With amazement, I’m writing this column to express my excitement of knowing that Pakistani citizens including overseas Pakistanis could use an e-voting system for the next general elections. Since the government’s effort to digitise Pakistan is laudable, technological-driven steps help in boosting the country’s economy. That said, having a completely digitised voting system may sound like a blessing for developing nations, whereas it’s a futile effort to preclude opposition parties from levelling allegations of election rigging. When President Trump disclaimed credibility of the United State elections, votes were cast through electronic voting in many of the states. Since 2016, Americans have been concerned about foreign interference in US elections due to the paperless voting machines, which are easy to target; foreign adversaries might exploit them.
The proponents of internet voting argue that e-voting can potentially make the election process significantly faster for voters who can use it and have shorter queues as it allows voters to vote quickly at the polling station. Also, people are increasingly relying on technology across various sectors as more and more transactional processes are being digitised. This is also becoming the case with elections, where computers and other technology have become indispensable to their conduct. Now, the COVID-19 pandemic has engulfed this planet, which has increased interest in and the demand for moving services to remote, online spaces. As this demand increases, election decision-makers must recognise the unique nature of electoral processes and take into account important risk factors when considering the use of a newer form of voting.
Most forms of electronic voting improve the speed and reliability of casting ballots. Whereas, at the same time, internet voting can effectively exclude other communities those who either do not have access to or do not know how to use the technology, disproportionately impacting older and rural voters in many cases. If implemented, there would be a need for extensive, robust voter education. The technology that underpins e-voting is highly sophisticated, involving advanced mathematics and cryptography. With a high literacy rate in Pakistan, it’s important to note that not all voters are necessarily comfortable with technology; particular care should be exercised to understand the level of technological literacy in Pakistan. Most voters will not understand how it works, and this lack of understanding could undermine public trust. This trust can be earned by establishing thorough procedures, including audits, and providing stakeholders with enough information for them to fully comprehend the sequence and mechanisms of the voting process. Careful consideration should be given regarding the views of the public. A lack of trust in an electoral process can dramatically impact the perceived legitimacy of those elected. Eventually, introducing e-voting requires major changes to the national legal framework governing elections. Initially, there is a need to run pilot projects that may require special permission, before an overall revision of the legal framework is implemented if such voting is to be introduced nationwide.
Hybrid digital-paper solutions, with a Voter Verifiable Paper Audit Trail (VVPAT), are becoming the norm for the communities that insist on using such machines. They are still touchscreen but print out ballots that verify a voter’s selection. Voting activists want the federal government to mandate that all e-voting machines have a voter-verified paper audit trail—a paper printout that would allow voters to check their vote on the paper before it drops into a secure box. The paper trail works, however, only if states are required to manually recount a certain percentage of the paper votes to compare them against the digital votes and check for anomalies. California requires e-voting machines to provide a paper trail, and requires counties to perform a one percent mandatory manual recount of all elections. For paper-trail legislation to be effective, it should also designate the voter-verified paper trail as the final word in cases where it differs from the digital vote since it would be easy for someone to program the machines to print out one vote but record a different one digitally. Also, there are several common-sense steps that could be implemented that would improve transparency and lessen the opportunity for fraud.