|
Voting from abroad – Global
experiences
A GNA feature by Francis Ameyibor
Accra, July 6, Ghanadot/GNA – Since the passage of the Representation
of the Peoples Amendment Act (ROPAA) lat year, politicians
for and against the Act have been propounding electoral
theories on the practicability or otherwise of its
implementation.
The battleground has also moved from parliament to the
Intra-Party Advisory Committee (IPAC) meeting located at
Electoral Commission’s premises.
As expected the first meeting at IPAC was aborted mid-stream
as the National Democratic Congress (NDC), which is
vehemently opposed to the law, walked out following an
entrenched exchange by the two
opposing sides.
Statistics of Countries with External Voting Scheme Mr
Theophilus Dowetin, International Institute for Democracy
and Electoral Assistance (IDEA), an inter-governmental
organization which supports sustainable democracy worldwide,
told the Ghana News Agency in an interview that 114 states
and territories (as of March 2007) had legal provisions
which allowed their electors to vote from abroad.
This figure includes five, which have legal provisions in
place to allow external voting but, for different reasons,
is yet to be implemented.
These include well-established democracies along with the
emerging or restored ones.
He explained that 44 out of the 114 countries and
territories with provisions for external voting applied it
to only one type of election, but a number allow external
voting for two or more types of election.
In Africa, 28 countries have provisions for external vote.
The Americas have 15, Asia 20, Europe 41 and Pacific 10.
Mr Dowetin said the most common practice was to allow for
two types of election — most frequently presidential and
parliamentary elections - which is practised in 22
countries.
He explained that a little over 20 countries and territories
used a combination of three types of elections or more.
Mr Dowetin said there were cases where external voting had
been used at one time in the history of a country or
territory but was no longer continued or provided for in the
legal framework or used on a very restrictive basis.
Categories of Elections
The arguments now seem to focus mainly on the kinds of
election for which external voting should apply, an
important point which political analysts consider as very
crucial for a successful implementation of ROPAA.
The kind of vote relates not only to political and
institutional considerations - which institutions and levels
of government should be influenced by the votes of electors
abroad - but also to technical and logistical
considerations.
A recent research carried out by International IDEA on
external voting in the world revealed four different types
of external voting systems.
These are: legislative elections, presidential elections,
referendums and sub-national elections.
The first two kinds are related to the election and renewal
of organs of national representation such as legislative
bodies and the presidency.
If external voting is only allowed for one type of election,
the most common practice is to allow it for legislative
elections, which is the case in 31 countries, while 13
countries allow external voting for presidential elections
only.
According to International IDEA research, there were no
known cases of external voting being allowed for referendums
only. Some countries which hold both legislative and
presidential elections do not allow external voting for
both.
For example, Afghanistan applied external voting for its
presidential elections in 2004, but it was not provided for
the legislative elections in 2005.
Azerbaijan allows external voting for legislative elections
only, although the presidency is elected.
Examination of the types of countries that have external
voting also shows that they vary according to level of
socio-economic development. They include both Organisation
for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) member
countries and countries from the less developed regions of
the world, the research revealed.
The research concluded that there was no obvious correlation
between external voting provisions and socio-economic or
political features. These factors, according to
International IDEA, remain important in the debates and
decision making related to external voting provisions and
practices and are often reflected in the challenges or
complexities faced by countries.
The countries are also different in the length of time for
which their democracies have been established, their roots,
and the stability and consolidation of their institutions
and democratic practices.
According to International IDEA research, Egypt, considers
the introduction of external voting to be a purely
administrative issue, whilst discussions in Nigeria have
also led to an increased interest in external voting.
Several countries that have existing provisions for external
voting and in some cases a long history of implementing it
are considering extending or improving the external voting
process.
This can be done by extending the voting rights to
additional types of election or to a larger group of voters
or by offering additional voting methods to the existing
external voters.
In the case of Ghana voting from abroad was allowed only for
diplomatic staff, those studying abroad or employed by the
armed forces.
People Entitled to Vote from Abroad
On the key issues of eligibility, electoral experts say the
first indicator of the degree of coverage or inclusiveness
of external voting is related to the requirements of
citizenship, residency, voter registration or other that
must be met before a person can be entitled to an external
vote.
Ms Maria Gratschew, International IDEA electoral expert says
in the majority of the 114 countries and territories, the
legislation on external voting does not include any special
or restrictive requirement for individuals to be eligible
for an external vote.
In others, there are formal limitations to eligibility for
an external vote, mostly relating either to the
circumstances of the stay abroad (activity-related
restrictions) or to the length of time for which the citizen
has been out of the country (length of stay abroad
restriction).
More often because of technical or administrative
limitations than for strictly legal reasons, most commonly
external voting is not provided for people who are only out
of their country on a temporary basis, whether for work, for
business, for study, or for medical or recreational reasons.
She says Australia, Canada, Denmark, New Zealand and Norway
are among the few countries that offer facilities to voters
who are in transit travelling or provisionally abroad.
An electoral administrator in Ghana has admitted to the
Ghana News Agency that some countries require external
electors to show a valid visa before they are allowed to
vote.
According to him participation in external voting also
depends largely on requirements for verifying the voter’s
eligibility, registration procedure, time to request,
replace or update the required documents at the home
country’s diplomatic missions abroad or by post, or possibly
by electronic means.
Voting Procedures in used for External Voting
Countries that allow external voting need to ensure that it
is conducted in such a way as to meet the requirements of
security, transparency and secrecy.
It is also desirable that as far as possible all electors
have the same opportunity to vote.
However, countries and territories also need to make
adjustments and innovations to cope with the challenges that
are particular to external voting, such as the geographical
location of voters, security in transporting ballot papers,
the high cost of external voting and other administrative
issues.
Electoral administrators admit that every voting procedure
when applied abroad has implications in terms of the
coverage of potential voters and their opportunity to cast a
vote.
International IDEA had identified five main different voting
methods in use for external voting throughout the world.
These are: personal voting at diplomatic missions or other
designated places; postal voting; voting by proxy; e-voting;
and voting by fax.
They are quick to sound the warning that “each voting
procedure has its advantages and disadvantages.”
Political Representation for External Voters
Nine countries — four in Europe (Croatia, France, Italy and
Portugal), four in Africa (Algeria, Angola, Cape Verde and
Mozambique) and one in the Americas (Colombia) — not only
allow their citizens abroad to participate actively in some
electoral processes, but also enable them to elect their own
representatives to the national legislature.
External Voting and Participation
To date, there has been far less focus on the levels of
participation among external voters than on levels of voter
participation.
In most cases where external voting is permitted, external
voters account for only a relatively small proportion of
overall turnout. Nonetheless, an external voting population
may have considerable impact on election results.
Examples include Italy’s 2006 legislative elections — the
first held in which external voting was permitted.
The election’s outcome was unknown until all the external
votes were counted, giving this relatively small group
considerable political impact due to the fact that the
electoral systems allows a bonus for the party or coalition
with the highest score.
In some cases external votes have tipped the scales in an
election and they are often counted last.
Where external voting is permitted, rates of registration
and turnout among external voters are almost always lower
than they are in-country.
Given the amount of preparation for and work involved during
and after voting, much effort is put in for very few voters.
Turnout among Namibian external voters is very low and
represents only 0.09 per cent of the total turnout.
Mali has had a long and positive experience with external
voting which was conducted by the electoral authorities in
cooperation with the Malian diplomatic missions abroad.
The majority of Malian external voters are located within
the ECOWAS region where 61 polling stations are sited, with
47 of those in Ghana alone.
Factors that Influence Lower Turnout for External Voters
The factors that influence lower turnout for external voters
are political, administrative, institutional and financial.
Locating polling stations only where embassies or consulates
are available involves obstacles to voting for some external
electors.
The requirements for registering as a voter are also key to
participation as this is in most cases the first step
towards participation.
One example of unfortunate arrangements is that of Mexico’s
attempt at external voting in 2006 which required would-be
voters to obtain a photographic voting card which was
available only by going in person to Mexico.
Mexicans living abroad, mainly in the USA are about 11
million. Despite efforts by the Mexican authorities, in
collaboration with expatriate organizations abroad, to
enfranchise as many citizens in the Diaspora as possible,
only less than one million voted in the 2006 general
elections.
A number of reasons explain this situation: very few voters
could register abroad because the majority was not in
possession of voter cards issued in Mexico which were a
requirement for registration.
Furthermore, many Mexicans living in the USA were
undocumented and this situation made them shy away from
official contacts, such as registration and voting.
Requirements stating a minimum or maximum number of eligible
voters may also work as a disincentive to participation or
an obstacle to those who register as external electors but
will not be included unless the numbers add up.
Senegal, for instance, only organizes external voting if the
total number of registered voters in one country is 500 or
more.
Given these examples, the practical question must be asked
whether the low turnout justifies abolishing external voting
or simply not introducing it in the first place, regardless
of the more theoretical and normative counter-arguments
surrounding citizenship.
Levels of participation may influence decision-making
processes regarding the introduction and abolition of
external voting.
GNA
|
