Pakistan Today

Pakistan’s voting system

by Mohsin Saleem Ullah , December 7, 2020

E-voting needs verification before it can win public trust

With all amazement, I’m writing this column to express my excitement of knowing that
Pakistani citizens including overseas could use an e-voting system for the next general
elections. That made iy to the headline of every international newspaper, as Prime
Minister Imran Khan vowed to have fair and transparent elections in the country. Since
the government’s effort to digitalize Pakistan is laudable, technological-driven steps help
in boosting the country’s economy. That said, having a completely digitalized voting
system may sound a blessing for the developing nations, whereas it’s a futile effort to
preclude opposition parties from leveling allegations of election rigging, which was in
vain when President Donals Trump disclaimed credibility of the United State elections,
albeit votes were cast through electronic voting in most of the states. Since 2016,
Americans have been concerned about foreign interference in US elections is a major
concern, due to the paperless voting machines being easy to target by foreign
adversaries that might exploit it.

However, in a developing country like Pakistan to what extent e-voting could replace the
paper ballots, when the country has limited technological resources, and a constrained
budget to spend on digitalizing the voting system, remains a question. Touchscreen and
electronic machines have remained the most efficient and credible option for conducting
elections across the world, but over the years the experts have raised concerns and
warned against its adoption, because e-voting lacks an auditable paper trail, and
software could be prone to hacking that would change votes, and sway election results.
With no assurance of transparency, and the fear of cyber-professionals invading the
election authorities’ database, are the main reasons for the governments to switch back
to the paper ballot voting system. Critics of e-voting, including computer security
experts, believe that the machines are badly programmed, and the voting software is
proprietary, so no one claims what’s inside the machines except the voting-machine
makers, who have fought in court to prevent anyone from examining their software. E-
voting machines sometimes fail to boot up, fail to record votes, or even record them for
the wrong candidates─ that is, in cases when someone notices a problem. A machine
can appear to perform properly from the outside, but record votes inaccurately. Without
a paper backup trail or some other means to verify votes, there is no meaningful way to
determine the integrity of the machines or an election.

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 programme 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

The proponents of internet voting are arguing that e-voting can potentially make the
election process significantly faster for voters who can use it and have lesser long
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 digitized. 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 recognize the unique nature of
electoral processes and take into account important risk factors when considering the
use of a newer form of voting. While the cost of e-voting could eventually become lower
than traditional voting, it can produce ballots in multiple languages, and allow voters to
make last-minute changes. Additionally, it would allow overseas Pakistani, and disabled
voters to cast ballots without any external assistance. Though, its implementation is
another challenge to the Pakistani government, that would take several election cycles
to achieve as there is significant new procurement, training, public awareness
campaigning, and security involved with the launch of this system. Internet voting often
relies on unaccounted costs such as a strong identification infrastructure– biometric
voter cards, smart ID cards, which can be expensive if not already in place. While
internet voting can seem appealing to boost voter turnout, studies have shown that this
is not generally the case. The research found that internet voting may make voting more
convenient for regular voters, but it doesn’t attract new voters. Young voters, in
particular, appear to be more concerned with why they should vote at all, rather than
how.

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 low 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─ a state in the USA─
requires e-voting machines to provide a paper trail, 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 programme
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.