PROPORTIONAL REPRESENTATION - RECOMMENDATION FOR UGANDA
PROPORTIONAL REPRESENTATION:
THE NEW ELECTORAL SYSTEM UGANDA NEEDS FOR GENUINE REPRESENTATION
Report of Study carried out by Muhammad KibirigeMayanja and Omar Dawood Kalinge–Nnyago with support from the Netherlands Institute for Multiparty Democracy; Nov-Dec 2011
ABBREVIATIONS AND ACRONYMS USED IN THIS REPORT
CP Conservative Party
CA Constituent Assembly
DP Democratic Party
FDC Forum for Democratic Change
FPTP First Past The Post
JEEMA Justice Forum
KY KabakaYekka
UPC Uganda Peoples Congress
NRM National Resistance Movement
NRC National Resistance Council
PR Proportional Representation
RA Reform Agenda
UPM Uganda Patriotic Movement
US United States of America
PROPORTIONAL REPRESENTATION:
THE NEW ELECTORAL SYSTEM UGANDA
Report of Study carried out by Muhammad KibirigeMayanja and Omar Kalinge – Nnyago with support from the Netherlands Institute for Multiparty Democracy; Nov-Dec 2011.
ABSTRACT This study introduces to the reader the Proportional Representation Electoral system and convince the reader that it is the best system to address a number of deficits in Uganda’s democracy, as it is the only system that can ensure effective and genuine representation. It also proves that Proportional Representation is the preferred electoral system for a growing number of stable and prosperous democratic countries of the world. To contextualize the study, we dwell on an analysis of Uganda’s political system, the evolution of Uganda’s present winner takes all election system and the impact it has had on Uganda’s democracy with its associated ills of electoral and post-election violence, vote buying and a lingering individual merit system that has undermined the strengthening of political parties. The associated worrying trend of increasing voter apathy is also highlighted.The study then attempts to give a true picture of the importance of an Electoral system in a democracy. The concept of Proportional Representation is introduced and compared with the FPTP model. We later introduce variants of the Proportional Representation models by introducing the PR models of four countries: South Africa, Israel, Palestine and The Netherlands. A list of countries that practice Proportional Representation is provided as an appendix.The Study takes note of the impact of the electoral system and shows that PR is compliant with both Parliamentary and presidential models. We conclude with some recommendations on the right model of PR for Uganda, and the political system and put forward some milestones towards the adoption and implementation of Proportional Representation as Uganda’s Electoral system.
1.0 BACKGROUND
1.1 What is Proportional Representation?
Proportional representation (PR) is a concept in voting systems used to elect an assembly or council. PR means that the number of seats won by a party or group of candidates is proportionate to the number of votes received. For example, under a PR voting system if 30% of voters support a particular party then roughly 30% of seats will be won by that party.
1.2 Common terms used in Proportional Representation
1.2.1 Party List
This is the system of Proportional Representation in which voters choose among parties, rather than among candidates, and seats are awarded to the parties in proportion to the votes they have received. Each party submits a list of candidates for the election. This list is the “Party List”.
1.2.2 Slate
A Slate is the Party List a party presents at an election.
1.2.3 Mixed Member Proportional Voting
In this method, a half of the members are elected by a party-list vote, while the other half is elected through single member plural voting.
1.2.4 Single Transferable Vote
A single transferable vote or STV system is a type of proportional representation electoral system. In a single transferable vote system, voters rank candidates in their order of preference by numbering the candidates on the ballot. The candidates with the highest preferences are elected.
2.0 FIRST PAST THE POST (FPTP)
First past the post system is also, called the Westminster model as it originates in the political culture of United Kingdom . The basic principle of FPTP is that the winner is the candidate with the plurality – relative majority - of all valid votes. Connecting this with the second important feature, single-member district, FPTP is the least proportional formula leaving usually more than 50% of cast votes unrepresented.
On the other hand it is praised for its ability to form a one-party majority government, which does not have to seek for support and built coalition. While this is the standard in the western democracies, in many of the developing countries with diverse societies and multi-party system (for instance in India) the winning party without parliamentarian majority has to look for coalition partners. In general, FPTP leads to disproportional representation, majority of wasted votes and elimination of minorities and women candidates.
2.1 Historical evolution of FPTP in Uganda
Since independence, Uganda has gone through a series of political Crises involving the use of violence and the security forces to abrogate the constitution and changing electoral and political systems to favor one group or another. This includes the 1966 crisis, 1971, 1979, 1985 and 1986. These crises resulted in extension, suspension, postponement or tempering with the rules of elections and this denied Ugandans the opportunity to search for effective representative models of elections until the 1995 constitution was made.
2.2 1995 Constitution
After 7 years of interim administration, in 1993, the NRM Government appointed a Constitutional Commission to make a new constitution for Uganda
The constitutional making process was over dominated by various short term interest groups, including those who wanted to preserve the NRM Government in power, those who wanted to change the government and Buganda’ interest in a federal arrangement.
After heated debates, the CA promulgated a new Constitution that provided for First Past The Post (FPTP), a Movement system of Governance and direct presidential, parliamentary, local government and other public elections. The political parties were frozen according to article 271 since it was not possible to have more than one political system in force. However, the Constitution stipulated that “Parliament shall have no power to enact a law establishing a one-party state”. But the Constitution recognized the continued existence of the Movement which was state funded. The Constitution also provided for changing the political system through a referendum. The new Constitution provided for term limit to the office of the president under Article 105.
General elections were held in 1995 under individual merit system as provided by the new Constitution. Three candidates namely YoweriKaguta Museveni, Paul KawangaSemogerere and Muhammad KibirigeMayanja contested the Presidential election. President Museveni was declared the winner. Although parties were not allowed to exist, the entire Movement machinery supported the Candidature of President Museveni and the Parliamentary candidates he anointed.
After the election in 1996, the opposition campaigned vigorously against the Movement system and they challenged the system through courts of law for infringing on the fundamental freedom human rights of freedom of association. In 2005 the constitution was amended, to eliminate individual merit and allow the operation of full multiparty democracy in Uganda
The Constitution provided for every district to elect one Woman representative in addition to the opportunity for women to compete with men in open constituencies. The total women positions at district level were about 30% of the total seats in parliament. The women however, competed for a much larger constituency than the normal parliamentary constituency and women constituencies were largely dominated by NRM candidates whom the movement had funded.
After the 2005 amendments parties could field candidates to each constituency while independent candidates could also present themselves to various constituencies but the FPTP electoral system was maintained. An electoral commission appointed by the president with approval from Parliament was put in charge of organizing and supervising the election.
2.3 Statement of the problem
The promulgation of a new Constitution in 1995 and the subsequent amendments in 2005 fell short of bringing about genuine representation for all various groups and political parties in Uganda . It created the FPTP system that creates a dual party system instead of a genuine proportional representative democracy.
A close analysis of the General elections held in 1980, 1996, 2001, and 2006 and 2011 in Uganda
The dual party system works in favor of the two most powerful teams (including the incumbent) and does not tolerate many parties. Once it sorts out the two strongest parties/candidates, others are practically suffocated and buried alive. This is the bitter experience we have to accept from 1980, 1996, 2001 and 2006 elections in Uganda.
The women could only be brought in through the reserved constituencies as it was under the movement. However, the reserved constituencies were too large and quite straining to female starters. Most women seats were worn by the ruling NRM which financed the campaigns of its candidates.
It is therefore critical to search for a representative electoral system and to use all possible means to influence an electoral reform in Uganda.
3.0 IMPORTANCE OF AN ELECTORAL SYSTEM
Electoral system (sometimes called voting system) is the fundamental element of every representative democracy. Despite its crucial importance in the system of constitutional institutions, it was in many cases subject of accidental choice. Electoral system shapes the rules of the game among political parties and individuals and can affect who is elected and which party gains the power. It also influences both the party system and the internal structure and cohesion of political parties.
It has been discovered that electoral systems determine the broader political culture, the way in which political parties and their representatives behave. It may encourage parties for further cooperation and forging of alliances or it can also tend to deepen the animosity among separate social groups within the society. The decision of the right electoral system for the country has an impact on the turnout at the election, and it is not only in the case of disillusioned voters, whose vote will be wasted due to disproportionality, but also in the case of too complicated electoral system which is unclear for an average vote.
Each representative democracy needs an Electoral system, which determines the procedure of electing peoples representatives. Electoral system can be defined as set of methods for translating the citizen’s votes into representatives’ seats (Lijphart, 1994).
3.1 Criteria for evaluating an Electoral System
An electoral system is evaluated on the following criteria
- Fairness between political parties
- Effective representation of minority and special interest groups
- Effective representation of minorities
- Political integration
- Effective representation of constituents
- Effective voters’ participation
- Effective government
- Effective parties
- Effective parliament
- Legitimacy
4.0 GLOBAL TRENDS IN FAVOUR OF PROPORTIONAL REPRESENTATION ELECTORAL SYSTEM
There is ample evidence that many democracies are rapidly transforming to the PR Electoral system. Although Britain had resisted PR, the present government is a coalition between the Conservatives and the Liberal Democrats. The Lib Dems, advocate for a proportional representation electoral system.
4.1 Countries that use the Proportional Representation electoral system
A list of countries which use the Proportional Electoral System is attached as Appendix 2.
4.2 Basic Principles of PR
The basic principles underlying PR elections are that all voters deserve representation and that all political groups in society deserve to be represented in our legislature in proportion to their strengths in the electorate. In other words, everyone should have the right to fair representation.
In order to achieve this fair representation, all PR systems have certain basic characteristics that set them apart from another election system. Instead of electing one person in each Constituency (electoral district) several people are elected together in varying sizes of member constituencies (districts). The whole country may form one multi member District, there may be relatively small multi-member District with only 3-4 members or they may be larger with 10-20 members. Diagram 1 (below) presents four different patterns of voting depending on the number seats in the electoral district (constituency)Section which is FPTP represents the pattern for 50 single Seat constituencies. Section B represents the extreme end position all 50 MPs are elected together in 1 fifty seat PR districts. Part C are all PR models for 10 five seat district and 5 ten seat Districts.
The second Characteristics of all PR systems is that they divide up the seats in the multi-member districts according to the proportion of votes received by the various parties or groups running candidates. Thus if the candidates of party A win 40% of votes in a 10 member district, they receive 4 of the 10 seats or 40% of the seats. If another r Party wins 20% of votes they get two seats and so on.
DIAGRAM 1: FPTP Vs Proportional Representation
FPTP 3 versions of Proportional representation
|
A
50 Single Seat District
|
|
B
1 Fifty Seat PR District
|
|
C
10 five Seat PR District
|
|
D
5 ten seat PR District
|
|||||||||
|
1
|
1
|
1
|
1
|
1
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
5
|
5
|
|
10
|
|
1
|
1
|
1
|
1
|
1
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|||
|
1
|
1
|
1
|
1
|
1
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
5
|
5
|
|
10
|
|
1
|
1
|
1
|
1
|
1
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|||
|
1
|
1
|
1
|
1
|
1
|
|
|
|
1
|
|
|
|
5
|
5
|
|
10
|
|
1
|
1
|
1
|
1
|
1
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|||
|
1
|
1
|
1
|
1
|
1
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
5
|
5
|
|
10
|
|
1
|
1
|
1
|
1
|
1
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|||
|
1
|
1
|
1
|
1
|
1
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
5
|
5
|
|
10
|
|
1
|
1
|
1
|
1
|
1
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|||
5.0 ALTERNATIVE PR MODELS BY SELECTED COUNTRIES
There are several models of PR. In this section, we introduce the PR models of four countries; South Africa, Israel, Palestine and The Netherlands.
5.1 Proportional Representation in South Africa
The 1993 Interim Constitution (which facilitated the 1994 democratic election) specified in detail the procedures to be used for the election of the national and provincial legislatures. This resulted in an electoral system that is almost purely proportional in that there is a nationwide district for the conversion of votes into seats facilitated by a large national assembly. Furthermore, there is no electoral threshold.
The system is laudable in that it makes for maximum proportionality, a factor that strengthens the democratization process. The 1996 Constitution, however, only prescribes that the electoral system "results in general in proportional representation".
Debate with regards to adjusting South Africa 's electoral system surfaced after the 1999 election. The main area of contention has been the fact that Proportional Representation (PR) lessens accountability between representatives and their constituencies. This is compounded by the fact that South African party lists are closed. The anti-defection clause (prohibiting crossing of the parliamentary floor) has also been criticized and labelled undemocratic. The point of this clause is to ensure that parliamentary seats, which are party allocated, remain with the parties - it does, however, have the unfortunate effect of producing MP's who toe party lines rather than holding their allegiance to voters. Legislation that was passed in late 2001 allowing party defection at a local level in order to facilitate the Democratic Alliance split has signalled the need for this clause to be reviewed.
Theorists advocate that democracies in transition have different requirements from electoral systems than democracies that are consolidating. It is argued that South Africa has successfully drawn its many players into its democratization process and has significantly strengthened its ruling party in order to deal with programmes of social and economic reform - what is needed now is for democracy to be seen in motion in terms of public participation. Specialists in the field of electoral systems such as ArendLijphart, Andrew Reynolds and Jorgen Elklit have put forward suggestions that a constituency element be implemented into the South African PR system whereby PR lists at a national level would be combined with either single or multi member constituencies. This would introduce a direct accountability element into the South African system while still maintaining its proportionally representative nature.
5.2 Proportional Representation in Israel
|
5.3 Proportional Representation in Palestine
There are 132 seats in Palestine 's parliament. 66 are elected proportionally on a national party list system.
The other 66 deputies will be elected in local districts.
Using proportional voting for the election of half of the seats was an important development in the Palestinian electoral system. It helped ensure a fairer representation of the various parties and of all Palestinians.
Using proportional voting for the election of half of the seats was an important development in the Palestinian electoral system. It helped ensure a fairer representation of the various parties and of all Palestinians.
In Palestine , the electoral system is PR for Parliament but they also still hold direct Presidential Elections. SO, Parliament derives its mandate from the general population and the President also gets the same from the same Electorate. This means that Parliament has no powers to impeach the President, because both the legislature and the executive derive their mandate form the same source.
It is this scenario that created the current impasse in Palestine between The President (Abbas of the PLO) and the legislature controlled by Hamas. When disagreements between the two broke out, the Parliament had no power to impeach the president. Conversely, the President had no power to dissolve parliament. This ended up with Hamas controlling Gaza and President Mahmoud Abbas controlling the West Bank .
It, therefore, follows that a scenario whereby the legislature and the executive are all equal with none above the other could produce disastrous consequences.
5.4 Proportional Representation in the Netherlands
All votes cast for a candidate on a party list accrue to the total for the party. For the determination of the number of seats to be appointed to a party, the electoral districts play no role; seats are apportioned proportional according to the national vote. On the ballot a black square with a white circle is placed next to each candidate on the list. The voter must fill in the circle next to one of the candidates with a red pencil (for machine ballots there is a lever for each candidate).
In 1956 the number of seats in the Second Chamber was expanded from 100 to 150. The only threshold for obtaining representation in the Second Chamber is the number of valid votes cast, divided by 150, which also determines the electoral quotient (recently about 60,000 votes). Each multiple of the electoral quotient entitles a party to an additional seat.
When each party has received the seats to which it is entitled in this manner, it is generally found that not all seats have been allotted. The seats that remain are distributed by the method of largest average (the so called d'Hondt method). This replaced the largest remainder system in 1933, as the largest average was felt to provide a more precise proportionality. The use of this method does provide an advantage to larger parties. As a partial compensation for smaller parties since 1973 it has been possible to combine lists, both within and across districts, for the determination of the number of seats received.
Once the total number of seats for each party has been determined, the first name on the list is declared elected. The procedure next moves to the second name on the list, and continues until all seats have been filled. The only exception is that a candidate who receives a quarter of the electoral quotient is declared elected automatically (presuming of course that his or her party is entitled to at least one representative). The lists remain in effect between elections and are used to fill seats that have fallen empty. No by-elections are held.
Roughly the same system as explained above is used for municipal, provincial and European elections. Only the First Chamber is chosen in a different way; its members are chosen by the provincial legislatures.
Though commitment to proportionality is extremely strong in The Netherlands, compulsory voting was abolished in 1970.
6.0 STRENGTHS AND WEAKNESSES OF PR VERSUS FPTP
The strengths and weaknesses of the PR system vis-à-vis the strengths and weaknesses of FPTP are presented in the table below. In many instances the strengths PR turns out to be weakness of FPTP.
|
Strengths
|
Weaknesses
|
|
Proportional Representation
|
|
|
|
|
First Past The Post (Winner takes all)
|
|
|
|
7.0 POLITICAL SYSTEM
Proportional Representation is primarily about the electoral system. However, as pointed out at the beginning, the way the voting is done influences both the party system and the internal structure and cohesion of parties. Electoral systems determine the broader political culture, the way in which political parties and their representatives behave. It may encourage parties for further cooperation and forging of alliances or it can also tend to deepen the animosity among separate social groups within the society. If the electoral system changed, the political system may also need to change.
A survey of the political system among countries which are running on PR shows that there is a broad array of political systems. The most important issues in the political systems for PR is whether the country should have a presidential system or a parliamentary system. A presidential system means that the President is directly elected as well as Parliament. A parliamentary system means Parliament is the only one which is elected by the electorate and the party with the largest no of MP form the government. In many cases Parliamentary system also determines the proportion of cabinet seats for each party.
Countries from our list on PR with parliamentary system include Israel , Turkey , Germany , the Netherlands , Norway , Sweden , Japan and India Palestine , South Africa , France , Russia , Namibia and Congo
In Uganda Uganda Uganda
8.0 JUSTIFICATIONFOR UGANDA TO ADOPT PR
What is the justification to adopt PR?
· PR is just and equitable. In the majoritarian system with simple majority, a parliamentary candidate can win a constituency with low levels of overall vote (for example 30%). This means a party can win majority seats in parliament with far less than 50% of overall support. This injustice does not occur under the PR because each party representation is proportional to the number of votes it gets countrywide.
· No vote is wasted under PR. A popular candidate with nationwide support collects votes all over the country. Under the majoritarian system parliamentary a candidate who has support nationwide is restricted to votes in one constituency. Furthermore, if a candidate gets 100% support in the majoritarian system, the excess votes needed to win a constituency (49%) are redundant. In PR the excess votes needed to win a constituency are transferred to other candidates elsewhere for the party. Therefore there are no redundant votes in PR, since the election is for a list of all the party’s candidate in an election.
· PR will eliminate the excess burden of a larger constituency (District) to women. In a way the current system which subjects women to a bigger electoral area than men is discriminatory. Only rich women or women from the party in power (which in Uganda could have ill-acquired resources) will be able to win under the present system.
· PR will curb election violence and vote buying. PR requires party list voting and this in a way is often political ideas through Manifestos rather than personalities. Individuals have no particular constituencies since we are running under a multi-member constituency.
· PR is true multiparty democracy and not a dual party system (hegemony of the two largest parties). The narrowing down of choices to two options which have cropped up in Uganda
· Coalitions formed after the election: One of the main advantages of PR is that it favors formation of coalitions after the election. During the last 10 years Uganda
· The election-related war in 1980, which brought President Museveni to power, could have been avoided if there was a just electoral system such as the proportional representation in Uganda . The election in 1980 were held under the FPTP system. President Museveni quickly realized that the dual party system was futile in 1981. The two leading contenders then were Obote’s UPC and Semogerere’s DP. Museveni’s UPM and MayanjaNkangi’s CP were spoilers in the 1981 election. Museveni realized that the UPM would never take off. He therefore resorted to armed struggle in 19981. If Mr. Musevni had not gone to the bush to take over power by force of arms he would not even be winning more than 10% seats in Parliament today. It is not far-fetched to forecast that another Museveni will arise in the future after getting frustrated with the current FPTP and unleash another ‘liberation’ bush war in Uganda.
9.0 RECOMMENDATIONS
9.1 Model of PR
We recommend a PR model that distributes seats according to the proportion of votes received in the elections by different parties. If a party wins 40% it gets 40% of seats in Parliament.
We recommend that the whole country be divided into 10 member electoral Constituency/districts.
The different regions to become multi-member electoral Regions/Districts will be West Nile Region, Northern Region, Karamoja/Teso Region, Eastern Region, Busoga Region, South Buganda Region, North Buganda Region, Western Region, South Western Region and Greater Kampala Region.
The seats in each electoral regions/districts will be determined by the population size in that region. It is therefore clear that the electoral regions will not have the same number of seats.
We recommend that the contests in the elections be among lists of candidates in each region. The candidates of any given list will be elected to Parliament on the basis of the order in which they appear on the list for each region. If a certain party received sufficient votes for 5 seats in a region, the first 5 candidates on its list will enter Parliament. If an MP passes away or resigns his seat or is disqualified from sitting in parliament for whatever reason, the next on the list will replace him/her. Therefore there will be bye-election.
We recommend that no votes should be lost for whatever reason. If there are excess votes in one Region they should be transferred to another region to increase no of seats in parliament for that party.
We propose further that we adopt a model PR where the proportion of votes does not only determine Parliamentary representation but also participation in Government.
To ensure that women equitably participate, the slates or priority list of candidates at all levels must include women candidates. For every three candidates listed in each region, at least one of them must be a woman.
We propose further that We s use the reform to PR to reduce the size of parliament and cabinet. The tax payers in Uganda have been for a long time overburdened by the large size of parliament. The number of seats in Parliament should be brought down to 200. Given a total population of 35 million people, we are therefore proposing that every 175,000 people be represented by 1 MP elected in Multi member region/district PR.
The size of cabinet too should also down sized. Cabinet including Ministers, Ministers of State and deputy Ministers should be 20% of the size of parliament. The size of cabinet, therefore, should be 40 members.
9.2 Political system
In order to avoid the inherent clash between the directly elected president and parliament and also in order to reduce corruption (vote buying) we should adopt the parliamentary model of PR. Instead of the electorate voting for the president and Parliament, all focus in the election should be on parliament (Parliamentary system). The leader of the party with the largest number of seats in Government should be given the opportunity to form the Government and become the executive Prime Minister. The Executive Prime Minister must not be exempted from court processes as another check and balance of power. S/he should be sued and should be able to sue as an individual. The subjection of the chief executive to court process should also act as a control mechanism to minimize the abuse of power.
Parliament should then sit and elect a president. Although the president should be a non executive president, he should exercise considerable powers. However, being the fountain of honor, the non-executive President should be exempted from the court processes. S/He should in fact appoint the Judges with Parliamentary scrutiny. He should be the commander in Chief of the Armed forces and should be the one to approve the promotion and appointment in the UPDF.
9.3 Elections at District and Sub-county and LC1 levels
The PR system works at local council levels as well. Since the districts, sub-counties and LC 1 are small areas, they can form one electoral area for all the seats in the council. Each party should present its slate (lists of members it wants to constitute the council and take the seats in proportion to the votes they get in the election). A similar arrangement should be followed at sub-county level. The election is for a party rather than an individual. The party with the majority votes or the coalition with a majority votes identifies the chairman and forms the Government. But all the parties can be included in the village, sub-county and district cabinets.
10.0 HOW TO REFORM THE ELECTORAL SYSTEM FROM FPTP TO PR IN UGANDA
There have been a number of calls across the political divide in Uganda to transform to Proportional Representation, but no deliberate steps have been taken to move the process forward. It would therefore be futile if this initiative stops at producing just this paper and shelve it to gather dust. It is therefore important that some effort be made to move the process further. The process to transform current FPTP to PR in Uganda can be divided into various milestones. These include:
a) Sensitization of key stakeholders such as leadership in the different political parties, Parliament and the Civil Society Organizations about PR and how it works.
b) Educating and mobilizing the general public so as to empower them to demand for the change of the electoral system from the present one (FPTP) to PR.
c) Setting the process for agreeing on the model of PR to adopt in Uganda in motion
d) Process for amending the Constitution to transform from FPTP to PR.
10.1 Sensitization of key Stakeholders
Of the above 4 steps, we propose that initiatives be made to carry out the first step. We propose that workshops for key leaders in each party be organized as a test of the receptiveness to the general concept of PR. Similar workshops should also be made for Parliamentarians. The workshops should also encompass key CSOs and the press. This process should also be used to build strong bridges and alliances across party lines in support to PR. The outcomes of this first step would then determine the level of support to PR in various parties which would define whether to proceed further or to take a break or to go back on the drawing board.This step could also include a study visit to countries where PR is in operation by key leadership from various political Parties.
Appendix 1
Sources and recommended readings
· Lijphart, A.; Electoral System and Party System: A study of Twenty-Seven Democracies, 1945-1990, Oxford University Press, New York , 1994).
·Amy, Douglas J. (1993). Real Choices/New Voices: The Case for Proportional Representation Elections in the United States Columbia University
·Denis Pilon (2007). The Politics of Voting. Edmond Montgomery Publications.
·Colomer, Josep M., ed (2004). Handbook of Electoral System Choice. Palgrave Macmillan.
·Jess; Mary Southcott (1998). Making Votes Count: The Case for Electoral Reform. London: Profile Books.
· Reynolds, A., Reilly, B., Electoral system Design, International Institute for Democracy and Electoral Assistance, Stockholm, 1997
· Lijphart, A., Patterns of Democracy. Government forms and Performance in Thirty-Six Countries. New Haven and London , Yale University Press 1999Lijphart, A., Electoral System and Party System: A study of Twenty-Seven Democracies, 1945-1990, Oxford University Press, New York, 1994
· Lijphart, A., Democracies; Patterns of Majoritarian and Consensus Government in Twenty-One Countries, Yale University Press, New Haven and London, 1984
· Reynolds, A.; Reilly, B., Electoral system Design, International Institute for Democracy and Electoral Assistance, Stockholm, 1997
· LeDuc, L.; Niemi, R.G.; Norris, P.; Comparing Democracies, Sage Publications, New Delhi,1996
· Katz, S. Richard, Electoral Reform in Italy, Modifying a Pure PR System, Center for Voting and Democracy, http://www.fairvote.org/reports/1993/katz.html
Journals
·John Hickman and Chris Little. "Seat/Vote Proportionality in Romanian and Spanish Parliamentary Elections" Journal of Southern Europe and the Balkans Vol. 2, No. 2, November 2000
·Gallagher, M. , Proportionality, Disproportionality and Electoral Systems, Electoral Studies, 10 (1991),
· Multiparty electoral competition in the Netherlands
Germany: A model based on multinomial probit NORMAL SCHOFIELD, ANDREW D. MARTIN, KEVIN M. QUINN & ANDREW B. WHITFORD, Center in Political Economy, Campus Box 1208 , Washington
Appendix 2
List of Countries that use Proportional Representation
|
Country
|
Type
|
|
Party list
|
|
|
Party list
|
|
|
Party list
|
|
|
For Senate only, Single Transferable Vote
|
|
|
Party list, 4 % threshold
|
|
|
Party list
|
|
|
Party list
|
|
|
Party list
|
|
|
Mixed Member Majoritarian
|
|
|
Party list
|
|
|
Party list
|
|
|
Party list, 4 percent threshold
|
|
|
Party list
|
|
|
Party list
|
|
|
Party list
|
|
|
Party list
|
|
|
Party list
|
|
|
Party list
|
|
|
Party list, 5 percent threshold
|
|
|
Party list
|
|
|
Party list
|
|
|
Party list, 5 percent threshold
|
|
|
Mixed member proportional
|
|
|
Party list
|
|
|
Party list
|
|
|
Party list
|
|
|
Party list, 5 percent threshold
|
|
|
Party list
|
|
|
Mixed member proportional, 5 percent threshold
|
|
|
Party list (with plurality bonus).
|
|
|
Party list
|
|
|
Party list
|
|
|
Mixed Member Majoritarian
|
|
|
Party list
|
|
|
For Upper House (Rajya Sabha) only, Single Transferable Vote by State Legislatures
|
|
|
Party list
|
|
|
Party list
|
|
|
Single Transferable Vote
|
|
|
Party list, 1.5 percent threshold, with fragmentation so strong that
|
|
|
Party list (with plurality bonus giving the strongest party/coalition an automatic majority)
|
|
|
Mixed Member Majoritarian
|
|
|
Party list, 5 percent threshold
|
|
|
Mixed Member Majoritarian
|
|
|
Party list
|
|
|
Party list, 8 percent threshold
|
|
|
|
|
|
Party list
|
|
|
|
|
|
Single Transferable Vote, small constituencies (no third party got elected since 1966), with possible bonus to give House control to the biggest party
|
|
|
Mixed Member Majoritarian
|
|
|
Party list
|
|
|
Party list
|
|
|
Party list
|
|
|
Party list
|
|
|
Party list, no threshold to elected 150 members, high fragmentation ; Prime minister is the leader of the first party, but government talks may be long
|
|
|
Party list
|
|
|
Mixed Member Proportional
|
|
|
Party list
|
|
|
Party list
|
|
|
Party list
|
|
|
|
|
|
Party list
|
|
|
Party list, 5 percent threshold
|
|
|
Party list
|
|
|
Mixed member proportional representation, 5 percent threshold
|
|
|
Party list
|
|
|
Party list
|
|
|
Party list
|
|
|
Party list
|
|
|
Party list
|
|
|
Party list, 5 percent threshold
|
|
|
Party list, 4 percent threshold
|
|
|
Party list
|
|
|
Party list
|
|
|
Party list, 3 percent threshold, many small constituencies (forms a PR two-party-and-regionalists system, a result of a consensus between the right-wing, which wanted a two-party system with FPTP, and left-wing and regionalists
|
|
|
Party list
|
|
|
Party list
|
|
|
Party list, 4 percent threshold
|
|
|
Party list
|
|
|
Mixed Member Majoritarian
|
|
|
Mixed Member Majoritarian
|
|
|
Party list, 10 percent threshold, one of the highest in the world
|
|
|
Party list
|
|
|
|
|
|
Party list
|
|
|
Mixed Member Majoritarian
|
|
|
Party list
|
Comments
Post a Comment
Feedback appreciated. We shall get back to you timely.
#omarkalingeinsights