The coronavirus is one of democracy’s newest adversaries, especially when it comes to running elections. Although each country is subject to its own set of laws and customs during this formalized process, no one wants to let voting become another opportunity for virus numbers to spike. With governments dissuading large public gatherings and social distancing still being a critical asset to the prevention of COVID-19 across the globe, democratic countries need to organize upcoming voting events with new considerations in mind. 

COVID-19 has been labeled by the World Health Organization as a pandemic since March 11, and many voting events have since come and gone. Although elections across the world have been postponed, there are some countries that have pursued the process anyway. The elections that have occurred are on both national and local scales and have been met with varying levels of success. The Council on Foreign Relations released a short video on the optimal way to have an election; although this organization is American and focuses on United States elections, the suggestions are broad enough to be applicable in most democratic countries and include an emphasis on mail-in ballots, careful fund management and safe-in person voting procedures. One of the best examples was South Korea, which on April 15 became the first country to attempt a national election. The country had the highest voter turnout for a parliamentary election in 28 years, with 66.2% of about 44 million registered voters casting ballots. 

Prior to April 15, the country came out with a set of election guidelines that all voters and polling places would need to follow. This included the downloading of a self-quarantine app so voters’ movements could be tracked and social distancing at the voting stations. Voters had their temperatures taken on location, wore masks, and had gloves and hand sanitizer at their disposal. South Korea also made sure to account for people in quarantine and active COVID-19 patients, all of whom had to abide by additional voting guidelines. Despite all of these extra precautionary steps, one person reported that it took them less than 10 minutes to go through the whole voting process. When asked about why South Korea was so successful, many citizens said they had a lot of trust in the country’s actions involving the health care system. South Korea has recorded over 13,300 cases of the virus, but the number of new cases has not exceeded 80 since early April. Although an early voter in the city of Busan tested positive some time later, contact tracing later determined that only one person they came into contact with on Election Day had contracted the virus as well. 

Other places have also attempted to hold large-scale voting events, although none of them quite as successfully as in South Korea. For example, Croatia ran a presidential election with a 46% voter turnout (average of 53%), and Japan ran multiple elections as well. Tokyo’s election for governor resulted in about 52% of eligible people coming out, just above the average gubernatorial election turnout rate of 48%. In Poland, the presidential election was originally scheduled to occur in early May and would have been Europe’s first try at a presidential election since the pandemic. The country attempted to modify the voting standards beforehand (it wanted to offer more remote voting options so that there would be less crowding at polling places) but long-established laws prevented the country from making major changes to the process less than six months before the scheduled election. There was some conflict between the parties about the timing of the election—the incumbent party wanted a quick, on-time election while the challenging candidates asked for a delay—that ultimately resulted in the vote being postponed to June 28 and done with a larger number of postal ballots than the country had seen before. 

With a string of elections still on the horizon for this year, now-completed elections offer a template to copy or learn from, ultimately proving that safe voting is doable despite the pandemic. There are ways to work around the dangers of congested polling stations and there is considerable value in encouraging people to vote remotely (if the laws allow for it). While online voting is still very vulnerable to potential cyberattacks and other security concerns, postal ballots are an effective alternative. Safe and sanitary in-person voting is potentially the greatest universal asset for elections going forward. Although there are a multitude of factors that must be addressed when organizing elections, it is clear that ultimately, with sufficient and well-allocated resources, voter turnout does not necessarily have to suffer during this pandemic.