In Oman, two primary council bodies form the “Majlis Oman”: the Majlis Al-Shura (or Lower House) and the Majlis Al-Dawla (or Upper House). The members of the Majlis Al-Dawla are chosen by the reigning Sultan, with Sultan Haitham continuing the practice established by his predecessor, Sultan Qaboos. These members are either former government officials or influential citizens of the country. ¹⁸ The general public selects the members of the Majlis Al-Shura through an optional voting process. The dual chamber system balances the leaders’ public representation and experience to maintain political stability. Sultan has ultimate power for the final approval, but on the other hand, Majlis Oman, with sufficient powers, has the authority to review and approve new laws and budgets.

The Majlis Al-Shura of Oman, a consultative assembly, was formally established in 1991, succeeding the nation’s traditional consultative council. ¹⁹ This legislative body comprises delegates who serve as representatives for each of Oman’s 61 administrative governorates, known as Wilayats. The apportionment of representation within the Majlis Al-Shura relies on the demographic size of each Wilayat. A single representative for each Wilayat, but in cases where a Wilayat’s population exceeds 30,000 residents, is afforded a dual representation. The tenure for each member of the Majlis Al-Shura is a fixed term of four years. ²⁰

The Ministry of Interior (MoI) of Oman is the governing authority responsible for administering and overseeing the country’s electoral process. To be enfranchised and exercise their right to vote, prospective voters are required to first register with the MoI. This registration process is a prerequisite for inclusion in the official electoral rolls. Furthermore, several specific criteria must be met for an individual to be deemed eligible to vote. ²¹ •

They must be a citizen of Oman.

The voting process in Oman requires voters to present themselves at a designated election station within their Wilayat on the day of the election. At the station, an administrative committee manually verifies each individual’s identity using their official ID card. Upon successful verification, the voter is issued a ballot paper. The voter then confidentially marks their preferred candidate and deposits the ballot into the secure selection box. It is a strict rule that voters can cast only one vote for a single candidate. Following the election’s conclusion, an audit committee at each station manually reviews and tallies all ballots to ascertain the final election results. This extensive, labor-intensive procedure is associated with various drawbacks, including: •

Casting a vote requires a physical presence at an election station, which can be inconvenient for voters, as it necessitates travel to their respective Wilayats.

Oman has significantly changed to address the challenges of the traditional, paper-based voting system. The country has stopped using paper ballots and implemented a modern electronic voting system. This technological shift enhanced the electoral process by making it more traceable and verifiable, thereby increasing security and public trust in the election results.

The ninth general election in Oman, which took place on October 27, 2019, was conducted using an electronic voting system. This electronic electoral process utilized a device called “Sawtak,” deployed at every polling station. The device automates the verification process; once a voter enters their ID number, the system automatically authenticates their identity, followed by a biometric fingerprint scan to confirm their eligibility. Upon successful verification, an electronic ballot listing the candidates is displayed on the device for 120 seconds, allowing the voter to select. This ballot is only accessible to authorized individuals; it is not available to those not registered with the Ministry of Interior (MoI) or to individuals attempting to vote at an incorrect polling station. After a voter has selected their candidate, the device generates and displays an electronic ticket. This ticket, which includes the voter’s name and their chosen candidate, serves as a digital receipt to confirm the successful completion of the voting process. Figure 1 clearly illustrates the election process in Oman, its various stages from voter registration to the final tallying of results. ⁵

A Blockchain is a series of data blocks arranged in a specific order. ²² Each new block is cryptographically linked to the one before, forming a secure chain. The cryptographic reference, also known as block hash, is usually the secure hash value of the contents in the previous block. If M are data contained in a block, then δ = H( M) is the block hash, where H( .) is a secure, one-way function such as SHA-2, SHA-3, among others. A block can contain different information such as block index, timestamp, previous block’s block hash, number of transactions in the block, and the list of transactions. The block size reflects the capacity of the entire block and the number of transactions it can carry. The initial block of the Blockchain is called a genesis block with a block hash of δ ₀. As shown in Figure 2, blocks B ₀ , B ₁ , … B _N are the data blocks forming a Blockchain. ^{8 , 23} Thus, a block in a Blockchain contains multiple transactions, and a transaction contains the data values involved in the transaction. ⁸

The power of a Blockchain is born out of the feature that if any data in a block is to be changed, then every subsequent data block should be modified accordingly because of the change in the block hash. This property aids in ensuring the integrity of the data blocks if the cryptographic reference to the recent block is known or agreed upon. ²⁴ For instance, say the block hash of the recent block B _N is known to be δ _n. If data in block B1 is altered, its block hash is altered, eventually altering the block hash of B _N. Hence, Blockchain securely stores data to prevent alteration once recorded unless a unanimous agreement exists among all parties involved. ²⁵ In other words, the property of data immutability is achieved through a consensus mechanism that ensures all transactions are verified and added to the Blockchain transparently and irreversibly. Blockchain provides a trustworthy ledger where data integrity and transaction history are preserved, fostering transparency and reliability in various applications such as supply chain management, financial transactions, and voting systems (i.e., the approval of above 50% of the network nodes is required). ²⁶ De Filippi and Hassan ²⁶ consider Blockchain as a decentralized database (or state machine) that considers cryptographic primitives for the surety of data integrity and authenticity. It has also been known as electronic and decentralized, sometimes as an immutable transaction ledger that provides cryptographic verification. These definitions underscore the fundamental aspects of Blockchain technology, emphasizing its decentralized nature, cryptographic security measures, and the immutability of transaction records. ²³

One of the important aspects of a Blockchain ledger is what makes a valid data block and who can add a new one. A mechanism to add only a verified data block to the chain can aid in maintaining the perpetual integrity of the data. ²⁴ This security feature is provided by sharing the Blockchain among a special group of computing nodes known as a Blockchain network. The broadcast network of computing nodes is known as a Blockchain network (BCN). ²⁴ It can maintain a copy of a synchronized storage, which is defined as a Blockchain. Each node in a Blockchain network runs a protocol for maintaining data consistency/integrity, verifying a transaction before it is added to the Blockchain, maintaining operation transparency, and maintaining privacy through anonymity. A Blockchain protocol permits anyone to propagate transactions through the network for verification and to be recorded in the ledger. Some special nodes, known as miners, verify and add well-formed transactions to the ledger. The miners in the network use consensus algorithms, such as Proof of Work (PoW), and Proof of State (PoS), to agree upon the block to be added to the Blockchain. ^{23 , 27} Since multiple verifiers verify the validity of a transaction, Blockchain technology (Blockchain and Blockchain network) offers decentralization and disinter-mediation of transactions between users internationally. ²⁸ In brief, Blockchain technology provides a trustworthy ledger where data integrity and transaction history are preserved, fostering transparency and reliability in various applications such as financial transactions, supply chain management, and voting systems (i.e., the approval of above 50% of the network nodes is required). ²⁶

Figure 3 a simple Blockchain network with three network nodes n ₁, n ₂, and n ₃. Each node in a Blockchain network maintains a copy of the underlying Blockchain ledger B ₀ ← B ₁ ← … ← B _j.. ← B _n. If a transaction T _j is sent to node n3 for validation and to be recorded in the existing Blockchain, it is broadcast to connected nodes, which will also verify its correctness. ²² Many authors ^{23 , 27} agree that Blockchain allows anyone worldwide to send or participate in transactions, providing greater assurance that they are engaging with the rightful owner. This immutability is achieved through a consensus mechanism that ensures all transactions are verified and added to the Blockchain transparently and irreversibly.

Blockchain technology has captured their attention as scholars and policymakers seek to bolster integrity in elections. Dominating the conversations was the impact of digital technology on institutional trust and its relation to electoral systems and the confidence voters placed in those systems. ²⁹ The available literature reveals that implementing Blockchain in voting systems has advantages and challenges.

Defenders of Blockchain note that its features, particularly decentralization and the inability to alter information, can remarkably enhance the transparency of elections. Ohize et al. ³⁰ stress that mobile voting systems based on Blockchain technology can potentially eliminate voter fraud and increase turnout by providing a secure and verifiable system for voting. They highlight that Blockchain-based voting systems can be audited by anybody, enhancing credibility and faith in the system and electoral framework. Regardless of these advantages, Assouline et al. ³¹ argue that some privacy issues, cybersecurity, digital skills, and the exclusion of certain demographics add to the criticism of using Blockchain technology in elections. There needs to be sufficient public awareness and development of the relevant technology to enable everyone’s participation.

Similarly, Farooq et al. ³² explain how Blockchain can help protect voter registration information by making alterations transparent and traceable. Jafar et al. ³³ discussed that electronic voting machines with Blockchain technology could issue a printed paper receipt to the voters, which would aid in audits and boost trust in the vote-counting process. Moreover, Olaniyi et al. ³⁴ underscore the risks of applying new technologies to the election process. They contend that elections are critical undertakings wherein things cannot go wrong, since poorly applied Blockchain systems would lose public trust. Implementing any technological application should be preceded by robust public awareness campaigns managed by reputable, non-partisan election officials.

The use of Blockchain in the 2023 elections in Guatemala is an example that illustrates the expected results of the implementation. As stated in a Democracy and Society ³⁵ report, the technology was applied to restore trust in the electoral system after allegations of fraud in preceding elections. Storing each transaction in a ledger using Blockchain technology boosted the electoral system by easily detecting attempted manipulations.

One of the distinguishing features of democracy is transparency and digital democracy. As noted by many researchers, Blockchain technology requires a guarded approach regarding security and public trust. ³⁶ These two elements demonstrate the utmost necessity in maintaining the public’s trust in the system. Transparency of information coupled with accessibility indicates an open, robust form of Government, which can be achieved through Internet technology. With innovative ideas purchasable through the Internet, civic engagement engages us to welcome and engage in democracy through active voting. Voting becomes a civic duty for citizens of democratic countries as it directly influences their choices and decisions.

In this regard, elections are a striking example of implementing civic engagement. However, they tend to ignore that civic engagement can be defined in a multi-dimensional framework that features systems thinking that captures the complexity of social systems, making a participatory approach more appealing. Regardless of who utilizes the notion of digital democracy alongside open Government, the digitally achieved, or instead opened democracy acts as a form of power that the Government can exercise and aid in refining the understanding of democracy through freedom.

2.4.1 Theoretical Foundations and Potential Benefits

Blockchain functions as a transparent public ledger incapable of modification, which opens the possibility for a new method of ensuring fair elections. Employing specific coding techniques, voting systems based on Blockchain technology can offer End-to-End Verifiable (E2E) elections. ³⁷ E2E implies that votes are cast on time, midstream, stored, and counted while stored. This capability can resolve problems associated with election fraud, risk of hacking, and personnel error. However, adding Blockchain does not automatically provide more trust in elections. ³⁸ Rather, the trust in Blockchain voting is founded on the perception of voters, political leaders, and election officers. Without trust and knowledge of such systems, citizens cannot endorse democracy.

2.4.2 Trust in Institutions and Electoral Legitimacy

Trust in institutions is one of the central issues in political science. To what degree do people consider that political institutions are executing their roles properly? Standard voting systems, dependent on institutions like election commissions, political parties, and independent monitors for free and fair elections, rely on multiple functions working synergistically to acquire an equilibrium bloc. ³⁹ It’s more a question of voters’ trust in the technology than in existing institutions and whether Blockchain technology, which offers a mechanism without a central authority, will make freer elections possible.

Most studies indicate a general decline in confidence in voting systems across the globe. People are apprehensive regarding cheating, vote tampering, and cybersecurity threats. ^{40 – 42} Blockchain is suggested as an answer to this problem because there is no need to trust a central authority. All the transactions (votes) can be independently verified. Political analysts say elections are primarily social and not purely technical. ⁴³ If people remain doubtful about Blockchain security, ease of use, and the possibility of government tampering, increased reliability of elections will not be guaranteed.

Research indicates mixed results on users’ trust in voting via the Internet. Some suggest that younger, more adept technology users will trust elections run on Blockchains while older users grapple with the system’s clarity and transparency. Moreover, in cases where there is extreme political division within parties, new election platforms are likely to be more divisive than unifying.

2.4.3 Voter Perceptions and Digital Transparency

Public trust in the fairness and accessibility of the electoral processes is fundamental to their credibility. A Blockchain framework could worsen fears and misunderstandings without clarity, education, and transparency.

Perceived Opacity vs. Actual Transparency

Although Blockchain can improve transparency by allowing voting processes to be publicly verified, most voters lack the technical skills necessary to audit Blockchain systems. ^{44 , 45} Without straightforward verification mechanisms, Blockchain implementation could inadvertently generate a black-box scenario where the community must depend on trusted specialists to navigate the opaque system instead of analyzing the results independently.

Digital Literacy and Accessibility

The positive impact of Blockchain technology on electoral integrity relies on the assumption that all voters have the requisite digital literacy skills to engage with a Blockchain voting system. Nonetheless, some studies indicate that the digital divides informed by education, age, and socioeconomic status can extend existing disenfranchisement. ⁴⁶ That said, implementing Blockchain voting needs to be preceded by efforts to educate voters about the technology so that they have an adequate understanding and trust in the system.

Role of Social Media and Disinformation

The capability of Blockchain technology to secure electoral data does not address the challenges of misinformation. Today’s elections are as much about the social media narratives, spin, and misinformation surrounding them as they are about casting votes. ⁴⁷ Even if there were a voting system based on Blockchain that was utterly impenetrable, trust in the system would still be undermined in highly polarised elections due to rampant inaccurate claims regarding the results.

2.4.4 The Role of Digital Transparency in Democratic Legitimacy

Democratic legitimacy defines whether a government has the right to rule and if it acts with the consent of the citizens. Improving digital transparency with Blockchain technology may help in improving legitimacy by: •

Offering tangible proof that hacking did not occur with the voting.

Elections conducted using Blockchain technology may expose previously undetected discrepancies in the voting process. These discrepancies, however, could be misinterpreted as fraudulent activity, thus eroding trust in the electoral system. While Blockchain may reinforce election integrity, its effectiveness will hinge on public perception, institutional support, and integration into current electoral systems. ⁴⁸ Should insufficient public confidence and trust exist, an inclusive strategy could lead to opposition to the elections. Lastly, to bolster the democratic image of a nation, issues surrounding democratic election integrity need comprehensive public trust initiatives and civic education campaigns that examine governance issues, establish trust in the system, and systematically approach the integration of Blockchain technology.

Ethereum, launched in 2015, fundamentally transformed the Blockchain landscape by introducing smart contracts, laying the groundwork for decentralized applications (dApps) and the burgeoning decentralized finance (DeFi) ecosystem. ⁶⁵ In 2022, Ethereum underwent a significant and pivotal upgrade known as “The Merge,” transitioning its consensus mechanism from Proof-of-Work (PoW) to Proof-of-Stake (PoS). This change was a monumental step in the network’s evolution, as it led to a dramatic reduction in energy consumption by more than 99% and laid the groundwork for future improvements in network scalability. ⁶⁶ Ethereum’s transition to a Proof-of-Stake (PoS) consensus mechanism was a fundamental architectural shift, moving beyond simple energy efficiency. This strategic reorientation laid the essential groundwork for key scalability solutions like sharding and developing Layer 2 solutions. By making the base layer more efficient, PoS specifically enhanced its ability to support Layer 2 data requirements, positioning Ethereum for a multi-layered scaling approach. ⁶⁷

Despite its popularity, Ethereum’s limited transaction speed and high fees, especially during peak use, have hindered its mass adoption. In Blockchain, scalability efficiently handles more transactions and users while maintaining security and decentralization. Smart contracts are vulnerable to security flaws that can lead to significant financial losses. ⁶⁸ Their immutable and transparent nature permanently exposes any vulnerabilities to hackers, making them a prime target, with billions lost annually to exploits. Ethereum’s architecture is shaped by the Blockchain trilemma, which includes balancing decentralization, security, and scalability. ⁶⁹ The tasks are divided between Layer 1, which handles the main network and focuses on security and decentralization. The Layer 2 solutions are built on top of Layer 1 to handle high transaction volumes, allowing Ethereum to scale without compromising its foundational principles.

Ethereum can often feel slow; to overcome this, layer 2 solutions have become so important. Layer 2 speeds up the transactions and makes decentralized apps and NFTs practical for everyone. The widespread adoption of Layer 2 solutions has reshaped the Blockchain ecosystem. L2s have fueled a “second wave” of DeFi adoption by offering cheaper, faster transactions, attracting new investors to major protocols like Aave and Uniswap. ⁷⁰ They have also enabled massive growth in the NFT and gaming sectors, with platforms like Immutable X providing gas-free minting and easy user onboarding.

Layer 2 solutions evolve from temporary fixes into a core component of Ethereum’s infrastructure, driven by strategic Layer 1 upgrades like proto-danksharding (EIP-4844). ⁷¹ Activated in March 2024, EIP-4844 introduced “blob transactions” that drastically cut Layer 2 transaction costs by 10-100x and boosted Layer 2 transaction volume by 224%. ⁷² This Layer 1 optimization for Layer 2 data solidifies their role, suggesting a future where Layer 1 secures data while most transactions happen on Layer 2.

The proposed Blockchain-based voting system involves key actors: election administrators, voters, election auditors, Ethereum nodes, and smart contract developers. Election administrators manage the process, voters cast secure electronic votes, auditors ensure integrity, Ethereum nodes maintain the network, and developers create smart contracts. Figure 4 illustrates a simplified use-case model of the system, depicting interactions among these actors and the Blockchain infrastructure, enhancing transparency and security in electoral processes.

Election Administrators The main operations of election administrators are as follows: •

Manage Election: Administrators can create, configure, and manage election campaigns. This includes setting up the parameters such as voting dates, eligible candidates, and voter eligibility criteria.

Voters Voters are the general public eligible for a voting campaign. The main operations of voters are as follows: •

Register to Vote: Voters can register themselves on the Blockchain-based system to participate in elections. This process may involve identity verification and confirmation of eligibility criteria. To simplify the process, voters can register to the Blockchain system for a voting campaign via an intermediate web application server operated by a government body such as the election commission.

Auditors •

Audit System Integrity: Auditors can verify the integrity of the smart contracts and voter registration, ensuring that the system operates without any manipulation or fraudulent activities.

Web Application and Smart-Contract Developers •

Develop Smart Contracts: Developers can create and deploy smart contracts that govern the rules and logic of the voting system, ensuring transparency, security, and automation of voting processes.

Ethereum Nodes Ethereum nodes play a prominent role in the Blockchain-based voting system by actively listening for and processing critical transactions such as voter verification, vote casting, and election result dissemination. Their active participation is integral to maintaining the integrity and transparency of the electoral process. Therefore, Ethereum nodes are considered principal actors within our system, ensuring secure and decentralized management of voting operations. This collaborative effort among nodes strengthens the reliability and resilience of the voting system, bolstering confidence in the accuracy and fairness of election outcomes. •

Verify voters: In Ethereum-based voting systems, nodes verify voter identities before they can cast their votes. Nodes maintain the Blockchain’s integrity by executing smart contracts that authenticate voters and record their votes securely. This decentralized approach ensures transparency and safeguards against manipulation, promoting trust in the electoral process.

System Architecture The architecture of a simplified Blockchain-based distributed voting system comprises four tiers: the storage services tier (Tier-1) ensures secure storage of encrypted voter data and transaction records, collectively enhancing transparency, security, and reliability in electoral operations. The Web3 Blockchain network smart contract services tier (Tier-2) hosts smart contracts governing the voting process. The Web2 application services tier (Tier-3) manages business logic and user authentication. The front-end tier (Tier-4) provides user interfaces for voter interactions.

Tier-1

As illustrated in Figure 5, tier-1 encompasses critical data storage services like MySQL for traditional data management and Blockchain ledger for immutable, decentralized record-keeping. Tier-3 voting application server utilizes MySQL-based storage engines to efficiently store and retrieve user credentials, voter information, and administrative data. Meanwhile, the Ethereum network in tier-2 involves Ethereum nodes maintaining individual copies of the Blockchain ledger that guarantees transparency, security, and integrity in the voting process by securely recording each vote as a tamper-proof transaction. This Tier-1 layer forms the foundation of the application’s architecture, combining the reliability of traditional databases with the innovation and trust of Blockchain technology to uphold the integrity of the voting process. In other words, a Blockchain ledger ensures that a voter can only cast a single vote for a candidate by restricting the backtracking of the cast votes to the candidates and producing trustworthy voting campaign results.

Tier-2

Tier 2 is the critical service layer of a trust-less distributed voting system. The trust-less means the system is designed so that participants don’t have to trust a single, central authority to function securely and reliably. It is composed of an Ethereum Blockchain network. An Ethereum network consists of thousands of computing nodes that individually store a copy of a distributed, synchronized database known as the Blockchain. The network is a distributed, peer-to-peer network. ⁸¹ The major feature of such a network is that each Ethereum node can store smart contracts in the Blockchain and run them in its Ethereum virtual machine. A smart contract is a stored procedure that performs atomic digital transactions, the outcome of which can be verified by the participating Ethereum nodes and committed to the Blockchain database. Every transaction is stored in the Blockchain network, such as Ethereum, and such storage is immutable and tamper-proof. ⁸²

The Ethereum network provides the following services to our voting system: 1.

Register voters and store them in the Blockchain.

The operations are performed in the smart contract deployed on the Ethereum network.

Tier-3

Tier 3 is composed of the web application services that can be utilized by election administrators for the following tasks: 1.

Register the voting campaign officers.

Tier-3 application servers utilize Tier-1 relational database services such as MySQL for data storage. Our tier-3 web application service was built in C#. Alternatively, we can use cloud storage services such as database.com, Oracle, Amazon Aurora, IBM Db2, and BigQuery. ⁸³

Tier-4

Tier 4 architecture encompasses various end-user devices, including smartphones, personal computers, tablets, and client applications such as web browsers and crypto-wallets. These devices play a pivotal role in the Blockchain-based voting system by serving as interfaces through which stakeholders, including voters and election administrators, interact with the electoral process. One of the distinctive features of devices in this layer is their ability to securely host and manage crypto wallets. Crypto wallets store cryptographic keys that authenticate users and authorize their actions within the voting system. For voters, these wallets enable secure and anonymous casting of votes, ensuring confidentiality and integrity throughout the voting process.

Election administrators utilize crypto wallets to manage voter registration, monitor election activities, and validate results, maintaining transparency and accountability in electoral operations. Moreover, end-user devices in tier 4 facilitate seamless connectivity to the Web3 Blockchain network, where smart contracts execute and enforce the voting process rules. This direct interaction with the Blockchain ensures that all transactions, from voter registrations to ballot submissions and result tabulations, are recorded immutably and transparently on the distributed ledger. By leveraging the capabilities of smartphones, computers, and other client applications, the voting system enhances accessibility for voters, enabling them to participate conveniently from any location with internet access. This inclusivity fosters higher voter turnout and engagement in democratic processes, while the secure handling of crypto wallets and Blockchain interactions ensures the system’s resilience against cyber threats and fraud. The voters utilize the client applications for the following tasks: 1.

To cast the votes for the candidates.

We created programs based on.Net Core 7 to simulate the operations of the tier-4 devices and applications. However, browser-based client applications can be developed for production purposes to support multiple operating systems, such as Windows, MacOS, Linux, Android and iOS.

The model’s primary strength lies in its pragmatic and context-specific design, differentiating it from other nations’ theoretical frameworks and legacy systems. While we acknowledge the pioneering work in Estonia and the advanced research in South Korea, the proposed model’s core innovation is its tailored approach for Oman. It moves beyond a purely academic exercise by seamlessly integrating with Oman’s existing e-governance infrastructure, specifically the national ID card and the ’Sawtak’ system. This strategic decision minimizes adoption barriers and leverages an already-trusted biometric authentication layer. The focus on a simple, modular design using both synchronous and asynchronous transactions is a deliberate architectural choice that directly addresses Oman’s unique logistical challenges, ensuring a system that is not only technologically robust but also practically implementable and regionally relevant.

Estonia’s well-established “i-Voting” system, a centralized remote voting solution, has been used for years, authenticating voters through a national ID card with a chip and a Public Key Infrastructure (PKI). ⁸⁴ However, despite its success, the system has drawn criticism from security experts due to its centralized server architecture, which presents a single point of failure and potential vulnerabilities. ⁸⁵ The proposed model leverages a decentralized Blockchain, providing higher transparency and auditability. Unlike Estonia’s system, where a central authority manages the vote record, our model uses a public ledger that permanently and transparently records votes, allowing anyone to verify the entire voting record. ⁸⁶ This immutability builds public trust and offers a more resilient solution by eliminating the single point of failure.

South Korean research, notably from institutions like ETRI, has explored complex, theoretically advanced Blockchain e-voting systems using hybrid consensus models and sharding to achieve high scalability. ⁸⁷ In contrast, our model’s pragmatic design and immediate implementability are strengths. Instead of relying on novel cryptographic techniques or architectural overhauls, the proposed solution seamlessly integrates with established biometric technology and a robust existing Blockchain (Ethereum). This approach is a practical engineering choice, utilizing a modular, synchronous, and asynchronous model to address real-world logistical challenges and minimize adoption barriers.

The “Sawtak” is an operational system that verifies voter identity off-chain using the National ID and biometrics; its centralized architecture carries inherent risks. The Blockchain-based model addresses these limitations by introducing a decentralized system with voting data distributed across a network of nodes, which eliminates a single point of failure and provides resilience against cyberattacks. The voter’s real-world identity is decoupled from the on-chain record; while the public can verify that a valid vote was cast, they cannot determine who cast it. Additionally, the model can scale and use Layer 2 solutions to accommodate a national-scale election.

The proposed model aims to enhance Oman’s existing e-governance infrastructure to integrate with the National ID card and “Sawtak” system’s trusted biometric verification. The proposed system helps to shift from the traditional trust us model to a verify for yourself solution. The tamper-proof nature of Blockchain lets anyone audit the entire voting record independently and build public confidence. The proposed model is built with a practical, modular design that tackles a major logistical challenge by handling different jobs at different speeds. For less time-sensitive tasks like voter registration, it works like sending an email; the system doesn’t have to wait for a reply to move on. But it switches to a real-time, instant confirmation method for the high-stakes moment of casting a vote on election day. This innovative, two-speed approach keeps the system running smoothly and efficiently without overcomplicating a critical process.

The simulation of the proposed model operates on a Layer 1 protocol. It takes advantage of the core functional and security benefits of a Blockchain-based voting system, relying solely on the Ethereum mainnet, which would introduce a significant scalability bottleneck for a national-scale election in Oman. These limitations of Layer 1, such as the number of transactions per second (TPS), could lead to high network congestion, delayed vote processing, and high transaction fees. The issue might trigger more during the peak voting hours, undermining the system’s efficiency and public accessibility.

To overcome this challenge, the proposed model is designed with a future-proof architecture that integrates with Layer 2 scaling solutions, specifically Optimistic and Zero-Knowledge (ZK) Rollups. These L2s are designed to process most transactions off the main chain, bundling them into a single, compressed transaction that is then settled on Layer 1. Integrating with Layer 2 increases transaction throughput while maintaining the core security with assurances of the Ethereum mainnet, which is helpful for the national election in Oman, to handle the scalability. Layer 2 can accommodate the authentication of voters and ballot casting on separate networks for instant transactions with nominal fees. Furthermore, Layer 1 can be used as a decentralized settlement layer to receive cryptographic proofs of all the votes cast. The dual architecture can handle large numbers of voters during national elections with security, transparency, and integrity.

The digital voting on Public Blockchain offers transparency and auditability, but presents a critical challenge to voter privacy. The advanced analysis of the data in the public ledger can lead to voters’ unique wallet addresses associated with their vote. Hence, there is a chance of compromising confidentiality due to the inherent immutability of the public ledger. This tension between transparency and privacy is crucial for consolidating the model’s design using Zero-Knowledge Proofs (ZKPs). ⁸⁸ The cryptographic method ZKP allows one party to prove to another party that a given statement is true, without revealing any evidence outside the statement’s validity. ⁸⁹

In the electoral system, voter can cryptographically prove their eligibility and the validity of their vote by hiding their identity or the chosen candidate. It helps to handle privacy concerns of public Blockchains and achieve privacy-preserving decentralized applications. ZKPs can be integrated into the proposed model, and instead of the voter’s wallet directly submitting a transaction with their vote to the Blockchain, it will operate in a privacy-centric manner. ⁹⁰ The voter can still authenticate using national ID and biometric data via the ‘Sawtak’ system, establishing eligibility.

After the authentication system generates a cryptographic ZKP to confirm the validity of the voter data and vote regarding the eligibility criteria, the secured data is submitted to the smart contract on the Blockchain. The smart contract would verify the proof’s validity without seeing the voter’s identity or the specific vote, which would be recorded in an encrypted or anonymized form. The process will help maintain the immutable public record of all the votes cast during the election, ensure transparency, and make the final tally easier. Further, it will guarantee that no external party can link a specific vote back to a particular individual. ZKPs can ensure that the voting model is transparent and privacy-preserving, addressing the fundamental weakness of all public Blockchains, strengthening the system’s integrity, and building public trust.

Performance evaluation in a Blockchain-based voting system involves assessing its efficiency, reliability, and scalability, focusing on metrics such as transaction throughput, latency, scalability under increasing loads, security, fault tolerance, resource utilization, audit ability, transparency, and user experience to ensure optimal system operation and voter trust. The research on a Blockchain-based voting system for Oman yielded several key findings from its experimental simulation. The proposed model demonstrated strong technical performance, successfully processing a high volume of simulated voter data and executing both voter authentication and ballot casting with minimal delay via smart contracts. The simulation also confirmed the system’s robust security features, showing that its decentralized nature prevented single points of failure and that votes recorded on the Blockchain were immutable and could not be altered or deleted by external parties. Furthermore, the biometric authentication step effectively blocked duplicate votes from a single user.

While these technical findings are conclusive, the paper presents several speculative statements about the system’s real-world implementation. These are not proven facts but predictions and hypotheses about what could happen if the system were deployed. For instance, the Blockchain’s inherent transparency could lead to greater public trust, increased voter turnout, and higher public confidence in the electoral process. However, these are logical, well-reasoned predictions and not conclusions supported by experimental data, as a real-world social experiment would be required to prove them. Similarly, the study assumes that Oman’s nationwide telecommunications infrastructure can support the system, but it cannot definitively confirm this without a separate, large-scale assessment of the real-world network’s readiness.

As part of the prototyping, the following tasks were completed: 1.

Load a 1000 list of voter-related data to SQL servers. Each voter is identified by a synthetic Social Security Number (SSN) and has other information such as full name, address, phone number, and email address.

Two main transactions, voter registration and vote casting, were executed in two different ways: 1.

Synchronous transactions: This method synchronously submits transactions to the Blockchain network. In other words, individual voter registration and individual vote-casting transactions were executed one after another. A total of 1000 transactions for each were executed to measure the execution time. Figure 6 shows the time required for registration and voting 20 individual transactions run synchronously.

Figure 7 shows the time required by asynchronous execution of 100 batches, each consisting of 10 transactions for voter registration and vote casting. The red plot is the line plot for time (MS) taken by a transaction for vote casting and receipt of the confirmation, and the blue line plot is the total time taken for voter registration.

Figure 8 Timing 100 batches of transactions, each containing 10 individual transactions for registration and voting.

Figure 9 displays the average time required for the asynchronous execution of 100 batches, each containing 10 transactions for voter registration and vote casting. This metric is crucial for evaluating the efficiency of the Blockchain-based voting system, particularly in handling concurrent transactions during electoral peaks. It underscores the responsiveness and reliability of end-user devices like smartphones and computers securely processing these transactions, highlighting the system’s scalability and performance under varying loads. These insights are essential for optimizing the voting system’s infrastructure to ensure robustness and effectiveness in electoral operations.

The experiment primarily focuses on the viability and processing time of election-related transactions. Security-related issues include security vulnerabilities, potential attack vectors, or the risk of Blockchain manipulation. While Blockchain is widely considered a secure and tamper-resistant technology, it is susceptible to several potential vulnerabilities and attack vectors such as Sybil attacks, 51% attacks, Smart Contract Vulnerabilities, data integrity and oracle manipulation, Denial of Service (DoS) attacks, Key Management and Insider Threats, Blockchain forking and inconsistency, ⁹¹ among others. ⁹² The most pertinent threats are discussed below: •

Sybil Attacks: In a Sybil attack, an adversary creates multiple fake identities to gain disproportionate influence over the network. This can compromise consensus decisions, particularly in permissionless Blockchains. It can be mitigated by enforcing large stakes for validators in a network like Ethereum. ⁹³