Brazil's electronic voting system is considered one of the most secure in the world. And yet, some politicians seem determined to pretend otherwise.
Flávio Bolsonaro, son of former President Jair Bolsonaro, recently told a room full of diplomats that Brazil's voting machines share the same origin as Venezuela's — a country with a well-documented history of electoral problems. He also cited a CIA report about fraud in Venezuelan elections to support his claims. Conveniently, he later denied that he was questioning the integrity of Brazil's system at all. He said he simply wanted more international observers present. Sure.
Following that meeting, the Brazilian government decided to block visas for a US delegation, saying it had concerns the group would try to cast unfounded doubts on the election. Among those blocked were two senior US State Department officials: Riley M Barnes, an assistant secretary of state for democracy, human rights, and labour, and Samuel Samson, a deputy assistant secretary in the same bureau.
The Superior Electoral Court has firmly rejected Flávio Bolsonaro's claims. Brazil has been using electronic voting since 1996, and in all that time, no systemic fraud has ever been recorded. The machines use fingerprints to verify voters' identities, which prevents people from voting on behalf of others or registering twice.
Each machine also prints a paper copy of its tally and displays it publicly, so anyone can compare it to the official count. Results are independently audited. And as if that were not enough, experts are actually invited — before elections — to try to hack the machines or find irregularities. So far, nobody has succeeded.
In short, Brazil's voting system has been tested, audited, praised, and verified. The doubt being cast on it appears to have very little to do with evidence, and rather a lot to do with politics.
Meanwhile, Flávio Bolsonaro has received public endorsements from Argentina's President Javier Milei and Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu — two foreign leaders apparently comfortable offering their opinions on Brazilian democracy. Whether that counts as meddling, of course, is a matter of perspective.