An election can be affected by discrimination, intimidation and fraud. Discrimination can result in eligible voters not being able to vote. Intimidation can affect voting behaviour and fraud can affect the outcome of the vote.

Measures must be taken to ensure that these problems are not systemic, that they are addressed immediately, and that they do not affect the outcome of the election (see Integrity Measures to Protect Against Fraud). Because of the secrecy of the vote, a tainted vote is impossible to invalidate once it is cast. And each tainted vote cancels out a valid vote, hurting the integrity of the process.

Problems can be on an individual level, involving small scale intimidation or corruption. This usually affects individuals and the way they vote, but does not change the outcome of the election. Problems can also be widespread and systemic which can affect the process to the point where the final results do not reflect the will of the voters. Both types of problems must be addressed, although systemic problems that raise questions about the validity of the results must be assessed immediately to determine whether the problem was so severe that the elections must be reheld.

Discrimination

Discrimination, aimed at preventing certain groups of voters from being able to vote, is not a problem confined to any one system or locality. It can done systematically through bureaucratic obstacles to voting, such as poll taxes, or through individuals refusing certain voters to access the polling sites.

Bureaucratic obstacles can make it difficult for certain segments of the population to register or to vote. These can include:

• Taxation. Poll taxes have been used in a number of systems as a mechanism to exclude certain segments of the population from voting. For example, in several southern U.S. states, poll taxes were required as a prerequisite to voting. Poor African Americans and whites who were unable to pay the poll tax were unable to vote. This discriminatory practice was only overcome through using the checks and balance mechanisms: the U.S. Constitution was amended in 1964 to bar this practice in federal elections, and the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in 1966 that the 'equal protection' clause of Constitution prohibited this practice in state and local elections.
• Lack of polling materials at certain polling stations. Voting can be stopped or slowed at certain polling stations if not enough materials have been delivered. Every polling site should have an adequate number of ballots and other necessary materials, such as pencils or voting machines, so that all voters will be able to mark their ballots.

Voters can also be denied entry into polling stations by polling staff, monitors or other persons hanging around outside the polling station. These actions are illegal in all systems. In the case of the U.S., racial discrimination in voting was addressed by the Voting Rights Act of 1965. This Act was passed at a time when discrimination in some parts of the southern U.S. prevented African American voters from voting. To combat this problem, the Act included some extraordinary remedies which were applicable to the problem areas for a limited time. These included:

• authorizing the U.S. Attorney General to send federal registrars to register voters in counties where the local registrars refused to register African Americans;
• authorizing the U.S. Attorney General to send federal observers to monitor the elections to make sure that African Americans who were eligible to vote were actually permitted to vote and that their votes were actually counted; and
• required the voting jurisdictions covered by the Act to gain the approval of the U.S. Attorney General before implementing any new voting practices or procedures to make sure changes were not racially discriminatory.

These provisions were originally scheduled to expire in 1970 but have been renewed several times and are now scheduled to end in 2007. ²⁰³

Intimidation

Intimidation can take many forms, and can be subtle or involve brute force. But the purpose of intimidation is usually to intimidate voters into voting for or against a certain person, party or position.

Intimidation tactics can include:

• pressuring voters before voting, such as threatening bodily harm, loss of employment or educational opportunities, and other physical or economic threats;
• pressuring voters to attend, or not attend, political meetings, rallies, marches, demonstrations or other events;
• pressuring non-registered or non-eligible persons into voting or impersonating another voter, or pressuring eligible voters to vote multiple times;
• pressuring voters into taking an oath that they will support a certain candidate. Oathing has been used in places such as Cambodia, where domestic observers noted voters were forced to drink a glass of water with a bullet in it, swearing they would vote for candidates from a certain party.
• pressuring voters during voting, such as having a party enforcer in sight when voters enter the polling station, or having party activists hover around voters in line. It can be verbal threats or the use of gestures to those going in and out to vote. It can include physically disrupting the order within a polling station or in the general area of the station. And, it can be as subtle as having a poll worker wearing the badge or emblem of a particular candidate or party.
• assisting voters to vote who don't want or need assistance.
• locating polling sites in a location owned by a candidate, political party or government official.
• preventing voters from being able to access a polling site, an electoral office, or to see an accredited political party monitor or domestic/international observer.
• pressuring a polling official or interfering with the independence or impartiality of electoral employees

Intimidation can be done by anyone - a candidate, a political party monitor, another voter, an election manager or a government official. Most electoral laws make intimidation illegal. However, the subtle forms of intimidation can be hard to prove.

In the case of Mexico, its electoral law makes it illegal for any administrator or party official to exert pressure on voters on election day inside polling stations or where voters are standing in line. It is also illegal for them to carry out any type of electoral propaganda when fulfilling their duties or for anyone to obstruct voting or exert a physical or moral force on the electoral officials. Spreading false information about the development of the election and its outcome is also illegal. ²⁰⁴

Fraud

Fraud during voting, can be found at the voters' level when ineligible persons vote or eligible voters vote more than once. It can also be found at the administrative levels where those with access to sensitive electoral materials or sites can stuff ballot boxes with premarked ballot, vote for no-show voters or change the results of the count on the reporting sheets.

At the voting level, possibilities for fraud include:

• impersonating another voter at the polls or in casting an absentee ballot;
• voting with a pre-marked ballot;
• multiple voting by individual voters;
• voting when not eligible;
• asking for money to vote for a particular candidate or party, or for money not to vote; and
• paying someone to vote or not to vote.

On the administrative side, possibilities for fraud include:

• allowing ineligible voters to vote;
• changing or destroying voter registration records or lists;
• preventing qualified voters from voting;
• allowing voters to vote more than once;
• substituting their own votes for votes legitimately cast, or voting for voters who didn't go to the polls;
• not voting for the candidate requested by voters they assist in voting. This has been a problem in countries such as Kenya, where 15-25% of the population is illiterate.²⁰⁵
• stuffing ballot boxes with pre-marked or spoiled ballots or allowing the ballot boxes to be stuffed;
• losing or destroying ballots that were validly cast;
• not accurately counting the ballots or putting incorrect information onto the tally sheets; and
• changing the election results or announcing a false set of results.