The Question
This question is posted on behalf of Jeff Fischer, member of the ACE Practitioners' Network

I am working on a civil registry project and the question has emerged about assessing the possibility of introducing user fees of some kind to offset the costs of civil registry administration. Are you familiar with any practices whereby a civil registry can generate revenue for the government and thus make it more financially sustainable?

Summary of responses
A number of examples are given where civil registries generate revenue for the government. There was initially a charge for the computerised national identity card as a part of Pakistan’s civil registry. This proved to be such a disincentive for people however, that the fee was subsequently waived (except for modifying or renewing the card). In Cameroon, there is a fee for every civil registry document, although the fee for the national identity card was abolished ahead of the 2011 presidential election, in an attempt to get more voters on the electoral roll. Several other replies warn of the danger of fees discouraging citizens, especially the poorest and most vulnerable, from fully partaking in a civil registry, which may then preclude their appearance on the electoral roll.

On the other hand, if a government decides not to generate any revenue from a civil registry, then it is crucial that its funding is financially sustainable by other means such as taxation or donors.

If there any fees connected to the running of a civil registry, then it is noted that the normal procedure is to find the right balance between what the state wants to ensure is registered and what citizens are willing or able to pay for. Best practice is seen by one expert as having no (or low) fees for the actual registration of fundamental elements (e.g. voting, births and deaths) while charging more for additional documentation or services (additional copies, passports, etc.).

Several experts are of the opinion that there should be a charge to replace a lost or stolen identity cards or documents, so that citizens apportion sufficient value to them.

Examples of related ACE Articles and Resources
Encyclopaedia:
• Civil Registry
• Managing the cost of voter/civil registries: Country Experiences 

External Resources
• The New Zealand Department of Internal Affairs: Services: Births, Deaths and Marriages: Forms, Fees and Information Brochures  
• The Economist, ‘Stateless: When is a Dominican not one?’ December 31st 2011. 

Names of contributors
1. Ronan McDermott
2. Kunzang Wangdi
3. Shahid Iqbal
4. Andrew Ladley
5. Atem Oben Henry Ekpeni
6. Zekria Barakzai
7. Daniel Finn
8. Rindai Chipfunde Vava
9. Nino Goguadze
10. Juma Thomas Otieno
11. Mosotho Moepya
12. Hadija Miiro

Happy New Year Jeff and ACE colleagues.

Pakistan's civil registry NADRA issues the CNIC (Computerised National Identity Card). It used to charge a fee for this. This fee, together with the opportunity cost (travel, lost income, multiple trips to office, costs for necessary documentation in support of CNIC application etc) suppressed uptake of the CNIC. One of the first acts of the incoming government in 2008 was to waive (i.e. subsidise) the fee for the CNIC. While not addressing the other costs, this had a positive effect and, together with greater outreach by NADRA raised the uptake of CNIC to the extent that the Election Commission of Pakistan now makes CNIC a prerequisite for voter registration.

My point is that charging for civil registration can inhibit uptake with negative consequences for participation. I believe that you can and should charge to replace a lost or stolen card - with increasing fees to punish those who repeatedly lose their card (i.e. $2 for the first replacement, $5 for the second etc).

That said, the civil registry must be on a firm financial footing, whether resourced from the Government budget or to some extent by citizens. The more sophisticated the approach (e.g. biometrics, smart cards, and so forth) the greater the dependence may be on donors.

Ronan

Levy of any fee may demotivate voters to register in an electoral roll. Further as a former auditor general it would risk putting  certain employees of an election management body to compromise his /her integrity leave alone the additional burden in ensuring accountability of the fund collected. I would therefore advise that  let the electoral roll be a free public service provided to a citizen for being a voter.

Imposing any fee might discourage citizens to register as voters. It might also provoke officials of election commissions to indulge in corrupt practices by selling off services such as charging fee for registration forms or acceptance of forms after the deadline has passed etc.

How a proper fee structure should be determined in cases where applicants insist on immediate processing/fast track and home delivery of cards.

As regards Ronan's concise but meaningful reply I would like to mention here that NADRA does charge for modification or renewal of CNIC.

Moving away from specifics to the general policy on civil registry (with relevance to electoral registration as well), as the replies already posted have noted, the most common policy position pretty much everywhere, I think, is to try to have no (or low) entry fees for actual critical registration (eg births, deaths, and voters) to avoid price being a barrier. That said, it is extremely common to have fees for any 'evidentiary product' thereafter (and especially so, if it involves technology and if there is a social demand for the product). So, one might have free (and sometimes compulsory) registration of births in the civil registry, but have charges for anything other than a bare receipt (eg a durable certificate, or copies of such, or indeed a national identity document). Same thing for passports, drivers licences, etc of course. Just for example, in New Zealand the civil registry charges for some products, but not for others - details are available at:

http://www.dia.govt.nz/diawebsite.nsf/wpg_URL/Services-Births-Deaths-and-Marriages-Forms-Fees-and-Information-Brochures?OpenDocument

As regards elections, voter registration in NZ is compulsory, free and mostly done by post and online - and no documentation is required at polling sites (people simply say who they are, their names are checked against the register, and ballot papers are issued). But that is not the environment in which many elections are run of course. Hence, elections in many places require production of something - eg a basic voters registration chit, a voters registration card, or some other document eg civil registry (or other acceptable - eg drivers licence, passport) identity document - almost all of which 'other documents' may have been paid for via civil registry charges. Sometimes the documentation is essential for voting, other times it simply speeds up the process of identification at the polling site. But the 'social value' of a civil registry document (eg for school registration, bank accounts etc) often means that the 'low threshold' policy position can be trumped because there are strong citizen incentives to pay (at least something, which also adds to the value of the document for the holder and makes it better cared-for).

At risk of repeating what everyone knows, the policy calculation is thus to weigh the value of registration and documentation to the state (taking account of the considerations of equality, democratic participation, and accurate statistics), against some calculation of the value to the individual/community of a document, and strike a cost-charge where the balance makes 'most sense' in that context. As Pakistan's example shows, sometimes the initial calculation is wrong and has to be changed. But because sustainable systems in many 'revenue-poor' states may require some sort of part-charging for documentation, the key is to place any charge in the spots of most value to the citizen as well. Basic marketing, really. In some of the poorest areas, people apparently think nothing of paying for a phone card, but may expect to get an voter card for free. But they will somehow pay for a copy of the birth certificate/ID card somehow, if it is essential for school registration as well.

In Cameroon, fees are paid for every civil registry document and for the obtaintion of National Identity cards (NIC), same for for renewal or cases of lost. In 2011 the president passed a decree reducing the cost for the establishmental of NIC and later passed a second decree for this to be established at no cost. This was aimed at encouraging citizens to register in the electoral roll for the 2011 Presidential election.

Courts were also requested to establish mobile terms to assist citizens get their birth declarations free of charge in order to obtain a birth certificate in the local Council of birth at low cost. Such cost are determined by the Local council in question. Offcourse fees for civil registry is very important source of revenue for local councils in Cameroon and the fees vary from Council to council depending on the economic situation of inhabitants.

Many concerns have been raised because whether free or paid for, without a sustainable civic education policy, citizens especially in Africa pay less attention to this and offcourse it affects participation.

In Afghanistan fee of 50=Afs(equal to 1 USD) is applied for issuance of Tazkera( the national ID card)

Jeff, long time no see.  Of course reasonable fees can be assessed for civil registration and issuance of ID cards.  Balkan experience indicates that setting the fees too high prevents voters from obtaining current ID and may create problems on polling day.  Onerous voter registration requirements have been rejected by the courts (such as the US Supreme Court on so-called "poll taxes") and the public (such as on Margaret Thatcher's proposed "council tax" as a requirement for voting).  A recent case in point is described in the year-end Economist, and involves residents of the Dominican Republic being required to pay regular fees to renew their birth certificates!  See link:  http://www.economist.com/node/21542182

Cheers,

// Dan Finn //

Honiara, Solomon Islands

In Zimbabwe fees are paid for issuance of a passport and a lost ID.The voters roll are the ones which are very expensive about $15 per ward roll and for about 210 constituencies we paid baout $30 000 in 2011 when we intended to do a research around the voters roll.This does discourage participation and there is need to be a reasonable fee for this not exorbitant prices  and availability of  online copies posted on the internet inorder to enhance openness and transpancy in as far as voter rolls are concerned.

regards

Rindai Chipfunde Vava

Zimbabwe Election Support Network

In Georgia Civil Registry is a legal entity which is under the control of Ministry of Justice. On the base of the date of Civil Registry, the Central elections Commission of Georgia compose voters list.

Fixed service of Civil Registry and issuance ID cards was free of fees before 2011. At the initiative of the Ministry of Justice a new electronic ID has been launched in August, 2011 and there are introduced new regulations about payment: fees for a new electronic ID are 30-65 GEL (approximately 18-39 US $) and they are depends on the terms of issuance of a card. It is not mandatory to change old ID with a new one, but if citizen lost his/her card or wants to change it, should get the new electronic card.

Sincerely, 

Nino Goguadze

Member of Central Election Commission of Georgia

I am of a different view with the author of the question. Civil registry is good for the government and the citizen. But let us measure the good to both. If we have to charge then why pay taxes? It means a defficiency and inadequacy accrues from the tax system of the government. More so, the government benefits much thro' this (on security follow ups, census projections, elections where they are applied, etc).

On the other hand, where civil registry is a tool/means to elections, using it jeopardizes the necessity of elections. Knowing that election is a human right(political right), then commercializing it means that those who cant pay it should not be issued with it thus be denied the opportunity to vote. It means democracy practice should be pegged on financial strength, in other words we are suggesting that politicians should fill this vaccum to enable unable citizens aquire civil registry docs. In this case, where is the distinction between bribery in electoral process? Will there be free, transparent, and genuine elections? And how will it be monitored and measured?

Let governments play their roles of ensuring sufficiency in its revenue without going to areas touching on peoples rights. In my reasoning civil registration is about peoples rights whether IDs, passports, or birth registration despite the fact in some quarters they are charged.

If the governments are disinterested in its subjects having them, then let people forfeit them. These documentations are needed to enable performance of activities that in the end benefit the government.

For voting this will lead to more than disenfranchisement to a serious abuse of peoples rights. It is a matter of time and the Zimbabwe cases will be past and forgotten. Tax can be raised thro' several other methods known and yet to be deviced. In cases where losses are experienced by citizens, a little cost may be attached for discouraging but where full electronic generation systems for these docs are in place like for example PIN in Kenya, you lose it and you are forced to spend your time and money in cyber or bureau to re-generate a new one automatically.

I suggest we advocate for a free civil registry.

Compliments of the Season Jeff and Colleagues,

I am not familiar with practices where a civil registry is used to generate revenue for the government. I do however, wish to share our South African experiences.

For us, registering and voting is voluntary. It is the single political right for which many lives were lost in the past. In recognizing the central importance of this registry, the Electoral Commission of South Africa (an independent EMB which is accountable directly to Parliament) is mandated in law, to register voters and maintain the voters' roll on an ongoing basis. For this purpose, the National Treasury annually provides sufficient funding for the maintenance of the registry, amongst others. This funding is not at issue either from government or the citizen's point of view. In this context, any move that may appear to make such a franchise a commodity to be traded would be met with civil strife. It is simply not desirable. Realising that this is important, measures exist in law that seek to ensure that while the voters' roll is maintained on an ongoing basis and kept open to voters and political parties at all material times, it (the voters' roll) cannot be used for purposes other than elections (i.e., it is a criminal offence to do so). As our democracy matures, instead of looking at ways to generate revenue, it is our nation's desire that more 'user-friendly' methods will be sought to enroll new voters and to maintain the details of those whose registration details have changed since they last registered.

In our case, it will simply not be an option to consider any practice that would seek to generate revenue for the government using the civil registry, at least for the foreseeable future.

In the developing world, charging for a civil registry is likely to affect those that are most vulnerable; women, youth, persons leaving with disabilities, children and the poor. These groups have less incentives to obtain national identification documents (ID) and or other documents associated with civil registration; voter cards, driving permits, birth certificates, university registration cards, national passports etc. These groups although in the majority do not easily link the benefits of the civil registry to their welfare. There are usually no tangible benefits.

In other words, the majorities have less need for the civil registry products,  fewer resources at their disposal, and are less likely to spend it on the civil registry and. In Uganda for example, an ordinary citizen may live his/her entire life without anyone ever asking him or her for an ID. Within Uganda, I do not remember when someone last asked me for an ID. Voter registration and polling are voluntary.

In the rest past, a permanent voter card issued in 2000/2001 has become to be regarded as one of the three national identification documents (Voter card, passport and driving permit). The voter card is issued free, passports and driving permits are charged because majority of those who use voter cards cannot afford, do not value to pay.

As earlier expressed, there are enormous benefits of a civil registry to governments, which include planning and security purposes and having read all earlier submissions from colleagues, my conclusion is that it is important to take into consideration the circumstances of each particular country: incentives to pay, affordability etc.

Similarly, picking from many of the views expressed by Andrew Ladley, I recommend that governments should “Charge if there are strong citizen incentives to pay (at least something, which also adds to the value of the document for the holder and makes it better cared-for)”.

Hadija Miiro