I wrote earlier about electronic voting and what happened here. The OSSE/ODHIR (say the Europeanelection watchdog wrote a report on the Netherlands elections in November 2006.

Currently, in the Netherlands, electronic voting is overwhelmingly the preferred method, and it has broad public support based on a high degree of trust in government and the electoral authorities.27. Whilst there have been no suggestions that trust at any level has been abused, the OSCE/ODIHR EAM believes that there is now a timely opportunity to further enhance transparency of implementation of new voting technologies, and public confidence, in an increasingly questioning and sceptical public environment. In particular:

Electronic voting systems should be monitored by an independent entity distinct from the authorities responsible for conducting elections. Such an entity should have broadtechnical expertise, and should be also responsible both for formulating and reviewing voting system standards.

There should be routine testing of voting machines before elections, and randomly selected machines should be subject to testing by an entity other than local election authorities. Mechanisms should be considered to verify that voting machines, as used on election day, are configured with the approved firmware and ballot definition.

In order to enhance public confidence in DRE voting machines, and to provide for meaningful audits and recounts, legislation regulating use of such systems should include provisions for a Voter Verified Paper Audit Trails (VVPAT) or an equivalentverification procedure. Software dependent vote recording mechanisms which do not permit an independent check on their operation should be phased out.

Voting system standards should not permit the use of systems which depend for their security on the secrecy of any part of their technical specifications. Reliance on proprietary systems should be reduced, where neither citizens, nor electoral officials, nor observers can determine how they operate.

Do you also read they are giving a slap on the hands while putting it nicely (“there is now a timely…”)? What they certainly said was these elections were NOT using those recommended technologies.