top of page

The experience of the automatic electoral system in Russia

  • gisproject
  • Mar 26, 2017
  • 4 min read

an introduction Recent developments in the democratization of Russia have created the need for a new approach to elections. For this reason, the Central Electoral Commission of the Russian Federation is considering a modern approach to the administration and organization of elections. However, the unique circumstances of the country, such as the breadth of its territory, the large number of time zones, the unequal distribution of its population and the different levels of development of the infrastructure and means of transport in its various regions, all affected the search for a solution to organize the elections. At present there are 105 million voters in Russia. More than 90,000 polling stations are created during the elections, and more than one million people participate in organizing and holding elections. As a result, the Electoral Commission faces numerous organizational and technological problems associated with the preparation and conduct of transparent democratic elections, which also incur high financial costs. The preparation of voter lists, the conduct of pre-election campaigns, the processing and distribution of election results and the transparency of elections are crucial. The unavoidable complexities of using modern technology can have serious political and economic consequences. The decree of the President of the Russian Federation on the establishment of an automated system of State elections was issued on 23 August 1994. Since then, an intensive process has been undertaken to develop new Russian electoral technologies and a phased process to implement a new electoral system. The first components of the new system were used during the elections of the Russian Duma deputies on 17 December 1995. In June 1996, during the pilot use of its first flight, the system was used to prepare and conduct presidential elections for more than 80 per cent of the entities of the Russian Federation. The system was used primarily to prepare voter lists and summarize the initial results of the voting process. However, the system was effective during this period. During the elections of the heads of branches of the executive branch, deputies of the legislative councils and local administrations (October-December 1996), the system was implemented in 75 (out of 89) entities of the Russian Federation. The operational experience of the use of the system in the entities of the Russian Federation has proved its efficiency, comprehensiveness and flexibility in resolving specific local problems, when new software has been developed taking into account specific local conditions and local legislation. The state program for the development of the state electoral automation system was implemented between 1996 and 2000. At the time of writing, the system had already been implemented in 88 Russian Federation entities, almost all Russian territory. Its scope of use, number of technical equipment and technological solutions place it in the country's largest computer network. In terms of its practical potential, its software and its comprehensive structural structure, it is the leading information and communication system in Russia. System resources and resources More than 6000 computers have been configured to form one system. Of these, 90 local networks have been established, which in turn unite more than 300 automated work stations. This system can verify the validity of the ballot, protect the results of the vote from fraud, and display the results of the elections in all regions of the country at the moment of issuance. On the day of elections, the use of scanners allows screening of the results of different voting types only 20-25 minutes after issuance. The results of the provisional vote can then be transferred to the Central Electoral Commission in the form of statistics, diagrams, textual, audio and visual information and sent quickly, after processing, to the media. To provide a high level of sustainability and diversity, several different assistive elements have been introduced into the system. These technologies and assistive devices comprise a long list, ranging from various types of indoor furnishing to polling places and centers, to technologies for the production of high-quality printing with high fraud protection, electronic fingerprint identification devices and sound counting machines. In periods where there are no elections, these resources are used mainly in: Communication between departments at different levels and support for their work Providing information resources to departments Principles and characteristics of configuration and maintenance The system has a multi-level hierarchical structure, in which automated devices are connected by e-mail to a single computer network. The use of various communication channels (including digital and satellite channels) allows the system to operate in real time. The first session of the system serves as a technical basis for computer networks at the four main levels: the Central Electoral Commission, the Electoral Commission of the Russian Federation entities, the Local Electoral Commission and the Regional Electoral Commission (see chart 1). The hierarchy of the system is similar to the organizational structure of the electoral commissions:

Information Network of the Central Election Commission and the Federal Information Center Information centers of the electoral commissions of the entities of the Russian Federation The information services provided by the local electoral committees governing the elections of the federal bodies of the state authority Media Centers for Regional Electoral Commissions. Although LANs that are used at the lower levels always have unified software and communication rules, they differ from each other in their characteristics and configuration. For example, the core (low-level) networks of regional electoral commissions are manufactured in six different models in their peripheral characteristics and number of printers, depending on the density of the information flow and the number of voters in each region.


 
 
 

Comments


bottom of page