Skip to main content

The Oxymoron of the Internet Voting in Illiberal and Hybrid Political Contexts

Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNSC,volume 12455)

Abstract

This paper explores the phenomenon of e-voting, in particular, new i-voting technologies, within the context of hybrid and authoritarian political regimes. While e-voting and i-voting are not particularly widespread, more and more illiberal countries are implementing these innovations, which has been overlooked in the academia so far. The paper attempts to fill in this gap. Firstly, we provide a general overview of the problem and identify the key features of non-democracies adopting e-voting and i-voting. Secondly, we explore the case of Russia, a hybrid regime, which may become a role model for other countries in the near future. The research exposes the potential of e-voting, and in particular, i-voting as a tool for the regime stability and provides some avenues of the future research.

Keywords

  • I-voting
  • E-voting
  • Autocracies
  • Hybrid regimes

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.

Buying options

Chapter
USD   29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • DOI: 10.1007/978-3-030-60347-2_12
  • Chapter length: 13 pages
  • Instant PDF download
  • Readable on all devices
  • Own it forever
  • Exclusive offer for individuals only
  • Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout
eBook
USD   64.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • ISBN: 978-3-030-60347-2
  • Instant PDF download
  • Readable on all devices
  • Own it forever
  • Exclusive offer for individuals only
  • Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout
Softcover Book
USD   84.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)

Notes

  1. 1.

    https://www.idea.int/data-tools/data/icts-elections.

  2. 2.

    Krivonosova I.: E-voting in Moscow: A Gratuitous Gimmick—RIDDLE. (n.d.). Retrieved June 2, 2020, from https://www.ridl.io/en/e-voting-in-moscow-a-gratuitous-gimmick/.

  3. 3.

    Krivonosova I.: E-voting in Moscow: A Gratuitous Gimmick—RIDDLE. (n.d.). Retrieved June 2, 2020, from https://www.ridl.io/en/e-voting-in-moscow-a-gratuitous-gimmick/.

  4. 4.

    V Gosdumu Vnesli Zakonoproekt o Testiro-vanii Elektronnogo Golosovaniya v Moskve – Vedomosti. (n.d.). Retrieved June 2, 2020, from https://www.vedomosti.ru/politics/news/2019/02/26/795201-elektronnogo-golosovaniya.

  5. 5.

    Moskvichi s 3 po 9 iyunya smogut vybrat' okruga dlya provedeniya elektronnogo goloso-vaniya—Moskva—TASS. (n.d.). Retrieved June 9, 2020, from https://tass.ru/moskva/6489105.

  6. 6.

    Cel' eksperimenta po vnedreniyu distancionnogo elektronnogo golosovaniya na vy-borah v Mosgordumu – sozdat' dlya moskvichej dopolnitel'nye vozmozhnosti realiza-cii aktivnogo izbiratel'nogo prava. (n.d.). Retrieved June 9, 2020, from https://duma.mos.ru/ru/34/news/novosti/tsel-eksperimenta-po-vnedreniyu-distantsionnogo-elektronnogo-golosovaniya-na-vyiborah-v-mosgordumu-sozdat-dlya-moskvichey-dopolnitelnyie-vozmojnosti-realizatsii-aktivnogo-izbiratelnogo-prava.

  7. 7.

    A. Shaposhnikov: Elektronnoe golosovanie pozvolit kolossal'no podnyat' yavku na vyborah deputatov Mosgordumy—Agentstvo gorodskih novostej «Moskva»—Informacionnoe agentstvo. (n.d.). Retrieved June 7, 2020, from https://www.mskagency.ru/materials/2884983.

  8. 8.

    Aleksej Naval'nyj—Oficial'no: U nas est' to, chego byt' ne dolzhno. «Elektron-noe golosovanie» polnost'yu skomprometirovano. (n.d.). Retrieved June 9, 2020, from https://navalny.com/p/6234/.

  9. 9.

    Dnevnoj fal'sifikat. Dmitrij Oreshkin ob"yasnyaet, kak vvedenie elektronnogo go-losovaniya pomozhet vlastyam vyigriyvat' vybory. (n.d.). Retrieved June 9, 2020, from https://novayagazeta.ru/articles/2020/05/14/85376-dnevnoy-falsifikat.

  10. 10.

     «Okej, golosujte bumazhno» Aleksej Venediktov otvetil na kritiku internet-vyborov v Mosgordumu. My poprosili ekspertov proverit' ego zayavleniya—Meduza. (n.d.). Retrieved June 7, 2020, from https://meduza.io/feature/2019/07/01/okey-golosuyte-bumazhno.

  11. 11.

    Eksperty prokommentirovali otkaz v registracii kandidatov na vyborah v MGD - RIA Novosti. 31.07.2019. (n.d.). Retrieved June 9, 2020, from https://ria.ru/20190731/1557026300.html.

  12. 12.

     «Edinaya Rossiya» ne vydvinula ni odnogo kandidata v Mosgordumu No frakciya edi-norosov v stolichnom parlamente vse ravno budet —Meduza. (n.d.). Retrieved June 8, 2020, from https://meduza.io/feature/2019/06/13/edinaya-rossiya-ne-vydvinula-ni-odnogo-kandidata-v-mosgordumu.

  13. 13.

    Meriya Obeshchala Prozrachnoe Internet-Golosovanie v Moskve. V Itoge Ona Mozhet Opublikovat' Lyubye Rezul'ta-ty, i Proverit' Ih Nikto Ne Smozhet — Meduza. (n.d.). Retrieved June 2, 2020, from https://meduza.io/feature/2019/09/06/meriya-obeschala-prozrachnoe-internet-golosovanie-v-moskve-v-itoge-ona-mozhet-opublikovat-lyubye-rezultaty-i-proverit-ih-nikto-ne-smozhet.

  14. 14.

    Onlajn-Golosovanie v Moskve Dvazhdy Priostanavlivali Iz-Za Sboya - Novosti – Politika – Kommersant. (n.d.). Retrieved June 2, 2020, from https://www.kommersant.ru/doc/4086901.

  15. 15.

    V Moskve Podveli Itogi Eksperimenta s Elektron-nym Golosovaniem — Rossijskaya Gazeta. (n.d.). Retrieved June 1, 2020, from https://rg.ru/2019/09/09/reg-cfo/v-moskve-podveli-itogi-eksperimenta-s-elektronnym-golosovaniem.html.

  16. 16.

    Urnoterapiya. Poluchiv psihologicheskuyu travmu god nazad, vlast' stala otsekat' negativnye scenarii na dal'nih podstupah k uchastkam. CHto iz etogo vyshlo. (n.d.). Retrieved June 9, 2020, from https://novayagazeta.ru/articles/2019/09/10/81915-urnoterapiya?utm_source=tg&utm_medium=novaya&utm_campaign=matematik-sergey-shpilkin-proanalizirova.

  17. 17.

    Bolee 548 tysyach chelovek podali zayavki na uchastie v onlajn-golosovanii—Parlamentskaya gazeta. (n.d.). Retrieved June 7, 2020, from https://www.pnp.ru/social/bolee-548-tysyach-chelovek-podali-zayavki-na-uchastie-v-onlayn-golosovanii.html.

  18. 18.

    Federal'nyj zakon ot 23 maya 2020 g. N 152-FZ “O provedenii eksperimenta po organizacii i osushchestvleniyu distancionnogo elektronnogo golosovaniya v gorode federal'nogo znacheniya Moskve”—Rossijskaya gazeta. (n.d.). Retrieved June 7, 2020, from https://rg.ru/2020/05/25/fz-o-golosovanii-v-moskve-dok.html.

  19. 19.

    Elektronnoe golosovanie na dovyborah v Gosdumu projdet v Kurskoj i YAroslavskoj oblastyah. (n.d.). Retrieved June 13, 2020, from http://actualcomment.ru/elektronnoe-golosovanie-na-dovyborakh-v-gosdumu-proydet-v-kurskoy-i-yaroslavskoy-oblastyakh-2007271358.html?fbclid=IwAR0UdmWrTsGKVDB8x4_ycnwRBOuz_KH4GNPQWYuIcHkC0wzuTCRgQZXnyxQ.

References

  1. Keremoğlu, E., Weidmann, N.B.: How dictators control the internet: a review essay. Comp. Polit. Stud. (2020). https://doi.org/10.1177/0010414020912278

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  2. Rød, E.G., Weidmann, N.B.: Empowering activists or autocrats? The Internet in authoritarian regimes. J. Peace Res. 52(3), 338–351 (2015)

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  3. Karlsson, M.: Carrots and sticks: internet governance in non–democratic regimes. Int. J. Electron. Gov. 6(3), 179–186 (2013)

    Google Scholar 

  4. Toepfl, F.: Innovating consultative authoritarianism: internet votes as a novel digital tool to stabilize non-democratic rule in Russia. New Media Soc. 20(3), 956–972 (2018)

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  5. Christensen, B.: Cyber state capacity: a model of authoritarian durability, ICTs, and emerging media. Govern. Inf. Q. 36(3), 460–468 (2019)

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  6. Krimmer, R., Duenas-Cid, D., Krivonosova, I.: Debate: safeguarding democracy during pandemics. Social distancing, postal, or internet voting—the good, the bad or the ugly? Public Money Manage. 1–3 (2020)

    Google Scholar 

  7. Goos, K., Beckert, B., Lindner, R.: Electronic, internet-based voting. In: Lindner, R., Aichholzer, G., Hennen, L. (eds.) Electronic Democracy in Europe, pp. 135–184. Springer, Cham (2016). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-27419-5_4

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  8. Krimmer, R.: A structure for new voting technologies: what they are, how they are used and why. In: Bergener, K., Räckers, M., Stein, A. (eds.) The Art of Structuring, pp. 421–426. Springer, Cham (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-06234-7_39

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  9. Berman, J., Weitzner, D.J.: Technology and democracy. Soc. Res. 64(3), 1313–1319 (1997)

    Google Scholar 

  10. Calingaert, D.: Authoritarianism vs. the internet. Pol. Rev. 14 (2010)

    Google Scholar 

  11. Diamond, L.: Liberation technology. J. Democr. 21(3), 69–83 (2010). https://doi.org/10.1353/jod.0.0190

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  12. Grider, M.: Securing the vote: electronic voting in theory and practice. 9 (2018)

    Google Scholar 

  13. Vassil, K., Solvak, M., Vinkel, P., Trechsel, A.H., Alvarez, R.M.: The diffusion of internet voting. Usage patterns of internet voting in Estonia between 2005 and 2015. Gov. Inf. Q. 33(3), 453–459 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.giq.2016.06.007

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  14. Kornreich, Y.: Authoritarian responsiveness: Online consultation with “issue publics” in China. Governance 32(3), 547–564 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1111/gove.12393

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  15. Truex, R.: Consultative authoritarianism and its limits. Comp. Polit. Stud. 50(3), 329–361 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1177/0010414014534196

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  16. MacKinnon, R.: Liberation technology: China’s “networked authoritarianism”. J. Democr. 22(2), 32–46 (2011)

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  17. Herrnson, P.S., et al.: Early appraisals of electronic voting. Soc. Sci. Comput. Rev. 23(3), 274–292 (2005). https://doi.org/10.1177/0894439305275850

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  18. Kshetri, N., Voas, J.: Blockchain-enabled e-voting. IEEE Softw. 35(4), 95–99 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1109/MS.2018.2801546

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  19. Cheeseman, N., Lynch, G., Willis, J.: Digital dilemmas: the unintended consequences of election technology. Democratization 25(8), 1397–1418 (2018)

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  20. Oostveen, A.M., van den Besselaar, P.: The academic debate on electronic voting in a socio-political context. In: E-Vote-ID 2019. 17 (2019)

    Google Scholar 

  21. Binte Haq, H., McDermott, R., Taha Ali, S.: Pakistan’s internet voting experiment. arXiv:1907.07765 (2019)

  22. Al Siyabi, M., Al Jabri, N., Al-Shihi, H., Al-Khod, A. K.: The uptake of voting participations in oman through e-voting. In: The International Information Systems Conference (iiSC) 2011 Sultan Qaboos University, Muscat, Sultanate of Oman (2011)

    Google Scholar 

  23. Al-Khouri, A.M., Authority, E.I., Dhabi, A.: E-voting in UAE FNC elections: a case study. Inf. Knowl. Manage. 2(6), 25–84 (2012)

    Google Scholar 

  24. Kassen, M.: Politicization of e-voting rejection: reflections from Kazakhstan. Transform. Gov. People Process Policy 14, 305–330 (2020)

    Google Scholar 

  25. Schedler, A.: Elections without democracy: the menu of manipulation. J. Democr. 13(2), 36–50 (2002)

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  26. Schedler, A.: The Politics of Uncertainty: Sustaining and Subverting Electoral Authoritarianism. OUP, Oxford (2013)

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  27. Kneuer, M., Harnisch, S.: Diffusion of e-government and e-participation in Democracies and Autocracies. Global Policy 7(4), 548–556 (2016)

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  28. Dukalskis, A., Gerschewski, J.: What autocracies say (and what citizens hear): proposing four mechanisms of autocratic legitimation. Contemp. Polit. 23(3), 251–268 (2017)

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  29. Gerschewski, J.: The three pillars of stability: legitimation, repression, and co-optation in autocratic regimes. Democratization 20(1), 13–38 (2013)

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  30. Gerschewski, J.: Legitimacy in autocracies: oxymoron or essential feature? Perspect. Polit. 16(3), 652–665 (2018)

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  31. von Soest, C., Grauvogel, J.: Identity, procedures and performance: how authoritarian regimes legitimize their rule. Contemp. Polit. 23(3), 287–305 (2017)

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  32. Tannenberg, M., Bernhard, M., Gerschewski, J., Lührmann, A., Von Soest, C.: Regime Legitimation Strategies (RLS) 1900 to 2018. V-Dem Working Paper. 86 (2019)

    Google Scholar 

  33. Wahman, M., Teorell, J., Hadenius, A.: Authoritarian regime types revisited: updated data in comparative perspective. Contemp. Polit. 19(1), 19–34 (2013)

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  34. Bader, M.: Do new voting technologies prevent fraud? Evidence from Russia. In: 2014 Electronic Voting Technology Workshop/Workshop on Trustworthy Elections (EVT/WOTE 2014) (2014)

    Google Scholar 

  35. Dutton, W.H., Danziger, J.N.: Computers and Politics: High Technology in American Local Governments. Columbia University Press, New York (1982)

    Google Scholar 

  36. Brancati, D.: Democratic authoritarianism: origins and effects. Annu. Rev. Polit. Sci. 17, 313–326 (2014)

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  37. Gandhi, J., Lust-Okar, E.: Elections under authoritarianism. Ann. Rev. Polit. Sci. 12, 403–422 (2009)

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  38. Ananyev, M., Poyker, M.: Do Dictators Signal Strength with Elections? (2018). SSRN 2712064

    Google Scholar 

  39. Gibson, J.P., Krimmer, R., Teague, V., Pomares, J.: A review of e-voting: the past, present and future. Ann. Telecommun. 71(7–8), 279–286 (2016)

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  40. Goodman, N., Stokes, L. C.: Reducing the cost of voting: an evaluation of internet voting’s effect on turnout. Br. J. Polit. Sci. 1–13 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1017/S0007123417000849

  41. Vassil, K., Weber, T.: A bottleneck model of e-voting: why technology fails to boost turnout. New Media Soc. 13(8), 1336–1354 (2011)

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  42. Solvak, M., Vassil, K.: Could internet voting halt declining electoral turnout? New evidence that e-voting is habit forming. Policy Internet 10(1), 4–21 (2018)

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  43. Germann, M., Serdült, U.: Internet voting and turnout: evidence from Switzerland. Electoral. Stud. 47, 1–12 (2017)

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  44. Reuter, O.J: Political Participation and the Survival of Electoral Authoritarian Regimes. http://ojreuter.com/wp-content/uploads/Turnout_Paper.pdf

  45. Frantz, E.: Voter turnout and opposition performance in competitive authoritarian elections. Electoral. Stud. 54, 218–225 (2018)

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  46. Heiberg, S., Martens, T., Vinkel, P., Willemson, J.: Improving the verifiability of the Estonian Internet Voting scheme. In: Krimmer, R., et al. (eds.) Electronic Voting. International Joint Conference on Electronic Voting, pp. 92–107. Springer, Cham (2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-52240-1_6

  47. Springall, D., et al.: Security analysis of the Estonian internet voting system. In: Proceedings of the 2014 ACM SIGSAC Conference on Computer and Communications Security, pp. 703–715 (2014)

    Google Scholar 

  48. Bull, C., Gjøsteen, K., Nore, H.: Faults in Norwegian internet voting. In: E-Vote-ID 2018 Proceedings, pp. 166–169 (2018)

    Google Scholar 

  49. Ruijgrok, K.: From the web to the streets: internet and protests under authoritarian regimes. Democratization 24(3), 498–520 (2017)

    Google Scholar 

  50. Golosov, G.V.: The regional roots of electoral authoritarianism in Russia. Europe-Asia Stud. 63(4), 623–639 (2011)

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  51. Turchenko, M.: Electoral engineering in the russian regions (2003–2017). Europe-Asia Stud. 72(1), 80–98 (2020)

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  52. Ross, C.: Regional elections in Russia: instruments of authoritarian legitimacy or instability? Palgrave Commun. 4(1), 1–9 (2018)

    MathSciNet  CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  53. Maréchal, N.: Networked authoritarianism and the geopolitics of information: understanding Russian Internet policy. Media Commun. 5(1), 29–41 (2017)

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  54. Nocetti, J.: Russia’s’ dictatorship-of-the-law’ approach to internet policy. Internet Policy Rev. 4, 1–19 (2015)

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  55. Maerz, S.F.: The electronic face of authoritarianism: e-government as a tool for gaining legitimacy in competitive and non-competitive regimes. Gov. Inf. Q. 33(4), 727–735 (2016)

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  56. Chugunov, A.V., Kabanov, Y., Zenchenkova, K.: Russian e-petitions portal: exploring regional variance in use. In: Tambouris, E., et al. (eds.) Electronic Participation. International Conference on Electronic Participation, pp. 109–122. Springer, Cham (2016). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-45074-2_9

  57. Kabanov, Y., Chugunov, A. V.: Electronic “pockets of effectiveness”: e-governance and institutional change in St. Petersburg, Russia. In: Janssen, M., et al. (eds.) Electronic Government. International Conference on Electronic Government, pp. 386–398. Springer, Cham (2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-64677-0_32

  58. Coppedge, M., et al.: V-Dem [Country–Year/Country–Date] Dataset v10. Varieties of Democracy (V-Dem) Project (2020). https://doi.org/10.23696/vdemds20

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Yury Kabanov .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

Copyright information

© 2020 Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this paper

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this paper

Romanov, B., Kabanov, Y. (2020). The Oxymoron of the Internet Voting in Illiberal and Hybrid Political Contexts. In: , et al. Electronic Voting. E-Vote-ID 2020. Lecture Notes in Computer Science(), vol 12455. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-60347-2_12

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-60347-2_12

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-030-60346-5

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-030-60347-2

  • eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)