[kwlug-disc] Say No To Electronic Voting ...

[Khalid Baheyeldin]

On Thu, Aug 6, 2020 at 3:51 PM Mikalai Birukou via kwlug-disc <
kwlug-disc at kwlug.org> wrote:

>
> 1) Confidentiality as an obligation. As soon as minute 3, speaker says
> that confidentiality of vote is not a right, but must be an obligation. Let
> me call BS on this one, backed by reality, and not mere opinion.
>

Mikalai,

I can't talk about Belarus, but I can talk about Egypt's brief experiment
with democracy, with all its flaws, as well as what was happening in early
Canada, vs. what is happening now.

The latter is relatable to all on this list.

Just check quickly how the secret ballot evolved, bullying and bribery that
caused the secret ballot to be adopted.
Also, how politicians and business people were opposed to it because: "how
can they be sure that people voted the way they wanted them to after taking
food supplies".

Read it for yourself.
https://www.thecanadianencyclopedia.ca/en/article/voting-in-early-canada-feature

https://archive.macleans.ca/article/1957/5/25/when-voting-was-a-high-adventure

Quote: “A workman, for example,” said one MP, “having promised his employer
to vote one way would vote another.”

The Horror!

And a more lengthy treatise at Elections Canada
https://www.elections.ca/content.aspx?section=res&dir=his&document=chap2&lang=e

In Egypt, we had dictatorship since the 50s which first banned political
parties, then introduced them in the late 70s, but used other methods
(voter suppression by requiring registration, not universal 'by default'
registration, ballot stuffing, ballot box swapping while in transit to
"counting centers", candidate screening and excluding the undesirables
based on 'security objections', and so many other ways ...). On the other
hand, the main opposition block, the religious party (Muslim Brotherhood),
used food supplies and loyalty groomed by providing health and education
services that are lacking in rural areas to ensure people voted for them.

After the 2011 revolution, the second aspect (buying votes using food
supplies, to a more limited extent intimidation) was rampant, but still the
elections in 2011 and 2012 were the most free ones in modern times. The
measures adopted were:

- Universal registration (anyone with a government ID, which is every
Egyptian above a certain age, can vote), and is registered to where their
address is)
- The process is monitored by representatives from all parties running,
inside the ballot station
- Unique serial numbers for ballots, in booklet form. Each station records
the number ranges given
- Ballot boxes are sealed, and the seals have unique numbers, so as to
prevent stuffing or tampering
- Judges overseeing each voting station, and the box seal number with the
reps
- Counting in the same voting station made sure that the serial numbers are
the ones signed from early in the day, so no swapping or stuffing occurred.
- Results are monitored by all representatives and at the end they issue a
joint document signed of the results
- and so on

By having several people present, each taking a photo on their mobile phone
and sharing it on social media, massive tampering was prevented.

There was intimidation of some religious minorities by the religious
parties in rural areas, e.g. blocking a few voting stations in Christian
majority south, but not on a nationwide scale.

But all in all, it worked: The powers that be (the armed forces) could not
get the results changed even if they wanted to. The scale required to
commit fraud is simply staggering and impractical: they can't intimidate
tens of thousands of reps in tens of thousands of stations.

So as you see, it was not perfect (it never is, but the issue is the
magnitude of fraud and its impact). The concern here is big government or
big money changing the ballots, and in this case, it was averted, barring
those incidents.

>From 2013 onwards, the game changed. A military officer took over, and used
intimidation before the ballot box to have his way: anyone from any other
party was imprisoned without trial: no one to run against him, then other
measures needed, and the voting process looked normal. Voter turnout went
to almost nothing after that, and apathy and despair set in again.

Back to a functioning democracy, which Canada is still one ...

Having a secret ballot prevents intimidation, bribery, retaliation by your
employer, or vandalizing your home.
Anything that is computerized cannot have all the criteria that we
currently have with paper ballots:
Not understandable to a lay person, a lay person cannot be part of the
oversight, a small number of people can be bribed or intimidated to swap
the code, and so on.

If the computer is keeping a list of who voted how, this can get hacked, or
leaked, or copied, as we see happening with so many organizations, be it
Life Labs, Equifax, LinkedIn, ...etc.

Again, I am not talking about Belarus. I am talking about here mainly, and
Egypt, partially.
Electronic voting would be a devil send for the rich and powerful ...

Yes, I saw that some municipalities are using electronic voting. I am a bit
troubled by that, and even expressed this concern at the time to some
members of this group.

Here is coverage from the time:
https://www.tvo.org/article/current-affairs/how-e-voting-is-taking-over-ontario-municipal-elections

https://www.tvo.org/article/current-affairs/how-e-votings-big-night-went-wrong-in-ontario

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/london/london-ontario-online-voting-1.4598787

However, they are not a major concern so far, since there are no big
political parties, and virtually no big money for rural communities where
this started. It can, and will, become a concern if it moves into larger
metro areas.
For now, it is a problem where the stakes are high: definitely federal
elections, and definitely provincial ones.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://kwlug.org/pipermail/kwlug-disc_kwlug.org/attachments/20200806/8d12e54e/attachment.htm>