Historically, external voting is quite a recent phenomenon. Even in some long-established democracies citizens who were resident in other countries were not granted the right to vote until the 1980s (in the Federal Republic of Germany (FRG) and the United Kingdom (UK)) or the 1990s (Japan). Currently, 115 countries have legal provisions allowing their citizens to vote while abroad but, in spite of this relatively high number, there has been almost no international debate about external voting until recently.
External voting is nonetheless now on the political agenda in many countries. Its sudden relevance in different regions of the world clearly derives from the worldwide political changes of the 1990s. First, as a result of the rapid increase in the number of democracies after the break-up of the communist bloc, the design of democratic electoral rules has received more attention. Second, external voting becomes more significant in the face of increasing migration.
Against this background, a considerable problem emerges: how can people living outside their country of origin have their political rights assured? The answer to this question that is most often heard is that in our ‘globalized’ world the principle of universal suffrage can only be fully achieved if citizens living abroad are entitled to vote in the national elections of their home country. This argument is mainly based on different international declarations in which universal, equal, free and secret suffrage is recognized as an inalienable part of human rights (for example, the 1948 Universal Declaration of Human Rights, article 21; the 1948 American Declaration of Human Rights and Duties, article 20; and the 1969 American Convention on Human Rights, article 23). These documents do not mention external voting as an integral part of universal suffrage. The 1990 International Convention on the Protection of the Rights of All Migrant Workers, however, explicitly states that:
Migrant workers and members of their families shall have the right to participate in public affairs of their State of origin and to vote and to be elected at elections of that State, in accordance with its legislation.
The States concerned shall, as appropriate and in accordance with their legislation, facilitate the exercise of these rights (International Convention on the Protection of the Rights of All Migrant Workers and Members of Their Families, UN document A/RES/45/158, 18 December 1990, article 41).
The notion of external voting as part of universal suffrage is neither self-evident nor unproblematic. The concept goes against one of the classic requirements for voting rights—residency inside the state territory. Furthermore, the implementation of external voting involves major technical and administrative problems that might interfere with other crucial features of the franchise, in particular the principle of free elections.
Nevertheless, the idea of external voting is currently highly attractive. Even in new democracies with little experience of free elections and problems with electoral administration, external voting has either already been introduced or is on the way to being implemented. One notable case is that of Mexico, where free elections were established only recently.
Although this is such a topical issue, the related debates remain at an intuitive level. Political elites are not generally familiar with the normative arguments in favour of or against external voting. Nor do they consider the potential problems arising out of such an extension of voting rights. As a result, there is great demand for expertise on external voting and on the options for its institutionalization, but there is not yet agreement on the basic concepts. Terms such as ‘political community’ and ‘citizenship’ are used differently in different contexts; their interrelationship remains unspecified.
Little comparative research has been carried out on the subject of external voting. Some articles on the topic can be found in the legal literature for certain countries, but there are almost none in the social sciences field. There is a general absence of systematic information on the relevant legal provisions of individual countries. Furthermore, a set of criteria is needed by which the functioning of some of the institutional arrangements associated with external voting can be evaluated. This is all the more important because a number of countries have already scheduled external voting for future elections but have still no regulations in place for implementing it.
The aim here is to introduce the issue of external voting in a systematic– comparative manner. This is done in three steps. The first section examines the exact meaning of external voting and provides a systematic overview of the legal framework of external voting. It discusses three different dimensions of the legal provisions for external voting and outlines the basic institutional alternatives with regard to these dimensions. Second part presents three main structural problems which are typical for external voting and should therefore be considered in political debates about its introduction. These are: (a) problem of the political representation of citizens living abroad; (b) problems of organizing free and fair elections, the transparency of external voting procedures, and the freedom and fairness of party competition, and (c) problem of judicial review of elections held abroad. Finally, the last section provides a summary and concludes that: external voting can only reasonably be introduced if the specific context of each country is taken into account. Similarly, the legal and administrative provisions that are decided upon should depend on the most important contextual factors. Some recommendations which deserve special attention when the introduction of or reforms to external voting are being considered here as well.
