Last updated on December 17, 2013

Trust is a vital component of the democratic process, and trust in the election process is critical for acceptance of electoral outcomes by the public, political actors and other electoral stakeholders.²⁰ It is not only important for the integrity of the electoral process that voters and other electoral stakeholders trust the process to accurately reflect votes cast, but also for these actors to trust EMBs have executed their responsibilities in a manner that safeguards the integrity of the process. While delivering elections that reflect the will of the voters is of critical importance for EMBs to generate trust, it is also important for EMBs to engage electoral stakeholders throughout the process and be responsive to their concerns and needs so trust is maintained over time.

This is especially important when electronic voting and counting technologies are being introduced into the electoral process. The inherent opaqueness of these technologies when compared to paper-based ballots, as well as the relative lack of familiarity with these technologies among most stakeholders should compel EMBs to ensure the design and implementation process is open and generates confidence. Failure to do so may lead to experiences where strong electoral systems with foundations of trust are forced to backtrack on electronic voting because electoral authorities did not engage stakeholders throughout the process and lost the support needed to move forward with electronic voting. Where there is not a tradition of strong, trusted electoral administration, the consequences of failing to establish confidence in electronic voting and counting technologies could be even more severe. Trust in the electoral process is a hard-won commodity that can quickly dissipate if errors are found. It is essential that EMBs take the steps necessary to further and maintain trust with the introduction of electronic voting and counting technologies. 

As discussed, transparency is a key factor in generating public and stakeholder trust in the electoral process, but it is a difficult measure to provide for electronic voting systems where the casting and counting of ballots is not visible. EMBs can use a number of concrete steps to foster transparency in the process of design and implementation of electronic voting and counting systems, but the basic underlying stance for EMBs should be to have a process that is open and engages electoral stakeholders every step of the way. Given the complexity of electronic voting and counting systems, it is important that EMBs provide stakeholders with information about the technologies and the process through which these technologies will be implemented. Some steps EMBs can take to elicit trust through transparency have already been discussed above. 

In addition to providing access to independent experts and stakeholders to test the technology to be used in a particular election, EMBs can also embrace transparency by making stakeholders a key part of the evaluation process while the choice of technology is being evaluated for adoption, as well as after an election. EMBs should engage informed stakeholders in these evaluations where the performance of electronic voting and counting systems is tested against either standards established for traditional, paper-based systems or emerging standards (e.g. the Council of Europe’s e-voting recommendations) for electronic voting systems. 

Voters are the end client for any voting system. Prudent EMBs should ensure voters are informed about changes in the way they cast their vote, and that at least some voters have a chance to try the technology out so that any usability issues can be identified early and addressed. Voter education programs that communicate the essential characteristics of the electronic voting system should be disseminated far and wide before the first use of these technologies so voters are not caught off-guard when voting. Demonstrations of voting technology through mock and pilot elections should be deployed so electoral authorities can ascertain whether voter education or other voter sensitization programs need to address specific issues in preparing voters for the introduction of the electronic voting technology. 

^{20 For more detailed information on this topic, please refer to the following sections in Part 2: Decision in Principle; Procurement, Production and Delivery; Project and Risk Management; Voter Education/ Information; Post-Election Audits; and Internet Voting.}

NEXT:

Secrecy