Why online voting isn't worth the gamble

The United Kingdom, despite being a highly connected society with widespread internet access and advanced cybersecurity infrastructure, explicitly prohibits online voting. British voters still physically mark their choices on paper ballots, a practice that might seem outdated in our digital age, yet one that the UK government firmly believes ensures the highest standards of electoral integrity. This choice underscores an essential truth: the convenience of digital technology should never compromise the fundamental principle of secure, reliable, and verifiable democratic elections.

- NIGHT OWL ANNA MAE YU LAMENTILLO

I strongly believe that the Philippines should adopt a similar stance and refrain from implementing online voting systems, at least in the foreseeable future. While our country continues to embrace digital transformation in various sectors—from banking to education—elections are an entirely different matter. They form the bedrock of democratic governance, and nothing is more critical than ensuring that every citizen's vote is accurately counted and protected from potential manipulation.

The risks associated with online voting are not mere hypotheticals; they are well-documented by real-world examples. Countries such as Estonia, Brazil, India, and the United States have experimented with various electronic voting methods, only to face persistent questions around reliability, security, and transparency. Experts have repeatedly raised alarms about vulnerabilities such as server hacking, malware, and the manipulation of data—all risks inherent in any digital voting framework. Even Estonia, often cited as a leading example of digital governance, faces critiques regarding its reliance on voters' trust in server integrity, a system that cannot be independently verified by citizens.