Electoral fraud takes various forms. In some cases it may be committed by citizens acting individually or in organized groups; in other cases it may be committed by a government intent on rigging the outcome of an election. The election authority must have the necessary independence to ensure fair standards in combatting election fraud by citizens, and it must have an assurance that the government will not resort to fraud.

Electoral fraud committed by individuals

• Impersonation. A common form of electoral fraud is an attempt to vote more than once, either by obtaining a second voter identification card or pretending to be another voter. Penalties for impersonation or double registration usually are set out in the electoral code; they include fines, imprisonment or both.
• Voting in the name of deceased persons. A variant of impersonation is an attempt to vote more than once, first using one’s own identity to cast a ballot and then using the identity of a deceased person. This type of fraud may be prevented by keeping the voters list up to date and making sure that names of deceased persons are removed promptly. Fines may also act as a deterrent.
• Mail-in ballot fraud. In a system that allows voting by mail-in ballot, there is a risk that the ballot will be requested or completed by someone other than the eligible voter. Integrity may be safeguarded through a prohibition against requesting a ballot for another individual, a signed declaration confirming the identity of the voter, and heavy penalties for breach of these regulations.

Electoral fraud committed by groups or governments

• Double counting (miscounting) of ballots. One way of stealing an election is by counting ballots incorrectly or stuffing the ballot box with votes not validly cast. Various measures may be used to deter these fraudulent practices: allowing only election officers to deposit ballots into the ballot box; using see-through ballot boxes; and counting the ballots in the presence of political party representatives as well as independent domestic and international observers, who attest to the fairness of the process.
• Intimidation. Those wishing to sway the outcome of an election may engage in intimidating activities to discourage voters from registering or, if they have registered, from casting a ballot on election day. Intimidation may sometimes be difficult to perceive because of the many forms it takes, explicit and public as well as more subtle. Nonetheless, the election authority needs to be aware of efforts to intimidate voters. It may receive help by encouraging reports of intimidation. It may also work with civil society groups and with domestic and international election observers to monitor intimidating activities.
• Exclusion from the voters list. To be free and fair, an election must allow all voters who meet the eligibility criteria to express their preferences by casting a ballot. Attempts may be made to exclude some groups of citizens from the voters list, particularly if they are known to support a particular political party. The election authority needs to be aware of plans for any such attempt and must ensure that it does not succeed. The risk is that by trying to include a certain group of people on the voters list, the election authority may be perceived as seeking to influence the outcome of the election in their favour.