The world of voting systems: which is the right choice for Bangladesh?

Bangladesh

Fri, Nov 8, 2024 05:38 PM
Last updated: Fri, Nov 8, 2024 6:37 pm

Fri, Nov 8, 2024 5:38 pm Last updated: Fri, Nov 8, 2024 6:37 pm

Visual: Anwar Sohel

“>

Visual: Anwar Sohel

Bangladesh is on the verge of comprehensive government reforms, much of which will involve overhauling the electoral system. A government commission has been created to consider all possibilities, and discussions are underway with the participation of political parties, experts and ordinary citizens.

Although voting in elections may seem simple to most, the number of different electoral systems around the world demonstrates the complex nature of democratically determining the rulers of a population.

For all the latest news, follow the Google Daily Star news channel.

In Bangladesh, like many other countries in the world, the electoral process is dominated by just two parties. — which may not be the most effective thing when it comes to truly representative democracy.

This allows elections to be held solely based on who gets the most votes. But if we expect more parties to become involved in a participatory democratic environment, then the weaknesses of these simple voting mechanisms will begin to emerge.

What happens if there are three candidates and one of them gets 34 percent of the vote and the others get 33 percent each? Is it fair for a politician who is supported by only 34 percent of the people to represent everyone?

To ensure that every vote has an impact on who governs the country, it is important to consider alternative voting systems. Many of these systems take into account the fact that in a pluralistic democratic environment there will be many more than two candidates or parties. Some take into account the fact that voters may have a first choice, a second choice, and so on, and all of these options have a right to be taken seriously.

This field of research has a name: social choice theory, based on rigorous mathematics and economic principles. While it may be difficult to delve into too many details of social choice theory in this article, given that comprehensive electoral reforms are on the horizon, let’s take a look at some common voting systems around the world and see what options the future holds for Bangladesh.

Multiple voting or majority voting

This is the current voting system used in Bangladesh and at least 39 other countries in their national legislatures. It is won by the candidate with the most votes in the election, regardless of turnout, even if the candidate received less than 50 percent of the vote. Many of the countries using this system are former British colonies, and the UK has used this system since the Middle Ages.

In first-past-the-post or plurality voting, the winner is not always the one with the support of the majority. Photo: Creative Commons

“>

In first-past-the-post or plurality voting, the winner is not always the one with the support of the majority. Photo: Creative Commons

The main criticism of this system is that it results in candidates being elected despite the majority of voters not wanting them. The system also discourages more than two candidates from running in an election, as candidates with similar ideologies tend to steal votes from each other, leading to the victory of the candidate with the opposite ideology. As a result, countries with such voting systems invariably fall into the trap of a two-party system, an effect known as Duverger’s Law.

The possibility of extremist ideologies coming to power in this system could potentially increase because voters have no incentive to vote for an alternative, even when their preferred party is marginalized, since accepting the alternative would mean a victory for the opposing ideology. Perhaps this is why Donald Trump was able to take control of the Republican Party in the United States.

Second round of elections (two rounds)

Perhaps the most famous example of this system is the French presidential election. In this system, when there are more than two candidates in an election, the condition of victory is that the candidate with the most votes must receive at least 50 percent of the votes to be declared the winner. If no candidate achieves this, then the top two candidates from the first round go head-to-head in the second round. The winner is the one who gets the most votes (which will definitely be above 50 percent) in the second round.

The second vote is held in two rounds, with the top two winners from the first round meeting in the second round. Voters have the right to change their vote from one round to the next.

“>

The second vote is held in two rounds, with the top two winners from the first round meeting in the second round. Voters have the right to change their vote from one round to the next.

The advantage of this system is that whoever wins the election does so with the support of the majority. However, the main criticism is that with a large number of candidates, even if there are only two left, voters will still have to vote for someone they don’t like and will be forced to choose the lesser of two evils. This is especially likely if the first round is close and all candidates receive the same percentage of the vote. Another criticism is that holding two large-scale elections is prohibitively expensive, but risks instability and law and order problems between the two rounds.

Ranked Choice Voting (Instant Round, Conditional Voting, Single Transferable Vote)

This system takes the idea of ​​a second round of voting and attempts to combine the entire process into one election. Instead of voters voting for just one preferred candidate, they rank their choices. For example, if there are five candidates in an election, voters can rank those five candidates in order of preference on their ballots. In some systems, voters can also rank as many candidates as they want, while in further variations, such as Sri Lanka’s conditional voting system, voters can only rank three options.

Generally, if no candidate receives more than 50 percent of the first-choice votes, the candidate with the fewest first-choice votes is eliminated and the votes of voters who selected that candidate are transferred to their respective second-choice candidates. This process continues until a candidate has 50 percent of the votes left.

In instant re-voting, this process is repeated until a winner is found.

“>

In instant re-voting, this process is repeated until a winner is found.

However, there are quite a few options for ranked-choice voting, most of which differ in how they count votes. For example, in a contingent voting system, all but the top two candidates are eliminated after the first count of votes, and the votes of eliminated candidates are divided between the top two candidates based on how high they placed on those ballots.

An example of a ranked-choice ballot for the 2016 Australian elections. Photo: Creative Commons

“>

An example of a ranked-choice ballot for the 2016 Australian election. Photo: Creative Commons

The benefit of ranked-choice voting in general is that it allows voters to vote for the candidate they want, regardless of whether they think that candidate can win. Because the options presented below carry significant weight in the ranked-choice voting system in the first place, voters have more say in who will represent them and who will not. Some criticisms include voter confusion, as well as the fact that in some special circumstances candidates may benefit from worse electoral performance by receiving fewer first-choice votes, provided they can obtain a large number of second-choice votes from candidates who will most likely lose.

Proportional representation

This method of voting has received some attention in recent times as it has been proposed by some experts (like the last Chief Election Commissioner and eminent economist Rehman Sobhan) and even Jamaat-e-Islami. Most political parties came out in support of it, with the BNP calling it “illogical”.

In this system, before elections, political parties publish lists of candidates in order of preference, indicating who they would nominate to parliament if they had only one seat, which two they would nominate if they had two seats, and so on. and the like. forward. During elections, voters simply vote for the party whose policies and candidates they support. Once the votes are counted, each political party can nominate candidates for the legislature based on the percentage of the vote they receive nationally.

For example, if in the future elections in Bangladesh, Party A gets 40 percent of the votes, Party B gets 30 percent, Party C gets 20 percent, Party D gets 5 percent, Party E gets 3 percent and Party F gets 2 percent, then these organizations will have it is allowed to nominate MPs based on their share of votes.

Since the Bangladesh Parliament has 300 elected seats, in this hypothetical scenario, Party A will get 120 MPs, Party B will get 90, Party C will get 60, Party D will get 15, Party E will get 9 and Party F will get 6 MPs.

It is a widely used voting method, with 85 countries around the world using it, including some developed countries in Europe. A version of the system called Mixed Proportional Representation, which combines elements of majoritarian and proportional representation, is used in seven countries. Some other countries use a “single transferable vote” system, which also includes elements of ranked-choice voting.

Proportional representation means minority votes matter more than in many other systems. Even if a party gets just one percent of the votes, it will win several seats in parliament, and in the context of Bangladesh, where one percent of voters number over a million, it makes sense for them to have representation in parliament.

This system allows multiple parties to participate in parliamentary politics, leading to the formation of coalition governments. Although some see this opportunity as a positive, especially for countries like Bangladesh, where for much of our history we have juggled super-majorities and near-one-party rule. Others are of the opinion that a large number of parties in parliament can cause the government to repeatedly lose legislative support, leading to instability, dysfunctional parliaments and chaos among legislators.