Search

Copyright of Acta Iuris Stetinensis is the property of University of Szczecin Press / Wydawnictwo Naukowe Uniwersytetu Szczecinskiego and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

The study undertakes a nuanced exploration of Pakistan's constitutional and legal intricacies governing the timing of general elections, employing a multifaceted approach. The objective is to comprehensively analyze key constitutional provisions, including Article 48(5a), 51(5), 153, 219, 222, 224 and 254. Methodologically, a qualitative research design is employed, delving into legal documents, historical records, and scholarly literature. Despite recent amendments to Section 57(1) of the Election Act 2017, granting exclusive authority to the Election Commission of Pakistan (ECP), results reveal persistent debates within the legal community. It emphasizes the supremacy of constitutional principles and recommends invoking the Advisory Jurisdiction of the Supreme Court of Pakistan under constitutional Article 186 to interpret Article 48(5a), 51(5), 153, 219, 222, 224 and 254. Swift legislative reforms are recommended for transparent elections, necessitating a comprehensive legal framework and heightened public awareness. This research underscores the imperative need for legal clarity and reform to fortify Pakistan's electoral system. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The text is a report on a conference titled "Elections and Electoral Law. Standards, Safeguards, Practice" held in Pozna¿, Poland. The conference aimed to facilitate the exchange of ideas and research on various topics related to elections and electoral law. It featured speakers from different fields, including academia, election administration, judiciary, legal professionals, non-governmental organizations, and politicians. The report provides an overview of the opening panel and the first three plenary sessions, highlighting the topics discussed and the presentations made by the speakers. The report concludes by expressing optimism for the future continuation of the conference. [Extracted from the article]

In this paper, we argue that the widespread practice in the United States of busing voters to the polling station on Election Day is an instance of paying people to vote. We defend a definition of what it means to pay people to vote, and on this definition, busing voters to the polling station is an instance of paying people to vote. Paying people to vote is illegal according to United States federal election law. However, the United States courts have historically considered the practice of busing voters to the polling station legally permissible. The United States legal system, therefore, faces a dilemma: either the courts must change their interpretation of current federal election law such that busing voters to the polling station is a violation of federal election law, or federal election law must be changed so that at least some instances of paying people to vote are legally permissible. We argue that choosing either horn of the dilemma has a controversial implication for the United States legal system. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

American elections currently run on outdated and vulnerable technology. Computer science researchers have shown that voting machines and other election equipment used in many jurisdictions are plagued by serious security flaws, or euen shipped with basic safeguards disabled. Making matters worse, it is unclear whether current law requires election authorities or companies to fix even the most egregious vulnerabilities in their systems, and whether voters have any recourse if they do not. This Article argues that election law can, does, and should ensure that the right to vote is a right to vote securely. First, it argues that constitutional voting rights doctrines already prohibit election practices that fail to meet a bare minimum threshold of security. But the bare minimum is not enough to protect modern election infrastructure against sophisticated threats. This Article thus proposes new statutory measures to bolster election security beyond the constitutional baseline, with technical provisions designed to change the course of insecure election practices that have become regrettably commonplace, and to standardize best practices drawn from state-of-the-art research on election security. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

We assess the opinions of Georgia voters regarding the 2020 presidential election, election administration, and voting laws following passage of Senate Bill (SB) 202. After the 2020 presidential election and subsequent 2021 Senate runoffs, contests all won by Democrats in Georgia, the Republican-controlled legislature passed SB 202 to appease their agitated and disaffected base of supporters. It appears that SB 202 had the effect of boosting Republican voters' confidence in Georgia's election system while registering the opposite effect among Democratic voters. Indeed, across a host of questions, including several asking about specific provisions in SB 202, we find a partisan schism in opinions expressed by Democrats and Republicans. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This essay examines Gilded Age voter fraud and voter suppression through the lenses of Mark Twain and Albion W. Tourgée. Twain is the most famous commentator on the Gilded Age. Less well known, Tourgée wrote best-selling Reconstruction fiction and became Homer Plessy's lawyer. Both were personally committed to the welfare of people of color. But Twain supported the Fifteenth Amendment as a color-blind standard to reduce voting fraud while Tourgée criticized the amendment for inadequately protecting freedmen from disfranchisement. The essay starts with Reconstruction's failure to reform the undemocratic system of presidential elections linked to the Electoral College. It ends with Twain's and Tourgée's reactions to laws enacted in the 1890s designed to block both fraud and African American suffrage. In between there is a section comparing fictional scenes dramatizing Twain's and Tourgée's views on literacy and voting; one highlighting how Twain's celebration of political independence and Tourgée's defense of political partisanship affected their understanding of the franchise; and one on the 1887 Law of the Electoral Count. Despite Twain's canonical status, Tourgée more poignantly exposes why the US continues to allow voter suppression and a minority to elect presidents. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Ataturk Yolu Journal / Atatürk Yolu Dergisi is the property of Ataturk Yolu Journal / Ataturk Yolu Dergisi and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)