The risk of voter coercion (voter interference, bribery, vote selling) exists when a voter can demonstrate how they have voted in a given election. It’s a difficult risk to mitigate because robust election systems have to reconcile privacy and security requirements that both guarantee the correctness of election results and the inability of voters to prove how they have voted. All voting media are susceptible to voter coercion. Mobile voting is no different in this regard.
However, before delving deeper into a discussion on the implications of secure mobile voting on voter coercion, it’s important to understand the societal measures that lead to voter interference. Ignoring these contextual dimensions allows for baseless arguments that blockchain mobile voting affords more opportunities for voter interference than traditional medium like paper voting, polling place voting, and postal voting.
This is because digitally enabled voting has historically been treated with adversarial and unsympathetic skepticism and consequently held to a higher theoretical standard than other media of voting: