The way “for” and “against” markings on ballots were counted during the 2025 municipal elections was deeply flawed and unacceptable, and errors cannot be ruled out, said Iveta Kažoka, Director and Senior Researcher at the think tank Providus, who observed the elections in person.
Kažoka told LETA that although she had no concerns about how votes for parties were counted, especially in precincts with observers present, she was deeply concerned about how “for” and “against” votes for individual candidates were tallied.
She pointed out that the failure of scanning devices and the lack of a viable “Plan B” were not just minor technical issues but raised questions about how accurately individual candidates were evaluated through these markings.
“Considering that the polling staff had been working since 7:00 in the morning, fatigue was a major factor,” Kažoka said. “It’s perfectly natural that people make mistakes or misread numbers. There’s also a risk of miscommunication between the person counting and the one entering the data into the system — who is also likely exhausted,” she explained.
While she acknowledged that poll workers did their best, Kažoka stressed that mistakes in vote counting — even significant ones — cannot be ruled out.
She noted that it remains unclear how well voters understood the new ballot design, and that variability in how ballots were counted across precincts could have led to discrepancies in the results posted on the Central Election Commission (CVK) website. She urged the CVK to recount ballots in at least some precincts to better understand the potential margin of error in what she described as a “very anarchic process.”
Kažoka firmly stated that such a system must not be repeated in the future, not even as a backup option.
She also warned that given the chaotic situation in most polling stations on Sunday night, someone could have theoretically manipulated the vote counts — either inflating support for a candidate or decreasing it — with relative ease.
“It’s important, and I hope the CVK has the algorithms in place, to cross-check “for” and “against” counts across all precincts in a municipality,” she said. If a candidate has an unusually high or low number of marks in a specific precinct, that precinct’s votes should be recounted.
“These kinds of crisis-triggering algorithms should always be part of CVK’s system,” Kažoka added, noting her surprise that no communication had been made about whether such mechanisms exist.
She stressed that such tools are especially important in cases where people are tired and uninformed, and where no one is double-checking the count of “for” and “against” votes.
Moreover, the new ballot format could be interpreted in multiple ways, and this might have led to certain candidates receiving abnormally high or low support, not necessarily due to fraud but possibly due to human error during counting or data entry.
Meanwhile, CVK Chair Kristīne Saulīte told journalists on Monday after the inter-institutional working group meeting that there are no doubts about the validity of the election results. “The reality is that elections were held, the results were compiled, and they are accurate,” she said.
Shortly afterward, the CVK officially confirmed the election results.
As reported, vote counting during the 2025 municipal elections on Saturday and into Sunday night encountered technical issues, as did early voting throughout the week.
Currently, no formal inquiry has been launched regarding the vote-counting problems, as authorities are still gathering information, said State Chancellery Director Raivis Kronbergs.
He reiterated that there had been no warning signs before election night. “If we hadn’t believed the system would work, we would have acted sooner,” Kronbergs added.
Saulīte emphasized that if there had been even the slightest indication the systems weren’t ready, officials would have been prepared to switch to manual counting immediately. “There were no such signs, so we followed the plan,” she said.
She also expressed willingness to take full responsibility for matters within her authority but noted that the technical issues fall outside of CVK’s responsibility.
Meanwhile, the State Agency for Digital Affairs (VDAA) has launched a detailed internal review, examining all levels of responsibility — from the staff managing the election system to the developers and auditors — to identify the cause of slow ballot scanning, said Agnese Tkačenko, a project manager in VDAA’s administrative department.
Separately, Minister for Smart Administration and Regional Development Inga Bērziņa (New Unity) announced on Monday that VDAA Director Jorens Liops would be removed from office.
Speaking to the press earlier that morning, Liops said he had not yet seen the dismissal notice but had heard about it. He added that it was time to re-evaluate how large-scale public IT projects are implemented.
“It’s not within my competence to assess the Minister’s decision,” Liops said when asked if he believed the dismissal was premature.