Skip to main content

My Vote, My (Personal) Data: Remote Electronic Voting and the General Data Protection Regulation

  • Conference paper
  • First Online:
Electronic Voting (E-Vote-ID 2020)

Part of the book series: Lecture Notes in Computer Science ((LNSC,volume 12455))

Included in the following conference series:

Abstract

On 19 September 2019, the Data Protection Authority of the Åland Islands (in Finland) published its findings on the data processing audit for the autonomous region’s parliamentary election special internet voting procedure. It claimed that there were faults in the documentation provided by the processor, which in turn meant that the election’s integrity could not be guaranteed without further precautions from the government of the Åland Islands. Since the European Union’s General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) entered into force in May 2018, it has set new critical requirements for remote electronic voting projects. Yet, to date, no specific guidance nor research has been conducted on the impact of GDPR on remote electronic voting. Tacking stock of two recent internet voting experiences in the Åland Islands and France, this paper aims at identifying and understanding these new requirements. More specifically, based on these two case studies it analyses four different challenges on the processing of personal data in remote electronic voting under the GDPR: the definitions and categories of personal data processed in online voting projects; the separation of duties between data controllers and data processors; the secure processing of (sensitive) personal data, including the use of anonymisation and pseudonymisation techniques; as well as post-election processing of personal data, and possible limits to (universal) verifiability and public access to personal data.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 39.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 54.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    All translations from the original reports in Swedish by the author, using an online tool.

  2. 2.

    According to Krimmer et al. (2019: 9): “In Åland, it is not the government itself, but a particular agency, ÅDA, which is acting as the procurement agent being in charge of the procurement process with the Government as the “real” customer”.

  3. 3.

    All translations from the original reports in French by the author.

  4. 4.

    For the applicability of European data protection law there is no need for actual identification of the data subject: it is sufficient that the person concerned is identifiable.

  5. 5.

    Under the GDPR, “processors must maintain a record of all categories of processing activities to demonstrate compliance with their obligations under the regulation” (art. 30.2). Processors are also required to implement appropriate technical and organisational measures to ensure the security of processing (art. 32), to appoint a Data Protection Officer (DPO) in certain situations (art. 37), and to notify data breaches to the controller (art. 33.2).

  6. 6.

    Which is necessary to “to guarantee that all votes have been cast by eligible voters and that only the appropriate number of remote electronic votes per voter gets counted” (Scytl 2019: 38).

  7. 7.

    Recital 26 of the GDPR explicitly includes a scenario where it is foreseeable that further data recipients, other than the immediate data user, may attempt to identify the individuals (EU Agency for Fundamental Rights and Council of Europe 2018: 91).

  8. 8.

    Contrary to good practice (Council of Europe 2017c: 9.b), in France once a voter has cast an i-vote, they cannot cast a second vote in person to cancel it.

  9. 9.

    Universal verifiability refers to “tools which allow any interested person to verify that votes are counted as recorded” (Council of Europe 2017b: 56).

  10. 10.

    That is so even if an “appeal shall be sent to a competent Provincial Administrative Court within 14 days from the confirmation of the election results” (Election Act for Åland, Section 102).

References

Download references

Acknowledgments

This work has received funding from the European Commission under the auspices of PROMETHEUS Project, Horizon 2020 Research and Innovation action (Grant Agreement No. 780701).

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Adrià Rodríguez-Pérez .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2020 Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this paper

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this paper

Rodríguez-Pérez, A. (2020). My Vote, My (Personal) Data: Remote Electronic Voting and the General Data Protection Regulation. In: Krimmer, R., et al. Electronic Voting. E-Vote-ID 2020. Lecture Notes in Computer Science(), vol 12455. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-60347-2_11

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-60347-2_11

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-030-60346-5

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-030-60347-2

  • eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics