A GNA feature by Francis Ameyibor
Accra, July 6, 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 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.
