Explaining electoral fraud in an advanced democracy: Fraud vulnerabilities, opportunities and facilitating mechanisms in British elections
| Published date | 01 November 2017 |
| DOI | 10.1177/1369148117715222 |
| Author | Maria Sobolewska,Magda Borkowska,Eleanor Hill,Stuart Wilks-Heeg |
| Date | 01 November 2017 |
| Subject Matter | Articles |
research-article2017
Article
The British Journal of Politics and
International Relations
Explaining electoral fraud in an
2017, Vol. 19(4) 772 –789
© The Author(s) 2017
Reprints and permissions:
advanced democracy: Fraud
sagepub.co.uk/journalsPermissions.nav
https://doi.org/10.1177/1369148117715222
DOI: 10.1177/1369148117715222
vulnerabilities, opportunities
journals.sagepub.com/home/bpi
and facilitating mechanisms in
British elections
Eleanor Hill1, Maria Sobolewska2,
Stuart Wilks-Heeg3 and Magda Borkowska4
Abstract
Explanatory theories of electoral fraud are usually developed for new and failing democracies.
However, while rarer, electoral fraud does happen in advanced democracies. Because data on
fraud in advanced democracies are scarce, single instances of fraud are studied in isolation and
offer very little generalisability. This study uses a unique comparative dataset of 35 in-depth, semi-
structured interviews from eight locations, only half of which experienced allegations of fraud. We
show that theories of why and how fraud happens in developing democracies can be extended to
an advanced democracy. We also provide a detailed description of two micro-mechanisms, which
facilitate fraud taking place and thus provide a causal link between the structural vulnerability to
fraud and the direct opportunities for fraud to take place. The case study of Britain focuses mostly
on the biraderi structures within the British South Asian communities, but we offer ways in which
these structures generalise more broadly.
Keywords
biraderi, electoral campaigning, electoral fraud, political parties
While allegations and instances of electoral fraud in UK elections have received grow-
ing attention in recent years, they continue to be rare (Clark and James, 2017). This
rarity is the case in many developed democracies and is why the majority of the litera-
ture focuses on new and failing democracies. Some even identify the presence of elec-
toral fraud as a distinguishing feature of undemocratic elections (Alvarez et al., 2008).
However, although uncommon, electoral fraud can happen in developed democracies,
1Department of Politics, University of Manchester, UK
2Department of Politics and Centre on Dynamics of Ethnicity, University of Manchester, UK
3Department of Politics, University of Liverpool, UK
4Cathie Marsh Institute for Social Research, University of Manchester, UK
Corresponding author:
Eleanor Hill, Politics, University of Manchester, 4th Floor, Arthur Lewis Building, Oxford Road, Manchester
M13 9PL, UK.
Email: Eleanor.hill@manchester.ac.uk
Hill et al.
773
and our aim is to extend the theoretical framework derived from new and failing
democracies to analyse risks of fraud in developed democracies.
Studies into electoral fraud can be divided into three types. The first concentrates on
detecting electoral fraud (see Beber and Scacco, 2012; Hyde, 2008; Leemann and
Bochsler, 2014; Mebane, 2008). The second focuses on the methods used to commit
electoral fraud and the reasons why electoral fraud is committed (see Holland and
Palmer-Rubin, 2015; Lehoucq, 2003; Nichter, 2008; Stokes, 2005; Stokes et al., 2013).
Third, advances in voting practices have led to studies focusing on the risks posed by
postal and Internet voting (Alvarez and Hall, 2008; Birch and Watt, 2004; James, 2011)
and public perceptions of these systems (Alvarez and Hall, 2008; Beaulieu, 2016;
Saglie and Segaard, 2016). We contribute to this literature by marrying the different
elements of these types of studies. First, we explore how and why electoral fraud occurs
focusing on the example of Great Britain, and specifically areas of high concentration
of Pakistani- and Bangladeshi-origin residents, which tend to be associated with fraud
(Electoral Commission, 2014). However, we use a research design used in quantitative
studies seeking to develop ways of detecting electoral fraud (Beber and Scacco, 2012;
Leemann and Bochsler, 2014; Mebane, 2006) by studying causes of fraud not only in
areas where it was detected but also in areas where it was not. To our knowledge, our
application of this approach to a qualitative study seeking to understand how and why
electoral fraud occurs is unique. Finally, given the role that postal voting on demand
plays in Britain, we draw on and contribute to this literature as well.
Based on the literature, we identify three types of causes of electoral fraud prevalent in
developing democracies and show that this typology extends to Great Britain—an
advanced democracy. Based on analysis of 35 in-depth interviews with activists from
eight wards in England, we argue that each of these causes has a different functional rela-
tionship to fraud and each is connected in a chain of causality. The first element in this
causal chain is the vulnerabilities to fraud: these are the political system and the socio-
economic structural inequalities that create underlying conditions and motives for fraudu-
lent activities. The next element is the opportunities for fraud: how electoral fraud can be
committed given the current voting safeguards, including the role of postal voting on
demand. Finally, at the end of the causal chain, are the facilitating micro-mechanisms: the
link between the conditions ripe for fraud and fraud being committed. We discuss the role
of South Asian biraderi networks and political party campaigning in facilitating fraud.
Existing literature
The literature on electoral fraud is relatively sparse. Despite new efforts to study this issue
in a more systematic way (see Norris, 2015; Norris et al., 2014), empirical studies of
fraud in developed democracies are usually incidental. In the main, they remain single
case studies, are generally descriptive and often focus on how widespread fraud is
(Fukumoto and Horiuchi, 2011; Minnite, 2010). However, in recent years literature has
emerged pinpointing concerns about failings in electoral administration in established
democracies and the risks arising for the vulnerability of elections to fraud or error
(Norris, 2015; Norris et al., 2014, but see Clark and James, 2017 for evidence of low
incidence in the United Kingdom).
The UK literature focuses on the pressures that the growing frequency and complex-
ity of electoral events have imposed on the electoral system and administration (Clark,
2015, 2016; James, 2013; Wilks-Heeg, 2009). A high volume of legislative changes has
774
The British Journal of Politics and International Relations 19(4)
imposed burdens on electoral administrators required first to liberalise procedures and
then to effectively ‘retro-fit’ measures to tackle vulnerabilities (Clark, 2015; Wilks-Heeg,
2009). Eric Pickles recently made recommendations for the introduction of voter ID at
polling stations and the requirement for electors to submit new postal vote applications
every 3 years (Pickles, 2016). The government’s response indicates these recommenda-
tions will be enacted or are being considered (Cabinet Office, 2016). However, many of
these recommendations may be an over-reaction to the actual levels of fraud risk that we
present here and that others have analysed elsewhere (Clark and James, 2017).
The relative dearth of British literature on electoral fraud can, to an extent, be explained
by the infrequency of electoral fraud. Electoral fraud is not widespread: just more than
1000 cases of fraud were reported to English police forces from 2008 to 2013, and 20
have resulted in convictions (Electoral Commission, 2013). Most involved single wards
in local elections, which given the thousands of ward-level elections held annually (2364
wards were contested in 2013 and 4500 in the 2014) amount to a tiny number overall
(Electoral Commission, 2014). However, even this small number may raise worry that
fraud occurs at all, in what is one of the world’s longest established democracies.
The majority of the literature focuses on how fraud has been committed. For instance,
postal voting is commonly believed to undermine the secrecy of the ballot (Birch and
Watt, 2004; Council of Europe Parliamentary Assembly, 2007; Wilks-Heeg, 2008) and to
increase the risk of large-scale fraud (Wilks-Heeg, 2008). Despite the concerns expressed
by Pickles (2016) that voting at polling stations is vulnerable to fraud, Clark and James
(2017) find that attempted personation at polling stations is exceptionally rare.
Causal explanations for electoral fraud in the United Kingdom are less developed.
Party strategies, including pressing for the use of postal votes, have been suggested
(Stewart, 2006). Also implicated have been biraderi kinship networks, characteristic of
British South Asian communities (Akhtar, 2013; Wilks-Heeg, 2008; Peace and Akhtar,
2015). These networks, led by male elders, provide welfare for their members and were
imported through migration from Pakistan and Bangladesh to the United Kingdom
(Akhtar, 2013). This migration is on-going (Charsley et al., 2012), and biraderis continue
to be important in Britain’s Pakistani and Bangladeshi communities. This explanation is
potentially far-reaching, as all but one of the 18 local authority areas1 at particular risk
of electoral fraud identified by the Electoral Commission have sizeable Pakistani or
Bangladeshi communities (Electoral Commission, 2014). However, locating explana-
tions of fraud so directly within...
To continue reading
Request your trial