Kristóf Gál

Alongside almost each element of our daily lives Covid-19 has made us rethink the legal background regulating elections and referenda. In the context of this Visegrad project and also in a broader sense multiple valuable contributions have been made in this discussion by fellow student contributor Lili Karácsony, published by the Institute for Legal Studies.

If we suppose that despite the pandemic health experts advising governments think it is safe for a specific election to go ahead on its designated date, it still does not mean that no measures can be taken to further decrease the chance of virus transmission. International Idea Institute provides a comprehensive list of measures introduced in 2020 in polling stations with the most commonly used methods being: social distancing, PPE (personal protective equipment) for polling station staff, mandatory mask use, use of hand sanitizer, temperature checks and many others.

The first alternative method I wish to discuss is alternative only compared to our usual voting experience, but the in-person element of the elections continues to comfort individuals as a tried and tested custom. This method is early in-person voting and alongside these elections or referenda, which last multiple days, therefore the busy nature of polling stations can be avoided. It is still an in-person solution, but it is safer, because authorities and voters do not have to manage the process under a single day, thus less people must queue, meaning less epidemic exposure. Forty-six states in the USA now offer early in-person voting.  The “one election/referendum –held multiple days method” was also used in Italy in September 2020, becoming one of the first European states to respond to the pandemic this way. This, if possible is a potentially obvious solution to the challenge brought upon us by the pandemic, but it certainly makes the whole process more costly and will require more human resources too. As a general comment it must also be added that if this “voting window” is too wide (eg. months long) then the percentage of votes cast for a candidate or a party at the beginning of the electoral process might substantially differ from the vote ratio later as public life might change rapidly.

Another possible alternative can be voting by mail, which has proven itself to be a viable, almost to-go choice where offered, as in the USA. In 2020, according to Pew Research 46% voted by absentee or mail-in ballots in the presidential elections. This is currently not a choice in many countries, like Hungary, but as I had formerly argued for in another contribution it can be a way to avoid the postponement of elections, which is a desired outcome as the political landscape might look completely different a few months later. Mail-in ballots could be introduced by a simple amendment to election procedure laws, but the biggest hurdle this alternative must overcome is providing enough funds and manpower to the postal services responsible and we also should not forget that this method -compared to early in-person voting- is something out of the ordinary, so therefore sufficient time should be provided to inform the electorate and fulfil the criteria of foreseeability. This proved itself to be an issue in Poland in 2020, and alongside others these concerns saw the first round of the presidential election postponed.

There are still a wide range of other solutions, but short of room, lastly, I will examine the online sphere as a platform for voting. This by itself could be used in a hybrid manner, meaning not all voters would have to vote on the internet, so in this context it would be an addition to the in-person voting taking place. A law enabling this was passed in the Russian Federation in 2021, but not without controversy, as defeated candidates immediately called election fraud. This method has notable controversial elements, first and foremost the fact that it is not available to every voter, as for example in Hungary according to the latest figures shared by the Hungarian Central Statistical Office “only” (obviously this is a higher figure than the global average) 88% of households have internet access, therefore it is not available for everyone. Another concern raised by professionals is the hacking of the voting system, this can corrupt results. Multiple other problems requiring solution could be mentioned, but one which stands out is the existence of an identity verification system, because online voting would require an impenetrable identity verification system.

Despite all concerns hybrid online voting was used in the 2021 Hungarian opposition primaries, where in the second round out of 662,016 overall votes 143,797 were cast online. (21,7%) But even there the problems were prevalent, as after one had identified themselves through valid documents online on camera, they had received a link on their e-mail address, but that link did not require any more identification and depending on the day of successful verification it was valid for several days. In a hypothetical situation therefore if someone managed to hack the e-mail account of someone in possession of a link, they could have cast their votes instead of the eligible person.

September 2022

__________________________________________________________

The views expressed above belong to the author and do not necessarily represent the views of the Centre for Social Sciences.