An election with integrity calls
for procedures and measures to guarantee the secrecy of the vote and the
security of participants and sites. The electoral system would clearly define
voting rules at a safe, accessible and neutral polling site. The type of ballots
and their design can reinforce the integrity of the process.
To attract voters less likely
to use traditional voting methods, the system might allow alternatives such as
e-voting, which poses its own challenges to electoral integrity (since the
circumstances under which the act of voting occurs cannot be observed). In addition it is possible that an e-voting
system could be “hacked”, and the votes changed during transmission.
At polling stations, competent
officials should be present to ensure that voting takes place in compliance
with electoral law. There should also be monitors representing political
parties, as well as independent observers. These can detect potential
problems, such as proxy, group and “family” voting; multiple (including carousel) voting and
voter impersonation; and discrimination, intimidation and fraud.
Safe,
Accessible and Neutral Polling Site Locations
The location of a polling site
may affect the integrity of the vote, especially if it is not a neutral, easily
accessible or safe location. Voters need to feel protected from political
activists and pressure during voting. Polling sites are best set up in a safe
and neutral location, such as a school, sports centre or community hall. The
property of a party representative or government offices are generally avoided,
as are private homes (unless another adequate facility is not available). Some
countries will try to avoid the use of religious facilities whenever
possible. There is a premium on making
sure that polling sites are easily accessible, easy to find and served by
public transit if any.
Observers will often focus on
whether polling sites have been distributed geographically in a way which does
not favor voters from particular groups in society or of a certain political
composition. In Croatia during the 2007 elections for the Sabor (parliament), for example, the
main opposition parties sued the State Election Commission, arguing that areas
where their supporters were concentrated were inadequately served by voting
facilities. Denied by the SEC, they also
failed to prevail in an appeal to the Constitutional
Court, the Court finding that there was a
sufficient basis to support the location of sites, which had been used
previously. International observers
commented that the laws governing the establishment of (new) polling sites were
vague.[1]
When minority voters are
concentrated in certain areas, while being dispersed elsewhere in smaller
relative numbers, it can have a negative effect on their ability to obtain
representation vis-à-vis their
overall share of the vote. In Montenegro
for the parliamentary elections of 1998, the electoral law was amended to permit
ethnic Albanian-based parties, within certain parameters, to aggregate the
results of the voting so that votes obtained in areas with weak concentrations
of their supporters could be applied instead in other districts, where they had
a better chance of obtaining representation.
Professional,
Non-Partisan Personnel and Suitable Equipment
Non-partisan, properly trained
and competent voting personnel play an essential part in implementing voting
procedures and ensuring that the necessary measures are taken to maintain order
and protect voting secrecy.
Ballot boxes must be secure. Most
countries use a sealing mechanism with a serial number or other identifying
mark to prevent fraud. Many have also switched to transparent ballot boxes to
show that ballots have not been stuffed into them. South Africa
labels and numbers all ballot boxes so they cannot be switched without the
knowledge of officials. Suitable privacy screens are set up at polling stations
to protect the secrecy of the vote.
Presence
of Political Party Monitors and Candidate Representatives
Having monitors from various
political parties and a limited number of candidate representatives along with
domestic observers reduces the risk of collusion with polling station officials
to manipulate the results. Monitors usually sign each tally sheet and also
receive an official copy, allowing them to check that the results are not manipulated
later. They also monitor the voting process to detect potential problems of
discrimination, intimidation and fraud that may arise on election day.
[1]
OSCE/ODIHR, Republic of Croatia, Parliamentary Elections, 25 November
2007, OSCE/ODIHR Limited Election Observation Mission
Report (Warsaw,
30 April 2008), p. 5
