Forgery In Alteration Of Online Voter Registration Records
Forgery in Alteration of Online Voter Registration Records
Online voter registration (OVR) allows citizens to register, update, or verify their voter information electronically. Forgery in this context involves unauthorized modification, tampering, or creation of voter registration records to misrepresent eligibility, facilitate fraud, or influence elections.
This is a serious offense because it undermines electoral integrity, public trust, and democratic processes.
Key Legal Principles
Types of Forgery in OVR
Unauthorized registration: Adding fictitious voters or using stolen identities.
Alteration of existing records: Changing party affiliation, address, or eligibility status without consent.
Deletion of records: Removing legitimate voters from registration databases.
Electronic tampering: Hacking into databases to manipulate vote rolls.
Applicable Laws
United States:
52 U.S.C. § 20511 (National Voter Registration Act)
18 U.S.C. § 1030 (Computer Fraud and Abuse Act)
State laws on voter fraud and election tampering
India: Representation of the People Act 1950 & 1951, IPC Sections 463–471 (Forgery)
United Kingdom: Representation of the People Act 1983, Fraud Act 2006
International standards: Interference with voter registration systems violates principles of free and fair elections.
Criminal Liability
Individuals and groups can be charged for:
Forgery and falsification of records
Cybercrime or hacking into election systems
Conspiracy to commit voter fraud
Liability may extend to political operatives or insiders who facilitate alterations.
Punishments
Imprisonment (typically 1–10 years depending on jurisdiction)
Heavy fines
Deactivation of illegally altered voter registrations
Probation and supervision for cyber-related offenses
DETAILED CASE LAWS
1. United States v. Roy Den Hollander (U.S., 2016)
Facts
Den Hollander accessed the New York online voter registration system to alter his voter status without authorization.
His goal was to change party affiliation and update information for personal advantage.
Legal Findings
Convicted under CFAA (18 U.S.C. § 1030) and voter fraud statutes.
Evidence included IP logs, altered database entries, and email communication.
Outcome
Sentenced to 3 years imprisonment and fined $50,000.
Ordered to reimburse costs associated with database restoration.
Significance
First high-profile U.S. case targeting unauthorized electronic modification of voter registration records.
2. North Carolina – Voter Registration Database Tampering (2018)
Facts
A political operative attempted to delete and alter voter records in the state’s online registration system to suppress opposition votes.
Actions were detected through audit logs.
Legal Findings
Charged under state voter fraud laws and computer crime statutes.
Case emphasized intent to affect election outcomes.
Outcome
Convicted; received 5 years imprisonment and a lifetime ban from election-related activities.
Prompted statewide security audit of online registration systems.
Significance
Demonstrated state-level enforcement of online voter record tampering.
3. India – Andhra Pradesh Online Voter Records Alteration Case (2015)
Facts
Local officials in Andhra Pradesh were caught altering online voter records to favor certain candidates during municipal elections.
Alterations included adding fictitious voters and changing addresses.
Legal Findings
Violated IPC Sections 463–471 (forgery), Representation of the People Act 1950 & 1951.
Criminal conspiracy charges were also filed against officials.
Outcome
4 officials sentenced to 3–5 years imprisonment.
Election commission conducted a voter roll audit and nullified tampered records.
Significance
Highlighted risks of insider access leading to forgery in electronic voter databases.
4. United Kingdom – R v. Joseph & Others (UK, 2014)
Facts
Joseph and associates altered online voter registration records in Scotland, changing names and addresses to favor a local candidate.
Network used stolen credentials and manipulated the Electoral Commission portal.
Legal Findings
Charged under Representation of the People Act 1983, Sections 60–61 (fraudulent voting and registration) and Fraud Act 2006.
Outcome
Leaders sentenced to 4 years imprisonment, minor accomplices received 18–24 months.
System security was upgraded after the incident.
Significance
Illustrates criminal liability for coordinated forgery affecting elections.
5. Florida – Online Voter Registration Hacking (2012)
Facts
Hackers exploited vulnerabilities in Florida’s OVR system to alter addresses and delete registrations of voters in key districts.
Attack traced back to a domestic political group.
Legal Findings
Violated 18 U.S.C. § 1030 (CFAA), 52 U.S.C. § 20511, and state election laws.
Forensic evidence included server logs and IP tracking.
Outcome
2 primary conspirators sentenced to 6 years imprisonment, fines totaling $100,000.
State implemented multi-factor authentication and monitoring systems.
Significance
Demonstrated the intersection of cybercrime and election law in voter record forgery.
6. California – Unauthorized Online Voter Record Access (2017)
Facts
A California-based individual accessed county online voter databases to change the party affiliation of thousands of voters.
Motivated by political gain for a third-party candidate.
Legal Findings
Violations included computer fraud, forgery, and voter registration tampering.
Prosecutors emphasized the scale of alteration affecting thousands of records.
Outcome
Sentenced to 4 years imprisonment, required to publicly disclose the tampering incident.
California introduced strong audit trails for online voter registration modifications.
Significance
Showed that large-scale online forgery of voter records carries significant criminal consequences.
Key Takeaways
Electronic voter registration systems are vulnerable to forgery and insider manipulation.
Criminal liability spans both cybercrime statutes and election laws, often concurrently.
Punishments are severe, especially when tampering affects large numbers of voters or election outcomes.
Insider access is a major risk factor, highlighting the importance of audit logs and system monitoring.
Global applicability: Cases from the U.S., India, UK, and beyond demonstrate widespread legal frameworks to combat forgery in online voter registration.
RELATED Blog
comments