The deployment of new electronic voting systems in Georgia as the country faces a critical election brings with it a number of risks. 

With less than a month to go before the 2024 parliamentary elections on 26 October, Georgia’s voters are facing a critical juncture with the potential to transform the country’s immediate and long-term future.

Alongside an unprecedented political landscape and a first ever fully proportional election, voters will also be faced with large-scale use of electronic voting technologies, following a decision made by the Central Election Commission (CEC) in February 2023. 

The announcement that 90% of voters would cast their votes electronically was made in response to EU and OSCE demands, and these technologies, including voter verification machines and electronic vote counting and tabulation systems, aim to enhance the efficiency, accuracy, and transparency of the electoral process. 

But the rapid rollout of these technologies presents several challenges, with the unprecedented scale of their implementation in Georgia raising concerns about potential technical issues and operational difficulties. Observers have reported problems including technical malfunctions and insufficient preparation among electoral officials, which could, alongside other factors specific to the new systems, undermine the credibility of the election results.

Consequently, it is looking increasingly likely that without sufficient preparation, the new technologies could provide a further risk in an already fraught election. 

Voter education

Effective voter education is crucial for the success of Georgia’s electoral reforms, particularly in relation to new electronic voting technology and updated voting procedures. 

One key change is a new rule for ballot validity: previously, any marking that clearly expressed a voter’s will was accepted, but now only ballots with a clear mark inside the relevant circle will be considered valid. It is vital that voters are fully informed about the change, to ensure that they are able to cast their votes effectively. 

However, political turmoil and controversy over recent government measures have diverted attention from voter education, creating a risk of confusion at the polls. To address this, election authorities need to conduct robust information campaigns, especially in rural and marginalised areas, to ensure voters are fully informed about the new voting process and rules.

Procedural changes

The change in technology has also affected voting procedures, including an increase in the maximum number of voters per polling precinct from 1,500 to 3,000. 

This change, combined with insufficient space in some polling stations, will lead to longer queues and potential delays. Observation of previous pilot tests of electronic technologies in Georgia have revealed that inadequate space and poorly designed voting booths could compromise the secrecy of the vote, with nearby individuals potentially able to observe voters’ choices. Addressing these issues requires better planning and design to ensure that the voting process remains secure and efficient.

There are also concerns that those working to facilitate the vote will not be adequately prepared for their new responsibilities. 

Effectively managing electronic voting technologies requires specialised skills and training, which pilot tests indicated may not be uniformly available across all polling stations. Technical issues related to the use of these technologies have been a concern, with some precincts struggling to manage the new technologies effectively. 

Inadequate training and support for election officials could lead to inconsistencies and operational difficulties, impacting the efficiency and accuracy of the voting process. Providing comprehensive training and support is essential for the smooth operation of the electoral process.

Disinformation and misinformation

The introduction of electronic voting has also prompted the spread of disinformation and misinformation on the subject (particularly on social media), which threatens the integrity of the electoral process. 

False claims about electronic voting have already gained traction. Some have suggested that electronic systems compromise vote secrecy, falsely claiming that individual votes can be tracked or manipulated. Additionally, misleading rumours about online voting persist, despite the fact that Georgia does not have internet voting. Both claims potentially threaten to decrease the number of voters voting in the elections. 

Combatting such false narratives requires a proactive approach. Election authorities and civil society organisations must work together to deliver clear and accurate information, dispelling such dangerous myths. For example, it is critical that voters are aware that the system is not fully electronic, with the digitalised process still preceding a manual count. 

Public education campaigns, media outreach, and real-time fact-checking are essential to ensuring voters’ trust, vote integrity, and understanding of how their votes are protected.

Effects on observer organisations

New voting technology also affects the work of observer organisations, creating a need for clear procedures and definitions of their new mandates, which Georgia’s election legislation currently lacks. 

This gap has led to significant resistance from the CEC and obstacles for observers. For instance, issues have arisen concerning the reception and sorting of election documentation and the digitalisation of ballots, with some observers facing restrictions that threaten their ability to fully monitor the process. 

For example, during the Gori pilot in October 2023, the Centre for Development and Democracy (CDD) observers were not allowed to observe the reception, sorting, and digitalisation of election materials by the district election commission. 

The Election Code mandates that the Election Commission provide conditions for observers to exercise their authority comprehensively, but recent experiences of hostility towards observer organisations and aggressive rhetoric from the ruling party have shown a deviation from best practices, with some restrictions on observation activities not previously encountered. To maintain transparency and trust, it is crucial to clearly define the role and powers of observer organisations, allowing them to monitor both procedural and technical aspects of the entire electoral process in line with international standards.

More broadly, transparency and inclusivity are fundamental to maintaining public trust in the electoral process. The introduction of new technologies and procedural changes must be accompanied by transparent practices and open communication. All stakeholders, including international observers, local civil society organisations, and the general public, should have access to information and be able to participate in monitoring the electoral process, so it is seen as fair and credible.

The impact of recent political developments

The political environment leading up to the 2024 elections has been marked by significant turmoil, including widespread protests and the adoption of controversial laws reminiscent of Russian legislation used to suppress criticism and crush civil society. 

These factors have overshadowed the electoral reforms, leaving voter education and procedural readiness neglected. In addition to the direct impact on its implementation, the political climate is likely to affect public perception of the new electoral processes and their integrity, making it imperative that election authorities address such concerns proactively and effectively. 

The 26 October parliamentary elections mark a crucial point in Georgia’s democratic journey, alongside which the shift to a fully proportional system and the widespread use of electronic voting technologies offer both opportunities and challenges. 

To ensure a fair and credible process, it is vital that the electoral authorities and civil society organisations address key issues that could significantly affect people’s participation in the elections. As tension and controversy mount, transparency, inclusivity, and effective management will be key to maintaining public trust and supporting Georgia’s democracy.