Reflection on the principles and requirements of a secure electronic voting system

Document Type : Original Article

Authors

1 PhD student in Public Law, Faculty of Law and Social Sciences, University of Tabriz , Tabriz, Iran

2 Assistant Professor, Department of Law, Faculty of Law and Social Sciences, University of Tabriz , Tabriz, Iran.

3 Associate Professor, Department of Law, Faculty of Law and Social Sciences, University of Tabriz , Tabriz, Iran.

Abstract

E-voting is considered to mean the further enhancement and strengthening of democratic processes in the information of modern societies. Electronic voting must first comply with the existing legal and regulatory framework. In addition, e-voting should be technically implemented in a way that specifies the requirements and regulations to reach the maximum number of users. As a result, the purpose of this article is twofold. In the first place (first), to identify the set of general requirements of the Constitution that must be considered when designing an electronic voting system for general elections. This set of requirements will lead to the acceptable design of the specific principles of a law for the electronic voting system. In the second stage (second), by identifying the process of logical integration, the requirements of the electronic voting system are determined. These requirements are the result of design principles that have already been identified. This research seeks to find the answer to the question whether the electronic voting scheme can meet the legal requirements as established in modern information societies. In addition, what differences can be made between different types of electronic voting system requirements? The results using the descriptive-analytical method and collecting library documents show that at present the possibility of electronic voting should be considered only as a complementary tool for traditional electoral processes. The main reason for this phenomenon is the digital divide, the inherent distrust of electronic voting, as well as the inadequacy of existing technology tools to meet certain requirements.

Keywords

Main Subjects

References

  1. 1- Azarbad, Babak and Haqshanas, Mohammad Javad, (2020) "Electronicization of elections and the transition to democracy, a comparative study of the consequences of this process in the United States and Iran", Islamic World Political Research Quarterly, Year 11, Number 1. (in Persian)

    2- Amiri Zargabad, Souda and Seyyed Hossein Malkuti Hashtjin, (2021) "Electronic Parliament and its role in the realization of democracy" Journal of Legal Research 2, No. 48. (in Persian)

    3- Fathian, Mohammad and Taqvi, Muniralsadat (2008), "Electronic Elections (Principles and Practices)", first edition, Research Center of the Islamic Council. (in Persian)

    4- Namdar Porbangar, Mustafa, Ebadullah Abbasi (2015), Labor Laws, first edition, Shahr Danesh Publications. (in Persian)

    1. Adler J., Internet Voting Primer (www.votehere.net/adacompliant/ whitepapers/primer).

    6.Burkert H., “Elektronische Demokratie: Einige staats und verfassungsrechtliche Anmerkungen“ (http://www.gmd.de/People/Herber t.Burkert/ARCHIV).

    1. Buttler R., et al., (2000)“A national-scale authentication infrastructure”, Computer, Vol. 33, no. 2, pp. 60- 65.
    2. California Institute of Technology – MIT(2001) , Voting: What is, what could be, Voting Technology Project.
    3. Cramer R., Franklin M., Schoenmakers B., Yung M.(1996), “Multiauthority secret ballot elections with linear work”, Lecture Notes in Computer Science, Vol. 1070, pp. 72-83, Springer-Verlag, Berlin.
    4. CyberVote (IST-1999-20338 project), Report on electronic democracy projects, legal issues of Internet voting and users requirements analysis, European Commission, IST Programme, 1999 (http://www.eucybervote.org).
    5. Digital Democracy Commission, (2015) Report of the Speaker’s Commission on Digital Democracy.
    6. European Commission, IST 2000 Programme, The Information Society for all, Final Report, Brussels 2000.
    7. e-VOTE (IST-2000-29518 project)(2000), Legal and regulatory issues on evoting and data protection in Europe, Deliverable D3.4, European Commission, IST Programme.
    8. Hoffman L., Cranor L., (2001)“Internet voting for public officials”, in Com. of the ACM, Vol. 44, no. 1, pp. 69- 71.
    9. Ikonomopoulos S., Gritzalis D., Lambrinoudakis C., Kokolakis S., Vassiliou C.(2002), “Functional requirements for a secure electronic voting system”, in Proc. of the 17th IFIP International Information Security Conference, M. Hadidi, et al. (Eds.), pp. 507-520, Kluwer Academics.
    10. International Working Group for Data Protection in Telecommunications (2001) , Common Position on the Use of the Internet in the Conduct of Elections, Berlin, September 2001.

    17 . Internet Policy Institute, Report of the National Workshop on Internet Voting: Issues and Research Agenda, March 2001 (http://www.internetpolicy.org/rese arch/e_voting_ report.pdf).

    1. Internet Policy Institute(2001) , Report of the National Workshop on Internet Voting: Issues and Research Agenda.
    2. Jacobson I., Booch G., Rumbaugh J.(1999), The Unified Software Development Process, Addison-Wesley.
    3. Jacobson I.(1993), Object-oriented software engineering - a use case driven approach, Addison-Wesley.
    4. Jones B.(2000), A report on the feasibility of Internet voting, Internet Voting Task Force, State of California.
    5. Larman G.(1998), Applying UML and patterns, Prentice-Hall.
    6. Mercuri R.(2000), “Voting automation?”, in Com. of the ACM, Vol. 43, no. 2, pp. 176.
    7. Mitrou L., Gritzalis D., Katsikas S.(2002), “Revisiting legal and regulatory requirements for secure e-voting”, in Proc. of the 17th IFIP International Information Security Conference, M. Hadidi, et al. (Eds.), pp. 469-480, Kluwer Academics.
    8. Phillips D., von Spakovsky H.(2001), “Gauging the risks of Internet elections”, in Com. of the ACM, Vol. 44, no. 1, pp. 73-85.
    9. Rational Corporation, The Rational Unified Process. (http://www.rational.com/products/ rup/index.jsp)
    10. Rüß O., Wahlen im Internet, quelle multimedia und recht (http://www. Internetwahlen.de/project/ruess. html).
    11. Schoenmakers B.(1999), “A simple publicly verifiable secret sharing scheme and its application to electronic voting”, in Lecture Notes in Computer Science, Vol. 1666, pp. 148-164, Springer-Verlag.
    12. Schoenmakers B., Compensating for a lack of transparency. (http://citeseer.nj.nec.com/ schoenmakers 00compensating.html).
    13. Simons A., Graham I.(1998), 37 things that don’t work in object-oriented modelling with UML, Technical Report TUM-I9813, Technical University of Munich.
    14. Tauss J., Kollbeck J., e-vote: Die elektronische Briefwahl als ein Beitrag zur Verbesserung der Partizipationsmöglichkeiten (www.tauss.de/bn/e-vote.html).
    15. The Swedish Government, Internet Voting - Final Report from the Election Technique Commission, 2000 (http://www.justitie.regeringen.se/p ropositionermm/sou/pdf/sou2000_ 125.pdf(.
    16. Thomas M. Buchsbaum,(2004) “E-Voting: International Developments and Lessons Learnt, Expatriates Division”, paper presented on Conference: Electronic Voting in Europe - Technology, Law, Politics and Society, Workshop of the ESF TED Programme together with GI and OCG 4.
    17. United Sates, State of California, A Report on the Feasibility of Internet Voting, January 2000 (http://www.ss.ca.gov/executive/ivo te/)
Journal of Comparative Law
Volume 6, Issue 2 - Serial Number 10
October 2022
Pages 185-208

Files

History

  • Receive Date: 15 May 2022
  • Revise Date: 30 June 2022
  • Accept Date: 31 August 2022

Share

How to cite

Statistics