Pro-Europe protesters demonstrate outside the Supreme Court in London on Dec. 6. (Andy Rain/European Pressphoto Agency)

The British government said Tuesday that it would begin rolling out mandatory identity checks for voters, prompting a backlash from those who say the move could effectively disenfranchise millions.

The controversy, with strong echoes of one that played out across the United States this year, turns on the question of whether identity checks are a reasonable tool to combat electoral fraud or are merely an attempt at voter suppression by another name.

Until now, voters in every part of Britain except Northern Ireland have been allowed to vote without presenting an ID.

But that will change under a pilot program announced Tuesday by Britain’s Conservative government. A photo ID, such as a driver’s license or passport, will be required in up to 18 different areas across England for local elections in 2018.

If the program is successful, it could be expanded nationwide. Britain is next expected to hold national elections in 2020.

Voting is “one of the most important transactions you can make as an individual, and in the 21st century many transactions require proof of ID,” Chris Skidmore, the constitution minister, told the BBC on Tuesday.

Skidmore denied that the pilot program targets any “particular community” and said the program would help ensure that British citizens can exercise their democratic rights “regardless of their race or their religion.”

[In Britain, a surge in hate crimes]

But critics said the program would disproportionately hurt immigrants and poor voters who lack the necessary documents.

Labour Party spokeswoman Cat Smith said that mandating identification “risks denying millions of electors a vote.” She cited data from Britain’s Electoral Commission showing that 3.5 million voters — or about 7.5 percent of the national total — would not have the necessary photo ID.

Katie Ghose, chief executive of the Electoral Reform Society, compared the plan to using “a sledgehammer to crack a nut.”

“There is simply no evidence to suggest that electoral fraud is widespread across the U.K.,” Ghose said in a statement. “Where it has occurred, it has been isolated and should be tackled locally.”

Ghose, whose group campaigns to improve democratic participation, said that “evidence from the U.S. shows that it’s generally those already most excluded from the political process that are worst affected by strict ID laws.”

[Brexit debate seen as making Britain more racist]

According to the National Conference of State Legislatures, 34 U.S. states have laws requiring that voters show some form of ID at the polls.

Allegations of voter fraud and voter suppression became flash points in this year’s U.S. presidential election campaign.

Republican-controlled state legislatures in recent years have passed laws making it more difficult for citizens to register and to vote. The changes, Democrats have argued, amount to an organized effort to disproportionately exclude poor and minority voters.

Republicans say the changes are needed to prevent fraud. Following his November victory, President-elect Donald Trump tweeted that Democratic rival Hillary Clinton had benefited from the support of “millions of people who voted illegally.”

He supplied no evidence, and election-law experts say the claim is baseless.

Read more

Today’s coverage from Post correspondents around the world

Like Washington Post World on Facebook and stay updated on foreign news