first words from Prensa Latina, a Cuban press agency, after the elections. Meanwhile, the Dominican newspaper Hoy announced that e-voting was “the key to peaceful elections in Venezuela.” The Jamaica Gleaner pointed out the difference between the Latin American secure e-voting system and that used by the US, which has proved controversial over time: “Venezuela's electronic voting system is secure, transparent, and auditable - with multiple audits, involving all political parties, being carried out at each stage in the process. Unlike the controversial 'Diebold' machines used in recent US national elections, each vote yields a tangible paper receipt for verification or recount, and there is no 'electronic back door' to permit manipulation of the tallies.”

US media outlets also had their say about Venezuela’s electoral technology. CounterPunch, an American political newsletter, declared: “Free and fair elections are only one feature of a democracy, but in Venezuela, elections have become something more—a national project which knows no party and constitutes a major investment.” The media outlet added that “CNE’s anti-hacking and multiple transparent audit and identity authentication systems have put to rest past opposition claims of fraud.”

The news traveled all the way to Asia, where voices of approbation were immediately heard. In the Philippines, The Manila Standard Today expressed admiration for the positive way the elections turned out in Venezuela.

To see that a Latin American country is teaching the world how to hold a successful automated election is truly remarkable. Venezuela certainly has given a lesson on democracy and become an example to follow. We hope it will be only a matter of time until other nations understand it and apply it as well.

Highlights of EVOTE2012

Source: EVOTE2012 Facebook Page

The fifth International Conference on Electronic Voting (EVOTE2012) was one of the most anticipated events in the year for the world of electoral technology. The conference, held in Bregenz, Austria from July 11th to the 14th, was deemed a complete success by participants and organizers alike. Hundreds of researchers, developers, government representatives and business people from all around the world gathered at Castle Hofen to share experiences and breakthrough discoveries in e-voting.

This year’s theme for the convention was “Challenges for Electronic Voting – Transparency, Trust and Voter Education”. In this respect, speakers presented various cases of best practices in auditing, testing and verifying elections held through voting machines. Some new technological developments for e-voting were also proposed during the conference.

One of the features that distinguish this prestigious event among the academic community is that in order to be a speaker it’s necessary to enter a paper to apply for a spot. After submitting it, the organizers’ committee evaluates them and approves participation with a conference

Among the many activities and forums held during EVOTE2012, on July 13th there was a workshop about the “Venezuelan Electoral Technology”, in which participants were able to get to know more about the multiple benefits that this platform offers to voters in terms of auditability, accuracy and transparency. Developed by the multinational Smartmatic, and deployed more than 10 times in different electoral events in the country, for the first time the electronic voting solution will include during the upcoming National Election to be held on October 7th, a brand new biometric identification system to perform voter authentication and guarantee the principle one voter - one vote. 

Another interesting conference was offered by Carlos Vegas who talked about “The New Belgian E-voting System”, developed for the upcoming elections of Flanders and Brussels-Capital Regions to be held on October. According to the several academic speakers and experts who exposed about this case, the new system was based on a proposal presented in a comparative study on e-voting requested by the administration to a consortium of Belgian universities. Among the various advantages offered by the system –besides the fact that it was designed and conceived by Belgium academics- is the incorporation of a printed vote receipt that allows the voter to confirm its selection.

Mark Phillips gave another interesting talk: “Testing Democracy: How Independent Testing of E-Voting Systems Safeguards Electoral Integrity”, in which he explained the importance of independent certification for automated voting systems using as an example the successful automated elections of Philippines in 2010. Mark Phillips is President and Chief Executive Officer of SLI Global Solutions.

EVOTE2012 probably the most important event in the year for those involved in the development, implementation, and analysis of electronic voting. The fact that such a great convention has been assembled around electoral technology is a testimony of how much has been achieved in this area, and how promising the future looks for these technology solutions.