建议CM/Rec(2017)5中关于应用于其他远程投票渠道的电子投票标准所确立的原则

Robert Müller-Török
{"title":"建议CM/Rec(2017)5中关于应用于其他远程投票渠道的电子投票标准所确立的原则","authors":"Robert Müller-Török","doi":"10.5817/MUJLT2019-1-1","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"E-voting is highly suspicious to many citizens and institutions. Past pilot implementations ended before Supreme Courts and mostly not in favour of e-voting. Beside these political and legal battles regarding e-voting, postal voting seems to be commonly accepted and not in question. Motivated by a landmark ruling of the Austrian Constitutional Court in 2016, which led to the revocation of the run-off elections result due to irregularities with postal voting, this paper analyses whether current postal voting regulations and standards in Germany comply to the principles established by the latest Council of Europe (CoE) recommendation on standards for e-voting. Both voting channels are channels for remote voting, hence principles established for one channel must, in the view of the author, also be fully applicable for the other channel. This paper applies the standards set by the recommendation to e-voting to the more commonly used remote voting channel postal voting and concludes that most of these standards cannot be met.","PeriodicalId":38294,"journal":{"name":"Masaryk University Journal of Law and Technology","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2019-06-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"3","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The Principles Established by the Recommendation CM/Rec(2017)5 on Standards for E-voting Applied to Other Channels of Remote Voting\",\"authors\":\"Robert Müller-Török\",\"doi\":\"10.5817/MUJLT2019-1-1\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"E-voting is highly suspicious to many citizens and institutions. Past pilot implementations ended before Supreme Courts and mostly not in favour of e-voting. Beside these political and legal battles regarding e-voting, postal voting seems to be commonly accepted and not in question. Motivated by a landmark ruling of the Austrian Constitutional Court in 2016, which led to the revocation of the run-off elections result due to irregularities with postal voting, this paper analyses whether current postal voting regulations and standards in Germany comply to the principles established by the latest Council of Europe (CoE) recommendation on standards for e-voting. Both voting channels are channels for remote voting, hence principles established for one channel must, in the view of the author, also be fully applicable for the other channel. This paper applies the standards set by the recommendation to e-voting to the more commonly used remote voting channel postal voting and concludes that most of these standards cannot be met.\",\"PeriodicalId\":38294,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Masaryk University Journal of Law and Technology\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2019-06-30\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"3\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Masaryk University Journal of Law and Technology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.5817/MUJLT2019-1-1\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Masaryk University Journal of Law and Technology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5817/MUJLT2019-1-1","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 3

摘要

许多公民和机构对电子投票持高度怀疑态度。过去的试点实施在最高法院之前就结束了,而且大多不支持电子投票。除了这些关于电子投票的政治和法律斗争,邮政投票似乎被普遍接受,没有问题。2016年,奥地利宪法法院做出了一项具有里程碑意义的裁决,由于邮政投票存在违规行为,导致第二轮选举结果被撤销。本文以这一裁决为背景,分析了德国现行的邮政投票法规和标准是否符合欧洲委员会(CoE)关于电子投票标准的最新建议所确立的原则。两个投票渠道都是远程投票的渠道,因此笔者认为,为一个渠道建立的原则也必须完全适用于另一个渠道。本文将电子投票建议所设定的标准应用到更常用的远程投票渠道邮政投票中,发现大多数标准都不能满足。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
The Principles Established by the Recommendation CM/Rec(2017)5 on Standards for E-voting Applied to Other Channels of Remote Voting
E-voting is highly suspicious to many citizens and institutions. Past pilot implementations ended before Supreme Courts and mostly not in favour of e-voting. Beside these political and legal battles regarding e-voting, postal voting seems to be commonly accepted and not in question. Motivated by a landmark ruling of the Austrian Constitutional Court in 2016, which led to the revocation of the run-off elections result due to irregularities with postal voting, this paper analyses whether current postal voting regulations and standards in Germany comply to the principles established by the latest Council of Europe (CoE) recommendation on standards for e-voting. Both voting channels are channels for remote voting, hence principles established for one channel must, in the view of the author, also be fully applicable for the other channel. This paper applies the standards set by the recommendation to e-voting to the more commonly used remote voting channel postal voting and concludes that most of these standards cannot be met.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
1.00
自引率
0.00%
发文量
9
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信