„When you bet 100 percent counting the receipts, there will obviously be discrepancies between the two results. This means that you have to write down the rules of what you do in this situation, because what will we do now if we see that there are several thousand votes difference between the machine and the paper result?“
This was commented by the expert Daniel Stefanov. According to him, if the purpose of counting machine receipts by section commissions at the end of election day, there is a good chance that something different will be achieved.
„We are introducing voting machines because it became clear that we cannot train the section commissions. They create protocols that create a lot of problems. That’s why we put in the machines and now we have these same people, without additional training, to check the result of the machines“, he added.
The resistance to this form of control in the reporting of the election results is strange, the aim of which is to increase the trust in the process, believes the doctor of constitutional law Borislav Tsekov. According to him, there is a problem in the machine vote, which can be compensated by counting the control receipts.
Meanwhile, Stefanov called on the Central Election Commission to start building capacity to manage machine voting, namely to have expert units that „know what they are doing“ with the machines.