The
objectives of the Results Management System section are to:
- provide
guidance to organizations responsible for preparing and conducting a results
management system;
- outline
principles of "best-practice" for results management process and procedures;
- describe the various methods of vote counting used in a variety of common
electoral systems;
- assist
electoral management bodies to maximize the credibility and integrity of the
vote counting process, by outlining ways to minimize opportunities for fraud,
systemic manipulation, malpractices and ensuring that the public perception of
the resulst process is one that enhances the integrity of the electoral
process;
- equip
electoral management bodies with strategies to avoid the serious problems
encountered in many elections caused by result process deficiencies and
insufficient command and control by EMB managment;
- emphasize the importance of appropriate training and organization of all staff
categories involved in the election results process;
- make
provisions for the various types of challenges to unprocedural or unlawful vote
counting.
The Importance of Results Management System
In recent times, the requirements and demands on an
EMB’s results system have increased considerably. Stakeholders demand results
significantly faster than they used to. In addition, they demand transparency
during the entire results process and not just the vote count – so- called “end
to end transparency”. Concerns over less than accessible transportation of
critical count-related material by EMBs, opaque tabulation procedures and tardy
release of results have sometimes threatened the integrity of the vote count.
As a result, EMBs can no longer solely focus on the vote count. The EMB must now
have an integrated results management system incorporating all key aspects from
vote counting to the certified results being announced and relevant complaints
have been properly adjudicated.
The
starting point for a successful EMB is to first take stock of the existing
results management system. Based on an honest and exhaustive review it can
identify areas of improvements. Naturally, changes to the EMB’s own
infrastructure and communications capabilities, as well as the adaptation and
availability of external means of communication in the society at large, will
guide the review process as changes are identified. However, as developments
are rarely linear, EMBs cannot assume that ICT-infrastructure procured and
utilized during the previous election are still operational, or that current
staff know how to properly operate the equipment. Legal or regulatory changes
since the initial introduction of technology may render the old technology
unfit for use.
Once
the EMB has internally agreed what the necessary improvements are and how these
could be achieved a draft operational plan will be developed. The operational
plan will not only describe all the processes and steps of the results
management system, but also indicate time and resource requirements. Given the
result systems importance to election stakeholders, it is important that
political parties, candidates, media and election-related NGOs are consulted
when developing the result system. If not, the lack of transparency and limited
inclusiveness could be construed as a precursor to fraud, systemic manipulation
or malpractices by the EMB itself.
A
results management system's operational plan often overlooks that it must cater
to two distinct yet intertwined processes: tabulation and reporting. Given the
intense interest in the election results from political stakeholders, media and
the electorate, EMBs realize that they no longer have the luxury of waiting
until the legal results forms arrive and results are verified before announcing
final results. An EMB’s results system must include mechanisms whereby both
provisional and final results are catered for. Most EMBs are therefore
cognizant of the importance of releasing timely provisional results, as this
will give the election authority sufficient time to process the final results.
Equally important, if the release of provisional results is not forthcoming the
EMB could soon find itself being accused by some parties and candidates of
altering the results. Having said that, it is instrumental that EMBs are not pressured
into releasing results prematurely. The EMBs must take sufficient time to
properly transmit, tabulate and check results before releasing both interim and
final results. In order to manage such expectations, EMBs must clearly and
repeatedly reinforce the expected timeline for release of results during the
lead-up to Election Day. Thereafter it’s too late.
Given
the intense focus on supplying early provisional results, EMBs are sometimes
focusing almost exclusively on this process generating interim results at the
expense of the final, legally binding, results stream. This could be
devastating as in a tight race, the EMB might decide midstream it cannot
announce an outright winner, or the need for a second round, before it has
verified the provisional results with the actual results forms. Thus, the time
lag between provisional and final results should not be excessive. In some
countries, a maximum period of time between Election Day and the publication of
certified results is dictated by the legal framework. However, if timeliness
and accuracy are of the essence for provisional results, accuracy and chain of
custody are essential for final results. Not only could the EMB leadership’s
own confidence in the results be compromised if the results forms have not
always been in the custody of an authorized election official, but chain of
custody is instrumental when adjudicating a challenge to the election results.
The EMB’s election results management system must therefore include procedures
and regulations clearly stating how sensitive election material must be handled
to avoid compromising the chain of custody while moving or storing physical
evidence. The chain of custody commences when the presiding officer in the
voting station signs for the election material until the very same material is
presented in a court of law.
If the
results management system introduces new ICT solutions for counting,
transmission, tabulation or improved command and control capabilities the
operational plan must take into consideration any such improvements to amend
regulations and procedures. In addition, the operational plan is to allocate
sufficient time for procurement, testing, and training on the new technologies
introduced. It is common for EMBs to significantly underestimate the time
required to properly plan and procure complex technical solutions. Furthermore,
to avoid suspicion and increase acceptance, any changes made to the politically
sensitive results system must be accompanied by a public information campaign
for the broader audiences and face-to- face interactions with key stakeholders.
Common
Components of a Results Management System
The election results management system varies from country to country
given local infrastructure conditions, available resources, political context,
EMB structure and electoral systems. Still, in general, common components of the
results system can be identified irrespective of model used.
The common starting point for all results management systems is the
development of an operational plan, based on the assessment of system used
during previous election, integrity risks identified and controlled, and new
requirements. Introduction of any new technologies need to follow established
best practices for conducting feasibility studies and introducing
ICT-solutions.[1] The
main segments of the electoral process captured in such a plan are:
Appropriate
training programs for all categories of staff involved in any part of the
results management system:
- Targeted
public information campaigns to stakeholders;
- Effective
command and control capabilities readily available to EMB managers;
- Counting
of the ballot papers at voting station level;
- If
counting at a higher administrative level, transport ballot papers and
other sensitive election material relevant to the counting process to the
next administrative level for counting without jeopardizing chain of
custody;
- Transmission
of interim results from counting and/or tabulation facility to next
administrative level and/or directly to EMB central tabulation center;
- Transportation
of legal results forms (for final results) from counting and/or tabulation
facility to next administrative level and/or directly to EMB central
tabulation center without jeopardizing chain of custody;
- EMB’s
central tabulation hub is properly tested and fully operational, including
software pre-loaded with triggers for suspicious results;
- Investigative
procedures, staff and resources available to swiftly adjudicate
accusations of fraud, systemic manipulation and malpractice leveled
against the results system;
- Media
Results Center operational and servicing key stakeholders with interim
results and final results as per a pre-announced schedule;
- Transportation
of sensitive election results-related material from relevant tabulation
location to storage facility for safe keeping until material can be
legally discarded following certification of results and completion of
adjudication of complaints. Adherence to strict chain of custody rules.
Designing Vote Counting Procedures
The type
of electoral system used will to a certain extent determine the specific
measures needed to successfully conclude an election count. (See Electoral Systems and Electoral System and
Ballot Type Implications for the Count for more on this topic.)
However,
several general principles apply to all electoral systems. Counting procedures
should take into account available resources, such as staff, training, premises,
transport, logistics, planning, communications, and equipment. For example, a
computerized method of counting votes would not be suitable for locations with
unreliable power supplies or a shortage of skilled computer operators.
A balance
may need to be struck between integrity, accuracy, and speed. Often the more
checks and balances there are, the slower the process. However, the accuracy of
the count cannot be compromised as it is the foundation upon which a
credible results system is built.
There are
a variety of ways that counting can take place, including manually,
mechanically, or electronically. The counting location may be at the voting
station or at counting centres.
More
complicated systems may require that the vote counting is conducted at several
locations. First-Past-the-Post or majority system aggregation of the results can
normally be completed at the electoral district level. In a proportional
representation system a final centralized result may be necessary to translate
votes into seats, see Electoral System and Ballot Type
Implications for the Count.
[1] see IFES’ publication “Electronic Voting & Counting Technologies: A
Guide to Conducting Feasibility Studies”.
Edit