TRANSPARENT TECHNOLOGIES OF VOTING BY SECRET BALLOTS
Annotation
In the history of election campaigns of many countries many disgraceful and scandalous pages are inscribed. Scandals connected with polling the results of voting many times shacked the courts of various instances, they splashed out into newspapers and were widely discussed on TV and radio. In some countries after the results of voting were announced they led to armed rising, massacres and even civil wars.
Direct casus belli for the Mexican Civil War of 1910-1917 was cynical and rough falsification of the results of presidential elections in Mexico in 1910. At these elections General Porfirio Dias, then being the actual President, has won. It was officially announced that at elections on June 26, 1910 Mexican people had re-elected the actual President Dias for the next six-year period.
General Porfirio Dias (1830-1915), an outstanding participant of the war against the French interventionists, was the President of Mexico in 1876-1880 years. When he was again elected the President in 1884, he actually established dictatorship in Mexico. He remained in power up to 1911 year. He was overthrown during the Mexican Revolution of 1910-1917 years.
Being constrained in the beginning of the ruling by the amendment to the constitution prohibiting re-election of president for the following term, Dias in 1887 issued the law permitting one re-election. In 1890 followed cancellation of any limitations regarding re-election of the same person as president. In 1904 one more amendment to the constitution was adopted, providing prolongation of the term of office of the president up to six years.
The election results falsification record was established in 1927 in Liberia. The existing president has swung his adversary with score 15 times exceeding total votes in the country.
Such excesses are quite regular as at present in the world archaic systems of voting by secret ballots are used, which allow in some range to rig the results of voting. Such various corrections of voting results may be performed by ordinary electors and election committees as well as by third persons, even behind the backs of election committees of all levels.
General voting by secret ballots at presidential, parliament elections and referendums is the main form of expression of public will and studying the societys opinion. Free alternative elections are one of the basic, determinative elements of democracy. They exactly strengthen the moral authority of the regime and add the legitimate status to the future policy and actions of the power and politicians elected. However, in case of elections using the existing technologies the question of Was the will of electors falsified at polling the voting results? always stays open. At elections using the existing methods of voting by secret ballots in any country in the world this question remains open. Therefore legitimacy of presidents, governments, parliaments, etc., of all the countries of the world is presently doubtful. Elections using the existing technologies of voting by secret ballots hypothetically creates dangerously explosive situation in any country of the world. In fact, the loser side may simply announce the voting results falsified to inflame the civil war fire in any country. As a glaring example one may recall the last events in Karachaevo-Cherkessia (Russia) and Yugoslavia.
Only a country with stable public system, political situation, healthy economy and consolidated society may allow such a luxury as using these existing voting technologies. However, the presidential elections of 2000 in the USA visually showed that even such successful countries may get stuck at scandals and legal proceedings concerning polling falsification. These scandals are provoked by archaic systems of voting by secret ballots.
Technologies of voting by secret ballots and first of all the process of polling are to be transparent for electors and to correspond the demands of social and political safety of the country. Unfortunately, the election rules adopted lately in many countries of the world concerning election technologies, elections and peoples voting rights guarantees not only fail to eliminate the danger of social disturbances after announcement of polling results but as well create new possibilities for various machinations and violations during polling. This was clearly demonstrated on December 19, 2000 during the latest elections to the State Duma and election of the president of Russia on March 26, 2000. Technologies of elections and referendums applied presently in all the countries of the world are regarded to the class of untransparent (dark) and they realize the right to active voting right only partially.
Active suffrage is the right of citizens to elect, i.e. the right to participate in general, equal, free, democratic elections, limited by minimal voting qualifications (for instance: age, capability, sex, etc.) Passive suffrage is the right of a citizen to be elected, on condition of certain limitations established by the law, for instance: previous conviction, bankruptcy, age, residential qualification, command in official language, etc.
Active suffrage may be full or partial (limited).
Partial (limited) suffrage grants to elector the right to participate in free elections corresponding the international democratic standards and to vote but in such a case elector has no right to check up accuracy and exactness of voting results polling. This right is accordance with the legislation is delegated (entrusted) to election committees of various levels, electoral colleges, home and foreign observers, various automated and computerized systems (example: State Automated System Vybory in Russia), etc.
Full active suffrage is legislatively foresees that elector together with possibility to participate in democratic elections and to vote freely has the right and technical possibility to check up his vote polling results in polling results publications by himself.
Besides this, full active universal suffrage allows each person after counting of votes and official announcing the election results to use at request else two electoral system mechanisms.
The First is the mechanism of pre-term recalling of the person who filled his position as a result of election victory. This right can be given either to all registered voters, or to that voters who took part in the last elections, or only to that ones who casted a vote for the candidate gained a victory on elections. Such mechanism allows each ordinary voter at any time determined by the law to withdraw his vote cast for the concrete president, deputy, senator, governor, mayor, etc.
The Second is the mechanism of evaluation of electoral person activity results. It must afford each voter a right to evaluate the activity results of any person who occupied the electoral position for the determined period of time.
Evaluation of activity results is realized by carrying out a referendum with only one question: How do you evaluate the activity results of the person X on the electoral position during a specified term. Referendum is combined with next or prescheduled elections. It takes place in any case, regardless of that if person X is nominated for next elections for a following term or not. Referendum is performed even in the case of the persons death, prescheduled retirement, discharge from position, etc.
Voting legislation based on full active suffrage, allows to perform honest elections.
Tenacious efforts in upholding and expediting into national elections legislation the principle of castrated active election right may be explained by only two reasons:
1. Officials dont believe in political maturity and worldly wisdom of nation and thus they dont trust it to control voting results, actually realizing in practice in one of the areas of legislation the principle of controlled democracy. This looks very strange against numerous declarations of public and political persons about further development of democracy and fullest introduction of democratic institutes.
2. State wants to preserve the right to correct, as it was before, the voting results to the side preferable to somebody. Russian politician Boris Berezovski has expressed this aim most clear and openly: State must have possibility to correct elections results, for instance in case communists or fascists win in elections.
Actively defending and expediting the principle of partial (limited) active suffrage to the legislation about elections and referendums, national parliaments are in fact mining the building of ones own state organization, which may explode at any moment and ruin the state.
The alternative to this explosive situation in the area of election systems can appear the transparent technologies of the confidential election by voting bulletins, which were elaborated in Russia and practically realize the principle of fully active election right.
Transparent technologies of voting by secret ballots, worked out in Russia, realizing in practice the principles of full active suffrage, may be used as alternative to this dangerously explosive situation in the area of election systems. These technologies allow to realize a various by methods, repeated, multilevel system of retrospective control of voting results.
These technologies meets the principles of state social and political safety and national strategy of stable development, they are maximally adapted for use in the present conditions and they are safely protected from falsification of voting results from the part of elective committees and electors as well as from the part of third persons.
The basis of the offered technologies of voting by secret ballots makes the idea of direct monitoring by electors of elective committees activity at all the stages of polling. The technologies are unique and may be used in any elections or referendums with the procedure of voting by secret ballots. They were worked out by the team of officers of the Russian Academy of Sciences using the system of artificial intelligence Radical-96. These technologies may be used in elections of federal and municipal authorities, scientific councils of universities and institutions, in joint-stock companies at annual general meetings of shareholders, at parties, trade unions and other public organizations congresses, where performance of elections by secret ballots is foreseen by charter or laws.
Their realization may be performed by several methods, differing by:
Distinction of these technologies is availability of monitoring by any elector of correctness of his vote consideration at polling the votes of elective district, region, in the country in whole. At that such a monitoring is performed with consideration of anonymity principle. Availability of such monitoring is realized by means of using the special form ballots and application of minor changes into the existing technology of elections performance. For concrete elector the procedure of his vote polling is absolutely transparent.
Advantages of the offered technologies are:
Transparent technologies of voting by secret ballots prevent anybody except for the voters officially registered at the polling station (district), from exerting influence on voting results.
At that results of voting are announced to electors not only in the form of final reports but as well in the form of publications in press and electronic (teletext) mass media as well as in the form of computer database, which correspondence to the final reports is easily checked up at any stage of polling procedure with the help of computers, modems, existing informational communication computer networks and general use telephone channels.
7) Availability to use specialized equipment and technologies on commercial basis for necessities of various organizations within the periods between elections. This allows to make elections campaigns partially self-supporting and in case of making a number of amendments to the existing legislation fully self-supporting.
8) Practical realization of the technologies doesnt need preliminary training of electors and they are easily mastered even by persons with minimal education or intellectual level. Approbation of concrete methods showed that they are easily mastered by all groups of electors independently of their age, sex, social status, profession, etc.
9) These technologies allow to minimize the influence of so-called administrative resource for the results of voting.
10) On the basis of transparent technologies of voting by secret ballots a simple and effective mechanism of recall the persons occupying elective offices (deputies, senators, majors, governors, presidents, etc.) by electors was worked out.
11) Transparent technologies may serve the basis for working out of national or regional legislation about elections.
Transparent technologies of voting by secret ballots cover all the cycle of elective decision-making, beginning from registration of electors, include polling the voting results, retrospective monitoring of electors number who attended voting and mechanism of recall the persons occupying elective offices.
These technologies allow to turn the routine process of participation in elections into an absorbing and interesting process in which the overwhelming majority of population will participate.
Application of these technologies changes the known aphorism No matter how they vote everything depends on wholl draw the poll into another one: No matter who draws the poll it depends on how theyll vote, as in such case possibilities of election committees for falsification of voting results are practically brought to nothing. In case of using of transparent technologies of voting by secret ballots nobodys able to steal millions of votes without further sending of millions of actions to courts of various instances of falsification of voting results.
These technologies avert possibility of falsification of voting results from the part of election (calculation) committees as well as from the part of electors or third persons.
Countries that do not use transparent technologies of secret voting by ballots may not call themselves democratic and may be only considered as states with so called regulated democracy. Stubborn reject of any country or organization in application of such transparent technologies automatically draws to the conclusion that dirty play prevails here at polling. In case of application of transparent technologies of voting by secret ballots any country, organization or company may be completely sure that any election will be not only free but honest and democratic as well. Historic experience teaches us that attempts to put obstacles to social or scientific-technical progress always failed. As the process may not be stopped one should make himself its leader.
Main elements of transparent technologies of voting by secret ballots are protected by twelve patents of the Russian Federation. In case youre interested in drawing of honest elections in your country (party, organization) and you are interested in our suggestion, we are ready to render you in full volume the additional materials, allowed to realize the transparent technologies of voting by secret ballots and to draw honest elections at shareholders meetings, in universities, academies, higher educational institutions, trade unions, parliaments, creative unions and etc.
This set of documents is considered to be a good basis at the development of state or regional legislation of elections.
The set of the documents includes:
Authors are interested in cooperation with organizations and scientists dealing with the problems of elective systems and elective legislation as well with common electors which is interested in these problems.