Discrimination, intimidation
and fraud may prevent voters from casting a ballot, lead them to change their
choice against their will, and alter the outcome of the vote.
Discrimination
Bureaucratic or financial obstacles
may make it difficult for certain segments of the population to register or
vote. For example:
- In several southern US States, payment of a
poll tax was a requirement for voting. Anyone unable to pay the tax was
not allowed to vote. This discriminatory
practice was not fully ended until 1966;
- A proposal by former UK Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher
to link voting in local council elections to payment of the Council tax
was withdrawn after being derided as a poll tax;
- The definition of
eligibility criteria for voter registration may systematically exclude
certain segments of the population.
For example, homeless citizens may not be able to provide an
address sufficient for registration purposes. And persons in detention – awaiting
trial, serving a prison sentence, or even released from prison – may
effectively lose their franchise on an indefinite basis. (In Europe, criminal
penalties of disenfranchisement must be strictly limited,[1].)
Intimidation
Intimidation may take many
forms, both subtle and aggressive. The purpose is usually to coerce voters into
supporting or opposing a candidate or party. Following
are some tactics of intimidation:
- physical or economic
threats, such as threats of loss of employment;
- stationing a party
activist beside the line of voters waiting to enter a polling site.
Through words or gestures, the activist may threaten persons entering or
leaving the polling site. (The intimidation may also be more subtle—for
example, wearing the emblem of a particular candidate or party within the
polling site); or
- locating a polling site
on or near the property of a candidate, political party or government
official.
Intimidation may also target
electoral employees, with the aim of compromising their independence and
impartiality.
Intimidation may be practised
by anyone—a candidate, political party, monitor, voter, electoral administrator
or government official. Most electoral laws specifically prohibit intimidation.
However, subtle forms of intimidation may be hard to prove.
Fraud
Fraud by individuals may
include:
- impersonating a voter at
the polls or by casting an absentee ballot;
- voting with a pre-marked
ballot
- voting more than once;
- voting when not eligible; or
- paying others to
influence how they vote.
Other types of fraud may be
committed by the electoral administration:
- allowing ineligible
persons to vote;
- changing or destroying
voters lists;
- preventing qualified
voters from casting a ballot;
- allowing voters to cast
more than one ballot;
- substituting fake ballots
for votes legitimately cast, or casting ballots in the name of voters who
did not go to the polls;
- not marking a ballot as
directed by someone who requested assistance in voting;
- stuffing ballot boxes
with pre-marked or spoiled ballots;
- destroying ballots that
were validly cast;
- not accurately counting
the ballots or recording incorrect information on the tally sheets;damaging
the contents of the ballot box or altering tally sheets;
- changing the election
results or announcing false results.
Two safeguards are commonly
used to minimize opportunities for fraud:
- Confirming voter identity:
To prevent someone from
using the valid registration of another person to vote, some systems
require voter identification. This enables polling officers to check
whether the person who showed up to vote is really the person registered.
To prove identity, the person may show a voter registration card (if
applicable) or another type of acceptable identification.
- Identifying people who
have already voted: To prevent repeat voting, some systems mark voters (or the identification
document of voters) who have received a ballot. Assuming proper control at
the polling station, someone thus marked cannot vote again. The most
common marking system involves dipping one of the voter’s fingers in
indelible ink. Other systems use hand stamps that are visible under
fluorescent light. The election management body must ensure that there is
enough ink for all voters and that it will not wear off before the polls
close. Storage and distribution must be monitored to prevent use of the
ink by persons who wish to stop voters from casting a ballot for an
opposing candidate.
[1] See Hirst v the United Kingdom
(No 2)
[2005] ECHR 681, [2006]
42 EHHR 41 (European Convention on Human Rights requires persons subject to the
criminal or correctional systems a specific judicial determination as to loss
of electoral rights, which must terminate automatically. Mere imprisonment is not sufficient to result
in exclusion from voting.)
