7^th European Conference of Electoral Management Bodies - “Every Voter Counts”

London, 22-23 June 2010

Speech by Keith WHITMORE, Chairman of the Institutional Committee

Ladies and Gentlemen,

Let me begin by saying that it is a great honour for me to introduce the topic which is taking on importance today, in a time of the digital era and new technologies that are changing the face of our democracies. With these new tools unleashing a great potential for what we call “e-democracy”, electoral modernisation, and in particular both electronic voting and e-voting, which is remote voting by internet, seems to be a logical response to the expectations of our citizens.

However, I see my task today as not only to state what seems to be the obvious, but also to strike a cautionary note and raise issues which may provide food for thought during our discussion.

It is clear that elections are the most tangible expression of democracy. During elections, people exercise in the most direct way their right to the freedom of choice and their right to participate in decision-making. However, democracy is an ongoing process, and it is natural that our electoral frameworks are evolving along with the development of our societies.

In the Congress of Local and Regional Authorities of the Council of Europe, we attach great importance to the holding of free and fair elections beginning at local and then regional level, as we are convinced that democracy begins at grassroots, and it is at the local level that people receive their first lessons and experiences of democratic processes and participatory politics.

A political assembly of local and regional elected representatives from the 47 member states of the Council of Europe – or, to put it another way, an assembly representing more than 200,000 local and regional communities of Europe – the Congress is a unique European body that has the legal mandate to observe local and regional elections, as part of monitoring the situation of local and regional democracy on our continent. Having observed more than 70 electoral campaigns since 1995, the Congress has accumulated substantial experience to be able to form an opinion which I would like to share with you today.

First, although it may seem self-evident, I should recall that elections in themselves are just the tip of the iceberg. When we speak about electoral modernisation, we must look at the whole electoral process – electoral law, voter registration and voter lists, rules for election campaigns and campaigning methods: for example, access to new media and internet tools, the use of social networks, internet blogs and direct e-mailing (which were actively used by President Obama during his campaign) – finally, voting itself, counting of votes and presentation of results. I could also add the whole block concerning political parties and other candidate-nominating forces – civil society associations, for instance, or self-nomination – as well as electoral systems, to complete the picture. All these are integral parts of the democratic electoral process, and they all must be subject to revision in the process of electronic modernisation.

My second point is to watch for caveats in applying electronic voting. It is a fallacy to think that technology is infallible. For example, in October 2008, the Congress observed, for the first time in its practice, the new electronic voting which will be partially used in the municipal elections in Finland. I had the honour of presenting the report on this exercise. Our finding was that the Finnish experiment did not conclude in a way which fully satisfies the fundamental principles for democratic elections, in particular the principle of universal suffrage. Even though the voting process was well organised and the applied system considered viable, close to 2% of the electronic votes were not registered because of inadequate voter use of the voting terminals.

We know that experimentation with e-voting in other parts of Europe raised similar concerns – not to mention the practice of electronic voting in some parliaments, in the absence of voting members themselves!

This is how we know that electronic voting, and especially e-voting, could be treacherous and give rise not only to errors but also to fraud and abuse. However, this is not the reason to stall modernisation. Quite the opposite – electronic methods could be of great benefit for handling, for example, an upsurge of voters and avoid situations such as those during the most recent UK elections, when some voters had to be turned away for lack of ballot papers. And e-voting in particular may very well be an alternative resource which might help tackle the problem of declining turnouts at elections.

But this brings me to my third point, which was raised in particular during the Forum for the Future of Democracy, organised by the Council of Europe in Kyiv, Ukraine, in October last year, which was devoted to democratic elections. Some participants emphasised that taking part in an election as a voter involves the personal act of turning out to vote, actually demonstrating one’s involvement in political life. Voting at polling stations is actually what makes elections and the expression of the popular will not only the most tangible manifestation of democracy, but also the most visible one. Voting is indeed a visible, personal act, and the weight of the ballot paper is symbolic of the political weight of the decision being made. There are worries that voting by internet could remove this vital element of physical participation from the electoral exercise.

These are some issues that we should ponder upon when speaking about electoral modernisation.

At the same time, inasmuch as elections are an essential part of democracy, election modernisation is part of the overall framework for e-democracy. The same month that the Congress observed electronic voting in Finland, October 2008, the Council of Europe organised in Madrid, Spain, another Forum for the Future of Democracy, devoted to tools for e-democracy and its impact on modern society. The Congress took an active part and made a substantial contribution to discussions of such issues as e-inclusion, e-participation, e-voting, provision of e-services

E-democracy, the use of the new communication and information tools, gives us the opportunity to meet these preoccupations by opening the doors to the creation of a new environment for consultation and participation, the “citizen environment”. It lets our efforts reach out to the remotest spots so that they touch and draw in the most disaffected citizens, by expounding complex issues with high-quality information comprehensible to all and encouraging transparency and the expression of individual as well as collective opinions.

E-democracy nevertheless calls for a learning process that brings about an indispensable change of attitude and behaviour on the part of the public authorities, the citizens, the associations and the economic players. Elected representatives themselves are trying out new devices for conducting dialogue with their fellow-citizens, thereby enhancing their representativeness. That is why suitable training for public authorities, elected representatives and citizens is something crucial to the success of our efforts and should be encouraged at all levels, whether nationally, locally or regionally.

 
Another important component in the success of e-democracy is the legislative and legal framework; this too requires co-ordination of the action of governments, parliaments, local and regional authorities and civil society.

 
Only by combining our energies, those of our citizens, in a participative environment can we ensure the ongoing sustainable development of our democratic society. Modern technologies have opened the door for us. It is time to cross the threshold.