Standardized ballots help
maintain the secrecy of the vote. The design and type of ballot may affect the
integrity of the process. A good ballot design can help ensure that voters can
easily identify the candidate of their choice on the ballot and mark the ballot
so that their intention is clear. Proper ballot design avoids many problems
that may arise during counting.
There are many types of ballot-papers,
including conventional paper ballots and ballots for use in voting machines.
Some newer electronic systems have no paper ballot; voters view a screen and press
a button to record their choice in the machine’s electronic memory. Ideally, electronic recording of votes should
be accompanied by a print-out of each “ballot” cast, so there can be a
meaningful recount.
The use of mechanical or
electronic voting machines potentially makes counting the vote faster, more
accurate and economical, and reduces the risks of tampering with the results.
Despite this, machines have not substantially changed the voting process.
Voters still go in person to the polling station to cast their ballot. In
contrast, e-voting could change the voting process: the voter would be able to
vote from home or another location. This approach carries its own set of
election integrity challenges, however.
Protecting
the Integrity of Ballots
For integrity purposes, each
ballot needs to:
- have a standardized
format so that the name of every candidate or party appears in print of
the same size, and is equally visible on the ballot;
- be easily tracked – for
example, through a serial number on the stub;
- be complete and simple to
understand so that voters can mark the ballot correctly; and
- be non-partisan in the
placement of candidates’ names.
In some multicultural
societies, the election policy-making body must choose the language used on
ballots. The needs of illiterate voters also have to be taken into
consideration. Several systems have met these needs by using symbols (logos) as
well as print text to identify candidates and parties. Another option is to add
candidates’ photographs to the ballots; but this adds cost, and sometimes the
photos are not of sufficient quality for the purpose.
Once the ballot design has
been settled, election officials supervise the number of ballots printed and
distributed. They need to properly estimate the number of ballots required for
each polling station to ensure that everyone who is entitled can exercise his
or her right to vote. They must ensure as well that it is difficult or
impossible to tamper with ballots or mark them in advance.
Some systems include security features
in the ballot design to make unauthorized duplication impossible; an example is
the use of special (including “watermarked”) paper. Other advanced security
measures include laser holographic elements or special plastic or metallic
“threads”. These features involve considerable
additional costs, however.
In many cases, the ballot is
authenticated (stamped or otherwise endorsed) when issued to a voter, in order
to ensure that the voter returns an official ballot. In Ireland
and Kenya, for example, ballots are considered
valid only if they bear an official authenticating mark. In Mexico,
after checking to make sure that ballots have not been pre-marked, political
party representatives sign the ballots on the back. These measures help deter
attempts to provide voters with pre-marked ballots or replace valid ballots
with counterfeit ones.
During storage and
distribution, electoral administrators must protect ballots from damage or
tampering that would affect their integrity. Good planning as to the number of
ballot packages and the quantity of ballots per package can eliminate the need
to open and re-handle ballots after delivery from the printer. A good tracking
system is also essential to protect ballot security.
Voting
Machines
When voting machines are used,
similar good planning and security mechanisms are required to protect the
integrity of the machines. Electoral administrators are responsible for
ensuring that only authorized persons have access to the machines during
storage or in the pre- or post-voting period, to safeguard them from malicious programming
that could alter or destroy election results.
Mechanical errors may give
rise to integrity issues during machine vote counting. Also, a machine cannot
determine the intention of a voter if the voter’s mark does not strictly
conform to specified requirements.
