Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
The article examines the problem of building institutional trust in the remote electronic voting system in the Russian Federation. It is noted that despite the legislative consolidation of the DEG in 2020 and successful experiments in a number of subjects of the Russian Federation, the level of citizen involvement in electronic electoral procedures remains insufficient due to technical defects in the functioning of the system and legal gaps in regulation. The article analyzes the regulatory framework of the DEG, including the provisions of Federal Law No. 67-FZ dated 12.06.2002 "On Basic Guarantees of Electoral Rights and the Right of Citizens of the Russian Federation to Participate in a Referendum," revealed violations of electoral legislation during electronic voting, and the positions of parliamentary parties on the transparency of electoral procedures. The results of a sociological study are presented, demonstrating the ambivalent attitude of the youth audience towards the safety and reliability of DEG. Taking into account the technological features of blockchain systems and cryptographic methods of data protection, the necessity of adopting a special federal law on the legal regulation of blockchain technology is justified. Specific mechanisms for improving the system of public control over DEG are proposed, including the formation of a two-level monitoring structure, modernization of the algorithm of observers' actions, and strengthening the requirements for stress testing of GAS Vybory 2.0.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Масуфранова et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: