Принцип таємного голосування
Loading...
Date
2017
Authors
Ключковський, Юрій
Journal Title
Journal ISSN
Volume Title
Publisher
Abstract
Розглянуто місце принципу таємних виборів у системі принципів виборчого права як інституційного принципу, пов'язаного з принципом вільних виборів. Суть принципу розкрито як заборону розголошення чи повідомлення іншим особам змісту волевиявлення виборця. Принцип таємного голосування існує у двох формах. Слабка форма, прийнята в Україні, розглядає таємність змісту волевиявлення як право виборця, тоді як сильна форма вимагає від виборця збереження таємниці власного голосу.
Показано, що альтернативні форми голосування допускають послаблення гарантій таємного голосування на користь принципу загального виборчого права.
The principle of secret suffrage is considered according to its position in the system of electoral law principles. Referring to the principle of secret suffrage as a principle of electoral law as a whole is explained with historical reasons. Nowadays it should be considered as an institutional principle of the legal institute of voting connected with the principle of free elections. The essence of the principle is shown to be a prohibition to disclose or report the contents of the elector’s vote to other persons. As a result, it includes requirements of absence of any control of the contents of the elector’s vote and the elector’s irresponsibility for his/her vote. The secret suffrage principle could exist in two forms – weak and strong. The weak form of the principle, which is adopted in Ukraine, interprets the secrecy of the vote contents as the elector’s right and is considered as an obligation for only other persons to keep the elector’s vote secrecy. Such a form of the secrecy principle does not prevent voluntary disclosure by an elector of the way he/she has voted; thus, it allows different manipulative technologies distorting the election results. The strong form of the secrecy principle requires an elector to keep secrecy of his/her own vote contents, which makes the mentioned technologies illegal. Guaranteeing the secret suffrage depends on the conditions in which the electors’ voting is held. The standard voting, mode when an elector votes in special premises where the election commission and observers are present, is qualified as “voting in the controlled environment,” which permits to keep secrecy of voting. Using alternative voting modes means refusing to vote in the controlled environment, which is followed with essential weakening of secret suffrage guarantees. The distant voting modes (postal voting and Internet e-voting) are especially threatening the secrecy of voting due to the elector’s voting in an uncontrolled environment. Alternative modes are shown to allow weakening the secret suffrage guarantees on a benefit of universality of the right to vote. Thus, under using alternative voting modes, the principle of secret suffrage conflicts with the universal suffrage principle. The way this conflict is solved determines voting modes acceptable in the frames of the national election law.
The principle of secret suffrage is considered according to its position in the system of electoral law principles. Referring to the principle of secret suffrage as a principle of electoral law as a whole is explained with historical reasons. Nowadays it should be considered as an institutional principle of the legal institute of voting connected with the principle of free elections. The essence of the principle is shown to be a prohibition to disclose or report the contents of the elector’s vote to other persons. As a result, it includes requirements of absence of any control of the contents of the elector’s vote and the elector’s irresponsibility for his/her vote. The secret suffrage principle could exist in two forms – weak and strong. The weak form of the principle, which is adopted in Ukraine, interprets the secrecy of the vote contents as the elector’s right and is considered as an obligation for only other persons to keep the elector’s vote secrecy. Such a form of the secrecy principle does not prevent voluntary disclosure by an elector of the way he/she has voted; thus, it allows different manipulative technologies distorting the election results. The strong form of the secrecy principle requires an elector to keep secrecy of his/her own vote contents, which makes the mentioned technologies illegal. Guaranteeing the secret suffrage depends on the conditions in which the electors’ voting is held. The standard voting, mode when an elector votes in special premises where the election commission and observers are present, is qualified as “voting in the controlled environment,” which permits to keep secrecy of voting. Using alternative voting modes means refusing to vote in the controlled environment, which is followed with essential weakening of secret suffrage guarantees. The distant voting modes (postal voting and Internet e-voting) are especially threatening the secrecy of voting due to the elector’s voting in an uncontrolled environment. Alternative modes are shown to allow weakening the secret suffrage guarantees on a benefit of universality of the right to vote. Thus, under using alternative voting modes, the principle of secret suffrage conflicts with the universal suffrage principle. The way this conflict is solved determines voting modes acceptable in the frames of the national election law.
Description
Keywords
таємне голосування, вільні вибори, дистанційні способи голосування, електронне голосування, secret suffrage, free elections, voting act, standard voting mode, distant voting modes, post
voting, e-voting, стаття
Citation
Ключковський Ю. Б. Принцип таємного голосування / Ключковський Ю. Б. // Наукові записки НаУКМА. Юридичні науки. - 2017. - Т. 200. - С. 32-40.