E-voting excels in Ecuador

Santo Domingo used technology
provided by Smartmatic. Image: El Comercio

Ecuador ran three electronic voting pilots yesterday as voters elected 5,651 regional offices in the 2014 sectional elections. 

In order to implement these technologies, the Consejo Nacional Electoral (CNE), Ecuador´s highest electoral office, reached agreements with electoral commissions from Venezuela, Russia and Argentina. Their experience in election automation proved key for the success of the project.

Two of the voting pilots -in Santo Domingo de los Tsáchilas and Azuay- were binding. In La Morita, only 194 voters cast their vote in an experimental pilot using Russian technology. 

Smartmatic, a London based company, provided voting technology and services to conduct the entire process in Santo Domingo de los Tsáchilas. This pilot ran smoothly. Only one hour after polls closed authorities had in their possession official results. For the voters, voting was trouble -free. They used touch screen voting machines which provide a physical vote receipt via a built-in printer. The company offered training, running a support center, preparing, deploying and collecting the electronic electoral kits, among other services. 

In total, in Santo Domingo, 1,221 voting machines were deployed in 53 polling centers to receive 326.932 registered voters. Among the technologies used in the pilot, this was the only 100% automated and verifiable voting experience in the pilot. 

In Azuay, the CNE of Ecuador managed the entire voting process. However, to capture the intent of the voters, they had Magic Software Argentina provide 3,022 voting machines. Some polling centers presented problems with this technology. In the Canton Ponce Enriquez , the voting had to be suspended  because the voting machines had not been properly configured. Authorities will announce today when the voting will be resumed.  

The Russian technology deployed in La Morita, Pichincha province, comprised only 4 Direct Recording Electronic (DRE) voting machines. 2 were intended for voters, one for training and one was kept for contingency purposes. Only 194 voters used this technology. 

In spite of the glitches in Azuay, the pilots can be considered successful. Hopefully, after this positive experience, Ecuador will move to full implementation in the near future.

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.

Venezuela pulls it through

Photo: (AP /Fernando Llano)

Last Sunday (October 7, 2012) Venezuela held a presidential election featuring six candidates. Since the very beginnings of the official campaign, three months ago, the voters’ intent was polarized towards two contenders, the incumbent President Hugo Chavez Frias, and Henrique Capriles Radonski, representing the Coalition for Democratic Unity (Mesa de la Unidad Democrática, MUD).

In spite of a heated campaign, which included radically contrasting proposals, and even physical violence between the opposing sides, the election ran smoothly and voters were able to cast votes in a peaceful and civic environment. Moreover, official results were published only minutes after last precinct closed. Around 10 pm, on Election Day, Hugo Chavez was declared winner with approximately 54% of the votes, and immediately after, Henrique Capriles conceded the defeat and congratulated the re-elected President.

Besides the fact that President Chavez, and his 14-year revolution, were in for review, the Venezuelan election caught the attention world-wide as the inclusion of the biometric identification system that initiates the voting session, made of this, the first end-to-end automated national election ever. The robust platform used in Venezuela comprised 39.018 Smartmatic voting machines, with its corresponding electronic ballot and fingerprint reader device. Also, the hardware was complemented with software solutions to create electoral instruments, monitor the development on Election Day, and consolidate and publish results.

In our opinion, the transparency, efficiency and accuracy of the robust automated platform used, played a key role in shielding the vote of Venezuelans, and providing uncontested results. All parties involved in the process participated in the seventeen audits and five test carried out prior to the event. Above all the security features the system includes, the voting machines provide a paper trail record for post electoral audits. Each voter has the possibility to verify his/her vote is recorded accurately through the printed version of the vote. Also, after polling stations closed, citizens and authorities audited approximately 53% of the machines by comparing the electronic results with the paper trails deposited in the ballot boxes. In the US, voting advocates are fighting to achieve the audit of 3%-5%, this gives you an idea of how audited the results are. With such level of scrutiny possible, there was little room for shenanigans.

During the months preceding the elections, the traditional Venezuelan opinion research firms, forecasted contrasting results. A few weeks before the election, both sides were very confident of their victory. However, as with every election, the results favored only one side. The audits performed to approximately 15,000 voting machines after polls closed confirmed the accuracy of results in 100%. Both, the digital results coincided with the paper trails. The audit mechanisms gave no room for interpretation.

In these elections, automation proved to be the way to go when political and social stability at stake.

After successful pilot, future of e-voting in Bangladesh looks uncertain

In 2008, millions of Bangladeshis were eagerly queued to vote
on the country's first election in seven years. Photo: Abir Abdullah/EPA

Peaceful, credible and transparent elections. These ideals have eluded Bangladeshi voters who for decades have been resigned to poll fraud and the attendant violence. Last year, however, two cities have had a taste of a possible breakthrough.   

For the first time, voters of Chittagong and Narayanganj elected their new leaders using electronic voting machines (EVMs). Many voters regarded their first experience with automated elections very positively. 

According to the article entitled “EVM passes with flying colours” (Rizanuzzaman Laskar, Daily Star, October 31, 2011),  voters praised the machines as  “quick”, “convenient” and “easy-to-use.”

The article further reports about a 105-old man named Jahedul Haque Bhuiyan who exclaimed that voting using the EVM was the most fun he has  ever had in any election. A 19-year old first-time voter, Suraiya Islam enthused that voting was fun “like playing a video game!”

Aside from the high degree of voter satisfaction, the results of the automated elections in the two cities were widely accepted. This was in stark contrast with the unrest that marred fraud-ridden elections in the past years. These positive developments have led observers to hail the exercise a huge success.

Given the impressive results of the pilot implementations, EVM's seem to be a logical choice for the country’s next general elections. However, it is not smooth sailing for automated elections as the Elections Commission has seemed to have had second thoughts about using the EVM's countrywide.  

The reason? Dominant opposition party BMP, citing reliability issues, has manifested its strong objection against the use of EVM's for the general elections.

There might be valid reasons for the BMP to oppose the nationwide use of EVM's. After all, ensuring a level playing field is always of paramount concern among political parties.  But every stakeholder in Bangladesh would be well advised to keep in mind that electronic voting is in its infancy in their country.  Most likely, the issues being raised are nothing that cannot be remedied in time for the next elections.

The elections in Chittagong and Narayanganj have shown that automation works in Bangladesh. Before shutting the door completely on EVM’s the Election Commission should consider that the benefits of automated elections far outweigh the costs that might be incurred to make sure that a reliable and secure system is in place.

Benefits of electronic poll books

SAI will eliminate any possibility of double voting or that third parties
might vote by stealing the identity of registered voters (Image Smartmatic)

As technology continues to improve our overall life quality by automating processes related to all aspects of our lives, one specific development is consistently becoming more relevant and essential to perform even the simplest task: biometric authentication. From border security, to banking, and even more recently, voting, biometrics are being successfully applied to different industries. In the electoral arena, which is the main interest of this blog, biometrics is also making possible some ground-breaking transformations.

We've all heard numerous times the old adagio: every vote counts. Well, that can only be asserted when authorities succeed in ensuring that every citizen who wants to express his opinion casts a vote, and that every cast vote is properly accounted for.

The managing of poll books is an area where Biometrics is starting to play a key role. Normally, and in order be given access to cast a vote, voters go through a process of authentication, which involves handing an ID to the poll station worker so they can confirm that the person in the polling station is in fact eligible to cast a vote in that precinct. During this process, and for decades, all sort of irregularities such as double voting and impersonation have occurred. Biometrics are making it impossible for fraudsters to actually impersonate another voter and in some cases, it is avoiding unscrupulous voters to cast more votes than allowed.

A solution to eradicate the problems regarding voter authentication is being implemented in Venezuela. Developed by Smartmatic, the Integrated Authentication System (SAI for its acronym in Spanish) uses the voters' biometric authentication (through fingerprint scanning) to verify the identity of the voter and allow him or her to cast their vote. The device receives each voter's ID number and fingerprint, and validates this data against the electoral roll. Only a valid identity from someone who has not previously voted, and is in fact eligible to vote, will activate the voting machine. This prevents identity theft and double voting, and guarantees the One Elector = One Vote principle. The system is a step forward from the automated electoral rolls being implemented in countries like Ghana and Cameroon.

Governments have an enormous responsibility towards their citizens and the overall democratic system when it comes to election administration. They must offer effective tools and technologies to ensure maximum levels of transparency and efficiency. Given the latest developments, biometric authentication is the next logical step to follow when election integrity is at stake. A manual poll book simply does not offer the levels of security and reliability that elections need. The example Venezuela is setting by using technologies like SAI, needs to be followed as it will shield the right to vote of the Venezuelan electorate.

Diffusion of Innovations and Resistance to Change

The ordinary 'horseless carriage' is at present a luxury for the wealthy; and although its price will probably fall in the future, it will never, of course, come into as common use as the bicycle.—Literary Digest, 1899.

If we were to compare our lives to those of our ancestors a hundred years ago, what would we say has improved? Almost everything. Our modern society is full of inventions, which we now take for granted and that have made our lives much easier. Cars, computers, commercial flights, to name just a few; they all share a similar story.When they were first created and marketed, some people—even experts—were reluctant to accept them. Lord Kelvin declared in 1897 that radio had no future. Television was thought to be a fad and a Fox movie producer believed that people would soon get tired of staring at a box. But we know very well what happened to these two novelties: we can no longer conceive a world without them.

Some of us think about what we have and not what we need. We think evolution has taken us this far and nothing new could ever come up in the future. The beauty of new inventions is that they solve problems that we think we didn’t have because we are so used to working with our current inconveniences. In other words, we don’t know any better. Thus, since we are wired to expect certain difficulties from what’s already out there, we tend to distrust things that disrupt our current mind frame,

things that could —and will— change our lives for the better. The editor in charge of business books for Prentice Hall in 1957 said about computers, “I have traveled the length and breadth of this country and talked with the best people, and I can assure you that data processing is a fad that won't last out the year.”

But then, how is this solved, and how do we jump from invention to adoption? According to Everett Rogers’ Diffusion of Innovations (1962), people progress through 5 stages: knowledge (first exposure to the innovation), persuasion (active search for information on it), decision (acceptance of the concept of change, advantage/disadvantage weigh-in), implementation (employment of the innovation, determination of its usefulness), and confirmation (final decision to continue using the innovation). If the innovation is finally adopted, it spreads via various communication channels.

An important part of this process is the acceptance of change, and this comes along with the acceptance that the previous technology is indeed inconvenient. For example: people are still discussing whether e-books will ever displace the heavy and burdensome paper books we’ve grown up with for generations. Once they accept the fact that printed matter could and should be a lot lighter than it is, the path to the new technology is open.

The automation of processes is another aspect of progress that has been subjected to the same cycle of distrust and acceptance of change. Our modern society keeps trying to facilitate things for everyone and at the same time increase productivity. Voting is a clear example of this. Some people resist the idea of exerting their right to suffrage through electronic means simply because all they know is manual voting.

However, most people are finding it “easy” or “very easy” to cast their ballot using voting machines, and this recognition of convenience is one of the turning points for the general adoption of this new technology.

As we see, the only way for our society to progress is to stop resisting change. The good thing is that once convenience is recognized within an innovation, its adoption is guaranteed. Having said that, given the strong positive reviews from the common people, manual voting is on its way to being considered an uncomfortable thing of the distant past.