The Critique of Postal or Mail Voting in terms of Election Security

Öz

Postal voting is one of alternative remote voting methods, of which prevalence gradually increases among the contemporary democracies. That said, to date, it has not received the attention that it deserves-in Turkish and international research literature. This study seeks to examine the risks of postal voting experienced where it is operated and of the threats to which it pose to the integrity of elections. To do so, the study at first focuses on the main structural characteristic which distinguishes the postal voting from the others. Then, the scope of this voting method among the EU member states and the states of USA in particular is identified. After I recommend a three-constituent analysis which help us differentiate each method from the rest, three sources of problem as intrinsic to postal voting are argued. These are the necessity of an agency, time gap and control gap. Each source of problem is assessed in light of the experiences of the countries and the problems which are often encountered. While some problems of postal voting appears to be figured out permanently, some were found to be in the nature always posing a threat. The absolute protection of the secrecy of the vote against the third persons in particular does not seem to be viable under the usual operation of the method.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• postal voting
• voting methods
• elections
• integrity of elections
• secret vote
• mail
• ballot

Seçimlerin Güvenliği Bağlamında Posta ya da Mektup Yoluyla Oylamanın Kritiği

Öz

Posta yoluyla oylama, günümüz demokrasilerinde yaygınlığı giderek artan alternatif uzaktan oylama yöntemlerinden biri olarak öne çıkmaktadır. Buna karşın bu yöntem gerek yabancı gerekse Türkçe literatürde gerektiği ilgiyi henüz görmemiştir. Bu çalışma posta oylamasının uygulayıcı ülkelerde sorun olarak karşılaşılan ve seçimlerin güvenliğine tehdit oluşturabilecek risklerini karşılaştırmalı bir yöntemle mercek altına almaktadır. Bunun için, çalışma öncelikle posta oylamasının diğer alternatif yöntemlerden ayrışan ana yapısal karakterini ele almıştır. Ardından AB üye ülkeleri ve ABD eyaletleri özelinde bu oylama yönteminin kapsamı ve kimlerin yararlanabildiği tespit edilmiştir. Oylama yöntemlerini birbirinden ayırt etmemize yarayacak üç unsurlu bir çözümleme önerdikten sonra, posta oylamasına özgü yine üç adet sorun kaynağı ortaya konmuştur. Bunlar vasıta zorunluluğu, zaman boşluğu ve kontrol boşluğu. Her bir sorun kaynağı, ülkelerin uygulamaları ve sıkça karşılaşılan sorunlar ışığında incelenmiştir. Posta oylamasında kimi sorunlar temelden çözülebilecek nitelikte görünmekteyken, bazılarıysa devamlı düzeyde tehlike arz etmeye uygun yapıda bulunmuştur. Özellikle gizli oy ilkesinin üçüncü kişilere karşı boyutuyla mutlak şekilde korunması yöntemin olağan akışı içinde mümkün görünmemektedir.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• posta oylaması
• oylama usulleri
• seçimler
• seçimlerin dürüstlüğü
• gizli oy
• mektup
• pusula

Kaynakça

1. BERNHAGEN, Patrick/MICHAEL, Marsh (2007) “Voting and Protesting: Explaining Citizen Participation in Old and New European Democracies”, Democratization, C:14, S:1, s.44-72.
2. BLAIS, Andre/ RUBENSON, Daniel (2013) “The Source of Turnout Decline: New Values or New Contexts?”, Comparative Political Studies, C.46, S.1, s.95-117.
3. BRADY, Henry E./VERBA, Sidney/SCHOLZMAN, Kay L. (1995) “Beyond SES: A resource model of political participation?”, American Political Science Review, S:89, s.271-294.
4. FEDDERSEN, Timothy J. (2004) “Rational Choice Theory and the Paradox of Not Voting”, Journal of Economic Perspect, C:18, S:1, s.99-112.
5. FORTIER, John C./ORNSTEIN, Norman J. (2003) “The Absentee Ballot and the Secret Ballot: Challenges for Election Reform”, University of Michigan Journal of Law Reform, C: 36, s.483-516.
6. GRAY, Mark/CAUL, Miki (2000) “Declining voter turnout in advanced industrial democracies, 1950 to 1997”, Comparative Political Studies, C:33, S:9, s.1091-1122.
7. GRONKE, Paul/GALANES-ROSENBAUM, Eva/ MILLER, Peter A./TOFFEY, Daniel (2008) “Convenience Voting”, Annual Review Political Science, S:11, s. 437-455.
8. HEINMAA, Anika/KALANDADZE, Nana (2020) “Special Voting Arrangements in Europe: Postal, Early and Mobile Voting”, International Institute for Democracy and Electoral Assistance, Webinar series report, s. 1-35.

9. IMAI, Kosuke/KING, Gary (2004) “Did Illegal Overseas Absentee Ballots Decide the 2000 U.S. Presidential Election?”, Perspectives on Politics, S: 2, s.537-549.
10. JACKIEWICZ, Andrzej (2016) “Postal Voting and Voting by Proxy as an Alternative Voting Methods in the Light of the Electoral Code in Poland”, Białostockie Studia Prawnicze, C: 20/A, s. 261-271.
11. JACKMAN, Robert W. (1987) “Political institutions and voter turnout in the industrial democracies”, American Political Science Review, S:81, s.403-423.
12. JACKMAN, Robert W./MILLER, Ross A. (1995) “Voter turnout in the industrial democracies during the 1980s?”, Comparative Political Studies, C:27, S:4, s.467-492.
13. KILLER, Christian/STILLER, Burkhard (2019) “The Swiss Postal Voting Process and its System and Security Analysis”, Communication Systems Group CSG, Department of Informatics IfI, Universitat Zurich UZH, s.134-149.
14. LEE, Sal H. (2020) "Judicial Review of Absentee Voting Laws: How Courts Should Balance State Interests against the Fundamental Right to Vote Going Forward.", Iowa Law Review, C:105, S:2, s. 799-826.
15. LOTT, John R. (2020) Why Do Most Countries Ban Mail-In Ballots?: They Have Seen Massive Vote Fraud Problems, Crime Prevention Research Center.
16. LUPIÁÑEZ-VILLANUEVA, Francisco/DEVAUX, Axelle (editörler) (2018) “Study on the Benefits and Drawbacks of Remote Voting”, European Commission.
17. QVORTRUP, Matt (2005) “First Past the Postman: Voting by Mail in Comparative Perspective”, The Political Quarterly, C:76, S:3, s.414-419.
18. RADCLIFF, Benjamin (1992) “The welfare state, turnout and the economy: A comparative analysis?”, American Political Science Review C:86, S:2, s.444-454.
19. RALLINGS, Colin/THRASHER, Michael (2009) “Postal vote verification and rejections in Great Britain: European and local elections 2009”, LGC Elections Centre.
20. STEWART, Charles (2020) How We Voted in 2020: A First Look at the Survey of the Performance of American Elections, MIT Election Data, s.1-34.
21. STEWART, John (2006) “A Banana Republic? The Investigation into Electoral Fraud by the Birmingham Election Court”, Parliamentary Affairs, C:59, S:4, s.654-667.
22. SULLIVAN, Kate (2020) “Impact of COVID-19 on the 2020 US presidential election”, International Institute for Democracy and Electoral Assistance.
23. THOMPSON, Dennis F. (2008) “Electoral Simultaneity: Expressing Equal Respect”, Journal of Social Issues, C:64, S:3, s. 487-501.
24. TOADER, Tudorel/SAFTA, Marieta (2016) “Constitutional Court of Romania: Postal Voting”, Vienna Journal on International Constitutional Law / ICL Journal 228, C:10, S:2, s.228-235.
25. TOKAJI, Daniel P./COLKER, Ruth (2007) “Absentee Voting by People with Disabilities: Promoting Access and Integrity”, McGeorge Law Review, C.38, S:4, s. 1015-1064.
26. UBEROI, Elise (2015) Postal voting, House of Commons Library, Briefing Paper, S:7419, s.1-21.
27. VASHCHANKA, Vasil (2020) “Political manoeuvres and legal conundrums amid the COVID-19 pandemic: the 2020 presidential election in Poland”, International Institute for Democracy and Electoral Assistance.
28. WAGNER, Aiko/LICHTEBLAU, Josephine (2020) “Germany Going Postal? Comparing Postal and Election Day Voters in the 2017 German Federal Election”, German Politics, s.1-24.
29. WAGNER, Rebecca (2020) “Responding to COVID-19 with 100 per cent postal voting: Local elections in Bavaria, Germany”, International Institute for Democracy and Electoral Assistance.