International commitments stipulate that all voters have the
right to vote in secret, regardless of their gender. But, where there is a tradition of men
casting votes “on behalf of” the family, then strong local law is needed to
ensure that the EMB can act to protect women’s right to vote in secret. This
could include targeted measures to protect against family voting and other
violations of voter secrecy and free choice. A strong legislative and
regulatory framework, including meaningful penalties for those who break the
law, and a willingness of the police and the judiciary to prosecute, make it
easier for the EMB and other bodies to enforce the law.[1]
In some countries, provision is made for male and female voters
who cannot vote on the day of the election to cast an early vote and for voters
who are out of the country to cast a vote abroad. In some places, these voters
nominate another registered voter to be their proxy and to cast their vote on
their behalf. Such measures are taken to allow as many people as possible to
cast their vote in the election and are known as “proxy voting”. Proxy voting
is legal in many countries and is viewed as a tool to legitimately protect the
franchise of voters with limited mobility.[2]
A different phenomenon is “family voting” and/or enforced proxy
voting, which is often confused with legal proxy voting. Family voting refers
to the situation in which the heads of family (often extended family and often
male heads of family) influence other family members in how they cast a vote.
It is commonly practiced in jurisdictions that have a tradition of extended or
customary family structures that allow the dominant member of the family to
take important decisions or carry out important activities affecting the
family. Family voting can be a serious violation, especially when it is
malicious, i.e., when it is carried out with the intent of influencing or
removing the freedom of choice of a voter. In these cases, family voting violates
the central principle of voter secrecy.[3]
When family voting is a cultural norm, the EMB may need to
consider if polling staff recruited from the local area could also be under
cultural pressure to allow family voting or could be concerned as to adverse
consequences for the women if they do not allow the family to control their
vote. Following
are actions that may be implemented in polling day management.[4]
- Tightening the electoral code before
the election or enacting clearly defined operational instructions to protect
the secrecy of the vote, including prescribing specific measures for orderly
operation of polling station, providing sufficient space and isolation booths
in polling stations, only allowing one voter at a time in isolation booths and
issuing ballot papers one at a time
- Prioritizing training of poll workers
to comply with secrecy provisions.
- Conducting targeted public outreach to educate voters on
their right to secrecy, especially among vulnerable populations such as women
and illiterate voters.
- Promoting confidence and transparency by ensuring that,
once a vote is cast, the EMB will protect voters’ secrecy and their choice will
never be revealed.[1]
Example: The Macedonian State Election
Commission has developed a strategy and taken measures to mitigate the practice
of family voting. As part of a program aimed at preventing family voting, the
State Election Committee issued a directive to all staff that prevention of
family and proxy voting was important. It also published a strategy against
family and proxy voting with the aim of ensuring a consistent framework for all
government and donor projects to address the problem. The framework acknowledges
that the issue must be dealt with using continuous activities throughout the
electoral cycle.[1]
[1] UNDP and UN Women
(2016): op. cit., p. 75.
[1] UNDP and UN Women
(2016): op. cit., p. 75.
[1] UNDP and UN Women
(2016): op. cit., p. 74.
[2] UNDP and UN Women
(2016): op. cit., p. 74.
[3] UNDP and UN Women
(2016): op. cit., p. 74.
[4] UNDP and UN Women
(2016): op. cit., p. 75.
