Smart elections or rigged algorithms: the rise of artificial intelligence in electoral governance in Southeast Asia

Introduction Introducing Artificial Intelligence AI into electoral-management infrastructure has radically transformed the administrative practice in Southeast Asian democracies through streamlining voter registration, consolidating identification, and making the real-time observation of the electoral events possible. Although the benefits of AI are undoubtedly tangible in terms of efficiency, transparency, and accessibility, its appearance in contexts where such regulatory sanitation is antithetical presents sharp postulations of algorithm bias, lack of data security, and possible undermining of democratic values. The current study questions both positive and negative effects of the implementation of AI in Indonesia, Thailand, Philippines, Myanmar, and contrasts their benefits and limitations concerning the fairness of electoral processes and good governance. Methods The investigation methodologically includes the secondary sources, i.e., government reports, institutional white papers and NGO assessments from the 2019 to 2024 election cycles. It measures the degree of AI implementation, electoral procedures, and regulatory models within the individual countries using a comparative qualitative approach. Results The results indicate that voter verification and result-monitoring systems aided by AI amplified the level of administrative coordination in Thailand. However, it also created a sense of disquiet about the lack of explanations for unexplained anomalies in data and a high level of algorithmic transparency obscurity. Indonesia's strong and most advanced biometric voter identification system, the Philippines' cyber-based registration and results reporting strengthened the uniformity of procedures, but inconsistent security practices and anonymised analytic operations introduced doubt to goal-targeted campaign communication. The first use of biometric identification tools assessed in Myanmar highlighted the potential of biometric identification to create more easily accurate voter lists, even though infrastructure constraints and periodic system failures hindered the full implementation of biometric identification across Myanmar. As a cross-case synthesis illustrates, purely technical protection and an opaque political-economic commission provide no safeguards against the inadvertent amplification of existing electoral weaknesses and concurrently increase operational capability. Discussion and conclusion Finally, the study benefits the field of inquiry by providing empirically based knowledge about the real-world impacts and ethical considerations of using AI in developing democracies and suggests policy guidelines to ensure responsible and accountable AI incorporation.