Biometrics for the Balkans: Albania’s Diaspora Voter Registration Could Inspire Stronger Regional Democracy

In 2025, Albania quietly achieved something many of its Balkan neighbors have long aspired to but never fully realized: it digitally enfranchised its diaspora. Through a secure, biometric-based electronic voter registration system, Albania enabled nearly a quarter of a million citizens living abroad to register to vote for the first time—a milestone rooted not only in political will but in rigorous technical design.

This achievement is documented in the paper “Empowering the Diaspora: A Digital Approach to Voter Registration for Albanian Citizens Out of the Country” by Elira Hoxha, Jona Josifi, and Redion Lila (University of Tirana, 2025), which was presented during the recent E-Vote-ID 2025. The study offers the first detailed analysis of how Albania transformed diaspora enfranchisement from an administrative aspiration into an operational reality, merging electoral reform, cybersecurity best practices, and human-centered design.

A Digital Bridge for One-Third of the Nation

One-third of Albania’s citizens live outside the country—most in Italy, Greece, and Germany—and for decades faced immense barriers to participation: complex paperwork, poor consular coordination, and inconsistent voter lists. As Hoxha, Josifi, and Lila note, the introduction of the electronic voter registration (e-registration) platform marked “a major milestone in Albania’s ongoing efforts to modernize its electoral infrastructure and expand civic participation beyond national borders.”

The Central Election Commission (CEC) developed the system to operate through three channels—a desktop web portal, a native mobile application, and a mobile-friendly web version—ensuring inclusivity across age groups, devices, and internet conditions. Statistical data from the study revealed that nearly 80 percent of registrants completed the process using mobile devices, underscoring what the authors describe as “the emergence of mobile-first democracy.”

Biometric Security Plus Inclusivity

What set Albania’s approach apart was the integration of cutting-edge biometric technology with responsive human oversight. The system employed a three-factor authentication process—password, one-time passcode (OTP), and real-time facial recognition verified against the National Civil Registry—anchored on ISO/IEC 19794-5 biometric standards. This multi-layered authentication, as detailed in the paper, “safeguarded the registration workflow against impersonation, unauthorized access, and automated attacks.”

At the same time, the CEC established a 24/7 multilingual support team accessible via phone, email, WhatsApp, and chatbot. Staff worked in rotating shifts until 2 a.m., verifying applications within an average of three days. If errors were found, applicants were allowed to correct and reapply—striking, as the authors emphasize, “the right balance between efficiency and empathy.”

A Model of Democratic Modernization

The results were transformative. According to Hoxha, Josifi, and Lila, a total of 245,935 diaspora voters successfully registered—an unprecedented expansion of Albania’s electorate. The system’s reliability, accessibility, and compliance with GDPR and national data laws demonstrated that technological modernization need not come at the expense of democratic integrity.

Beyond its technical success, the initiative carried profound symbolic weight: it restored a sense of belonging to citizens long excluded from the political life of their homeland. It showed that digital transformation, when paired with transparency and accountability, can rebuild trust in institutions—something sorely needed in many post-transition democracies.

Blueprint for the Balkans

Albania’s experience offers a pragmatic blueprint for other Balkan states such as North Macedonia, Kosovo, Montenegro, Bosnia and Herzegovina, and Serbia. Each faces similar challenges: large diasporas, administrative bottlenecks, and waning voter confidence. Yet as the paper demonstrates, these challenges are not immutable—they are design problems waiting for digital solutions.

A region-wide embrace of secure, biometric e-registration could yield multiple dividends: enhanced electoral integrity, expanded participation, and a tangible step toward consolidating democracy in Southeast Europe. As the authors conclude, Albania’s case illustrates that “leveraging technology to expand voter engagement is not merely a technical innovation—it is an act of democratic renewal.”

Albania’s model reminds the Balkans that inclusion is the ultimate test of democracy. And in 2025, through code, cloud, and commitment, Albania passed that test with distinction.

Optical scan vs. electronic touchscreen voting machines

The democratic process in any given city, county, state or country should be reasonably independent and impartial such that it is not directly influenced by outside forces. The results of such elections should represent the will of the people in an accurate and transparent manner. This being said, government agencies from around the globe can benefit greatly by collaborating and sharing their knowledge, experience and expertise in regards to voting technologies being used.

Last October, the EVOTE 2014 International Conference was held in Austria, gathering together some of the most influential figures in the vertical of voting paradigms, administration and technology. This has since been followed by the 9th Annual International Electoral Affairs Symposium in December 2014, hosted in South Africa. One of the presenters at the event was Bruce Clark, the Kankakee County Clerk from the United States, and he spoke about the experience of the 2014 midterm elections in Illinois.

In addition to discussing poll worker training, outreach efforts, and ballot preparation, a key subject addressed was the deployment and use of optical scan machines for the election. One of the major trends observed by Clark was the shift in the type of voting equipment used in United States elections over the last 10 to 15 years.

The types of voting equipment in 2000 were incredibly varied and fragmented across the different counties in the United States. There was no systematic approach, resulting in counties using punch cards, DataVote, levers, paper, optical scan, electronic and mixed systems in a rather scattered fashion. By contrast, the vast majority of counties and townships in 2012 used either optical scan (62.8% of counties) or electronic voting machines (32.8%), resulting in less than 5% of counties using different equipment.

Given this, the Kankakee County Clerk took a closer look to compare optical scan (OS) machines with touch screen (TS) electronic voting machines. In the case of an optical scan machine, people still cast their vote on a paper ballot, but it is then inserted into the optical scan machine for tabulation. The advantages here include the fact that people like to see their vote and, in case of a discovery, there is a physical ballot to examine. However, ballot costs can be significant and there are physical limitations to the size of the ballot box.

By comparison, there are many positives associated with the use of a touchscreen direct-recording electronic voting machine (TS DRE). The accuracy level is incredibly high and the touchscreen machines facilitate far better accessibility for voters with disabilities, as they are able to cast a ballot completely unassisted. An audit trail can be produced, just like the optical scan machine, providing great accountability and transparency to further bolster the legitimacy and integrity of election results.

Naturally, considerations need to be made before implementing touchscreen voting machines. There may be issues related to calibration and, in addition to the upfont cost to purchase each machine, counties and election officials must consider the costs of equipment repair or replacement. Even so, the pros clearly far outweigh the cons and this is why touchscreen machines are understandably growing in popularity.

By working with other governments around the world and increasing competition among the vendors of electronic voting machines with touchscreen capabilities, election administrators can encourage further development in the industry, continuing to improve reliability, security and affordability.

New Mexico may introduce biometric voter authentication

It doesn't matter how well an election appears to be run or how smoothly the voting process goes for each constituent if the voting public cannot have a great deal of confidence that the integrity of the election and its results are suitably upheld. This includes the security and confidentiality of each individual ballot, to be sure, and it also includes the importance of eliminating voter fraud and ensuring that each person voting is adequately authenticated and verified.

There are many people who have spoken about the perceived voter fraud throughout the United States and various measures have been taken by the individual states to overcome this concern. However, some of these efforts have been perceived as unilaterally impacting disenfranchised citizens or individuals of a particular demographic that may be more inclined to vote for one political party than another.

The voter registration and proof of citizenship requirements in Arizona are one such example of this and it has become an incredibly contentious issue for everyone involved. Such laws, according to many Democrats, make voting more difficult for demographics that are more likely to support Democrats, including the Hispanic and Latino community.

To counteract this, a Republican Senator William Payne is proposing that biometric voter identification technology be implemented in the state of New Mexico. In his proposal, Payne says that he hopes to “put to rest the criticism that voters cannot afford to produce reliable photo identification when they vote.”

While the proposal is certainly still in its early stages and is decidedly up for debate, Payne offered the example of using everyday devices like a regular consumer smartphone as a method of identifying a voter using biometric data. “This is already commercially available,” he stated, “and it has nothing to do with the technical literacy of the person.”

That statement may be questionable and securing the legitimacy and security of a smartphone may be an incredible challenge, but the concept of utilizing existing technology for the purposes of voter authentication need to be explored. Smartphones like the Galaxy S5 from Samsung and the iPhone 6 from Apple have fingerprint readers on them. Using an off-the-shelf solution like these biometric fingerprint readers is far more cost-effective and far more of a proven system than if governments were to develop a brand new solution from the ground up.

The appeal of a biometric system for voter identification and verification is undeniable. Biometric technology has already been used in other elections around the world as an effective means of protecting against election fraud. If developing countries like Tanzania, Ghana and Kenya can explore and implement biometrics, the state of New Mexico should not ignore this possibility. It has been very successful in elections in Venezuela, for instance.

While some of the existing systems and infrastructure can make it difficult for the poor and disenfranchised to register to vote, biometric systems can be far more effective. Indeed, the US electoral system should adopt biometrics for this very reason. Mexico was able to register 95% of its population with biometric identity cards. There's no reason why New Mexico can't do the same.

To simultaneously reduce voter fraud and to encourage greater voter turnout among disenfranchised and marginalized demographics, biometrics can represent the future of security in increasingly electronically-geared elections. Anyone can swipe a fingerprint or have their iris scanned and it is far more difficult for fraudsters to spoof these identifying features. 

Tanzania weighing its e-voting options for October election

Many of the most exciting advances in electronic voting technology aren't necessarily being witnessed in first-world countries with high-end modern technology is a part of everyday life. Instead, it is in several developing nations around the world that e-voting, e-counting, and i-voting are receiving grassroots level support in part of a concerted effort to modernize these countries. 

Several countries in Africa have either already launched pilot projects in this field or are currently exploring the possibilities of doing so in upcoming elections. One example of particular note is Tanzania, where the country's general election is currently scheduled to take place this October. The National Electoral Commission (NEC) of Tanzania is being urged to not allow the country to be “left behind” in this “digital era,” being encouraged to implement electronic voting machines (EVMs), biometric voter registration (BVM), or a combination thereof. 

This follows in the example of other African countries that have already utilized some form of electronic-based technology as part of their democratic elections. As voter identification and voter verification are of critical importance, regular photo ID cards may not be sufficient to prevent voter fraud. To this end, the Tanzanian government has already decreed that a new biometric voting registration technology will be replacing the old voting system.

Indeed, the registration of voters using BVR is slated to start in February, well in advance of the October polls. Permanent Secretary Dr. Florens Turuka has indicated that the old voter identity cards will no longer be valid and all voters will need to register themselves through the new biometric system in order to qualify for voting in the upcoming general election. The system and technology have already been tested in three constituencies and every registered voter will receive new identification cards from the National Electoral Commission. 

Biometric voter registration and identification have already been used elsewhere in Africa, but some recent examples have been met with technical glitches and limited success. The system used in Kenya, which was co-developed by the Government of Canada and a sub-contractor called Morpho Canada, experienced numerous failures and some say this may have been caused by “massive fraud.” The elections in Ghana were marred with attempts at double registration and the theft of verification machines.

With both of these instances, the problems can likely be linked back to two culprits. First, human error and tampering can be problematic. Second, the systems may not have been properly secured and audited to ensure they would perform as needed for the elections in question. Tanzania needs to learn from the attempts in Kenya and Ghana, ensuring that they only contract respectable vendors with strong track records and that they ensure the proper security measures are in place to protect against those seeking to maliciously influence election results. 

As with Nigeria, Tanzania is still a transitioning nation and it will take time to move the country forward into the digital age for modernizing its democratic process. While it had its share of challenges, the recent elections in Namibia can also serve as a lesson and an example for modernizing elections on the African continent. Namibia was the first country in Africa to use direct-recording electronic voting machines. That is a major milestone. 

The Tanzanian election is only a few short months away. It will likely face many difficulties along the way, but a commitment to biometric voter authentication and the possible exploration into electronic voting machines or electronic counting of ballots represent positive strides in the right direction.