Integrity & Observation
The Vote phase must be credible under adversarial conditions. This chapter defines the integrity safeguards and observation architecture required to make outcomes defensible.
Objectives
- Prevent or deter coercion, fraud, and manipulation.
- Provide independent evidence about process integrity.
- Detect anomalies early enough to correct them.
- Create a record that can withstand post-result contestation.
Integrity Threats (Baseline Assumptions)
Design should assume:
- intimidation and retaliation threats against voters and officials,
- administrative manipulation (selective exclusion, “missing” registrants),
- disinformation and fabricated incident claims,
- cyberattacks on registration, reporting, or tabulation systems,
- physical disruption of polling and transport.
Observation Mission: Requirements
An observation mission must have:
1. Independence
- Governance that prevents capture.
- Funding and logistics that avoid single-party dependence.
2. Access
- Freedom to visit polling sites, counting sites, and registration centers.
- Ability to interview stakeholders without intimidation.
- Access to key documents and procedures (within privacy limits).
3. Coverage and Sampling Plan
- Deployment coverage targets (e.g., % of sites covered).
- Statistically meaningful sampling where full coverage is impossible.
- Explicit monitoring of high-risk areas and displaced voting sites.
4. Reporting Authority
- Right to publish findings on a defined schedule.
- Ability to flag urgent integrity concerns in real-time.
- Transparent methodology disclosures (what was observed, how, and limitations).
5. Coordination with Security and Monitoring Systems
- Channels to report threats and intimidation incidents.
- Integration with Freeze monitoring when violence affects voting safety.
Anti-Coercion Package (Minimum)
A credible anti-coercion design includes:
- Secret ballot protections (procedural and physical).
- Safeguards against “supervised voting” by coercers.
- Protections for election workers and observers.
- Rapid response for intimidation claims (hotline + investigation).
- Safe reporting mechanisms for vulnerable groups.
- Rules for invalidating or re-running compromised precincts.
Track coercion with:
- Complaint volume and category breakdown.
- Geographic clustering of threats.
- Incident severity and recurrence.
- Correlation with turnout anomalies (as a flag).
Audit and Integrity Checks (Minimum)
Even with observers, you need auditability:
- Chain-of-custody documentation for ballots/records.
- Reconciliation checks (issued vs returned vs counted).
- Risk-limiting audit or defined recount triggers.
- Independent review of tabulation software (if used).
- Logs that are tamper-evident and time-stamped (where feasible).
Transparency: What Should Be Published
Publish, at minimum:
- Rulebook and procedures (version-locked).
- Observer mission methodology and reports.
- Aggregate participation and turnout statistics.
- Incident and complaint summaries (privacy-protected).
- Audit results and reconciliation summaries.
- Final results with clear aggregation logic.
Keep restricted:
- Personally identifiable voter data.
- Information that increases physical security risk.
- Sensitive cyber defense details.
(See Data Governance)
Integration with Dispute Resolution
Integrity findings must have procedural consequences:
- Observer flags can trigger investigations.
- Defined thresholds trigger recounts or reruns.
- Timelines are enforced to prevent indefinite contestation.
See: Dispute Resolution
