Voluntary vs. Mandatory Registration
Is voter registration an obligation and responsibility of citizenship, or is it simply a right of
citizenship to be exercised at the discretion of the citizen? The way in which this question is
answered has important implications for the administrative procedures that must be in place to
facilitate voter registration. If the prevailing view is that voting is an obligation and
responsibility of citizenship, for example, then logically it follows that registration would be
mandatory.
Mandatory registration, then, places an obligation on the state to inform voters of the
requirement to register or to update the continuous voters list by informing officials of changes
in personal information (e.g., change of name or address). On the other hand, if voting is
viewed as a democratic right, but not necessarily an obligation, then registration itself becomes
optional, to be exercised at the voter's discretion. In this circumstance, often fewer resources are
needed to encourage the registration of voters.
Comparative Participation Rates: Compulsory and Non-Compulsory Voting
Countries in which registration is voluntary, such as the United States, tend to have lower
participation rates in the election than countries in which it is mandatory, such as Denmark.
Similarly, there appears to be a marginal increase in voter turnout, as well, when voting is made
mandatory.19
This said, however, there is much to suggest that voter turnout is not a simple function of
legislating compulsory voting. A recent study in Malta, which does not have compulsory
voting, for example, has shown that voter turnout has been much higher during the 1990s than in
Australia, where voting is mandatory (96.7 percent versus 82.7 percent, respectively).20
Similarly, a comparison of voter turnout in Central American countries between 1989 and 1991
showed that turnout was the highest in Nicaragua (86 percent), where voting was not
compulsory, and lowest in El Salvador (52 percent), where voting was compulsory.21
Implicit State Responsibility
Even in countries where citizens are obliged to register, the state still has an obligation to ensure
that the opportunity to register is comprehensive, convenient, fair and non-discriminatory.
Where the election authority fails to meet any of these conditions, it is engaging in a process
known as administrative disenfranchisement, or the administrative exclusion of otherwise
eligible voters. This term implies that the election authority, while remaining true to the letter of
the law in providing opportunities for registration, may fail to live up to its spirit, thereby
denying some citizens their right to vote.
Many registration systems, while purporting to be open and inclusive, still contain some
elements of administrative exclusion. When these features have a disproportionate effect on
some groups of voters, they may introduce unacceptable distortions in the election outcome.
Self-Initiated or State-Initiated Registration
Another persistent issue in voter registration is whether it occurs at the initiative of the voter or
at the instigation of the state. In the former case, voters become registered only if they act to
initiate the process. In this scenario, the state provides the opportunity for citizens to register but
does not take active steps to do so until requested by the voter.
In Senegal, for example, the state produces national and voter registry forms, but unless voters
complete the forms, they will not be entitled to vote (see Senegal - Analysis of Electoral Code ).22 In the 1997
legislative elections in Cameroon, an election marred by controversy over the voter registration
process, adjustments were made to the continuous registry only after the insistence of voters.
But because the divisional supervisory committees were so poorly managed, they were
responsible for the administrative disenfranchisement of thousands of voters.23 These
divisional committees were charged with maintaining the voters lists and distributing voters
cards, but it was alleged some were not even staffed until after registration was closed.
In Bangladesh, the administration for years has relied on volunteers to conduct a door-to-door
enumeration of voters. Far from producing a comprehensive and inclusive voters list that would
augment electoral legitimacy, the registration procedures, and the resulting
voters lists, have contributed to a lack of confidence in the electoral process.24
In the United Kingdom, civic administrators initiate contact with voters every year by mailing
them a card indicating their current listing in the register.25 In Sweden, the electoral
register is maintained by the local tax office, under the jurisdiction of the National Tax Board.
The tax office maintains the national civil registry from which the voters list is produced as a
subset. The voters list is prepared at the instigation of the state, and each year citizens are able
to make application for any appropriate changes to their listings.26
In the United States, while the obligation is on the individual to register, the individual states
take steps to ensure this opportunity is accessible. This includes providing mail-in voter
registration forms at numerous locations, registration through motor vehicle offices and some
state agencies in which citizens come in contact with government employees. Most motor
vehicle departments and welfare-related agencies are mandated by the states to comply with
federal law.
