Constituency delimitation: No alternative to regional list system
Birendra P Mishra
It is certain that the constituent assembly (CA) election will not be held on June 20, the date stipulated by the eight parties contrary to the provision of the Interim Constitution (IC) that provides completion of the CA polls by the middle of June.
The Election Commission (EC) has asked the government for an additional 110 days-time for conducting the elections after all related laws are enacted by the Legislature-Parliament (LP).
This was a foregone conclusion on the basis of four kinds of logic. First, there was dilly-dallying by the government in placing the bills related to controversial issues like electoral system. Secondly, there was delay in getting consensus on these issues. Thirdly, there was delay in the formation of the Electoral Constituency Delimitation Commission (ECDC), which has submitted its report only last week. The ECDC’s constitution and recommendations have become the issues of controversy in the LP. And fourthly, the EC, too, did not come out openly with its constraints in holding the elections from the very beginning.
The genesis of the controversy lies, to some extent, in the adoption of the electoral system by the eight parties on November 8, 2006, and its subsequent inclusion in the IC. It provides for mixed electoral system in which First Past the Post (FPtP) system becomes a component as 50 per cent seats are to be elected through it. Moreover, when the government decides to increase the number of seats in the CA on the basis of population of Madhes and Hill areas, formation of the ECDC becomes imperative. It was constituted twice and its constriction became controversial from its very inception.
However, the decision to increase the number of seats in the Tarai has wittingly side-tracked the main issue related to the demands of Madhesis for proportional representation in the House by turning it into the issue of proportional representation in the Tarai. It overlooked the main problem and equated the problems of Tarai and Madhesis. The issues of Tarai will always be the issues of Madhesis but not vise versa as some inhabitants of the region are other than Madhesis. Hence, some of their demands cannot be the same as they differ significantly in their mother tongues, customs and traditions.
As for the FPtP system, it is prone to gerrymandering when the delimitation of constituencies comes up. The party in power will influence delimitation process in its favour to bring support votes in one constituency, which will affect the final results in favour of the party. Although, the recommendations of the ECDC have not yet been made public, there were uproarious scenes in the House and the business of the House has been stalling. If the grievances of the members of parliament (MPs) are genuine, these have to be looked into, as these will affect the legitimate rights of the MPs and other stakeholders.
Had the IC not accepted the mixed electoral system the problem would not have arisen. Now that the polling will not be held within six /seven months, there is ample time to rethink the electoral system seriously. Keeping in view the nature of the election, which is in no way similar to a parliamentary election, let there be a public debate on the electoral system that has its impact on the meaning and function of any CA and the formulation of the constitution.
There are two options — either we have to switch over to Regional List Proportional System from the mixed system or if we decide to continue the FPtP for half of the CA, we must eliminate the division or boundary of the constituencies within the districts. Those who get maximum seats will be automatically elected. This system is known as Single Non-transferable Vote system. Japan and Jordan have adopted it. In it, every voter will have only one vote irrespective of the seats to be contested in an administrative district. Through it, major segments of society will get representation. But there is one danger — the party or a community with more votes can win more seats if its voters cast their votes strategically for particular candidates calculating the number of the voters.
The only way to have a meaningful CA is to adopt the Regional List Proportional System for the entire House of 235 having 21 regions based on languages, ethnic and cultural proximity, administrative and communication facilities. Some seats can be reserved for constitutional
experts, civil society organisations including professionals, disabled, religious minorities and for those communities who cannot be elected on the strength of their numbers to make the House of 290 to 295, making it a House which will not only be proportional and inclusive
in nature but also a qualified inclusive CA in reality. It would be qualitatively inclusive by including women, Dalits and indigenous nationalities of those regions where they really inhabit.
Prof Mishra is ex-election commissioner
It is certain that the constituent assembly (CA) election will not be held on June 20, the date stipulated by the eight parties contrary to the provision of the Interim Constitution (IC) that provides completion of the CA polls by the middle of June.
The Election Commission (EC) has asked the government for an additional 110 days-time for conducting the elections after all related laws are enacted by the Legislature-Parliament (LP).
This was a foregone conclusion on the basis of four kinds of logic. First, there was dilly-dallying by the government in placing the bills related to controversial issues like electoral system. Secondly, there was delay in getting consensus on these issues. Thirdly, there was delay in the formation of the Electoral Constituency Delimitation Commission (ECDC), which has submitted its report only last week. The ECDC’s constitution and recommendations have become the issues of controversy in the LP. And fourthly, the EC, too, did not come out openly with its constraints in holding the elections from the very beginning.
The genesis of the controversy lies, to some extent, in the adoption of the electoral system by the eight parties on November 8, 2006, and its subsequent inclusion in the IC. It provides for mixed electoral system in which First Past the Post (FPtP) system becomes a component as 50 per cent seats are to be elected through it. Moreover, when the government decides to increase the number of seats in the CA on the basis of population of Madhes and Hill areas, formation of the ECDC becomes imperative. It was constituted twice and its constriction became controversial from its very inception.
However, the decision to increase the number of seats in the Tarai has wittingly side-tracked the main issue related to the demands of Madhesis for proportional representation in the House by turning it into the issue of proportional representation in the Tarai. It overlooked the main problem and equated the problems of Tarai and Madhesis. The issues of Tarai will always be the issues of Madhesis but not vise versa as some inhabitants of the region are other than Madhesis. Hence, some of their demands cannot be the same as they differ significantly in their mother tongues, customs and traditions.
As for the FPtP system, it is prone to gerrymandering when the delimitation of constituencies comes up. The party in power will influence delimitation process in its favour to bring support votes in one constituency, which will affect the final results in favour of the party. Although, the recommendations of the ECDC have not yet been made public, there were uproarious scenes in the House and the business of the House has been stalling. If the grievances of the members of parliament (MPs) are genuine, these have to be looked into, as these will affect the legitimate rights of the MPs and other stakeholders.
Had the IC not accepted the mixed electoral system the problem would not have arisen. Now that the polling will not be held within six /seven months, there is ample time to rethink the electoral system seriously. Keeping in view the nature of the election, which is in no way similar to a parliamentary election, let there be a public debate on the electoral system that has its impact on the meaning and function of any CA and the formulation of the constitution.
There are two options — either we have to switch over to Regional List Proportional System from the mixed system or if we decide to continue the FPtP for half of the CA, we must eliminate the division or boundary of the constituencies within the districts. Those who get maximum seats will be automatically elected. This system is known as Single Non-transferable Vote system. Japan and Jordan have adopted it. In it, every voter will have only one vote irrespective of the seats to be contested in an administrative district. Through it, major segments of society will get representation. But there is one danger — the party or a community with more votes can win more seats if its voters cast their votes strategically for particular candidates calculating the number of the voters.
The only way to have a meaningful CA is to adopt the Regional List Proportional System for the entire House of 235 having 21 regions based on languages, ethnic and cultural proximity, administrative and communication facilities. Some seats can be reserved for constitutional
experts, civil society organisations including professionals, disabled, religious minorities and for those communities who cannot be elected on the strength of their numbers to make the House of 290 to 295, making it a House which will not only be proportional and inclusive
in nature but also a qualified inclusive CA in reality. It would be qualitatively inclusive by including women, Dalits and indigenous nationalities of those regions where they really inhabit.
Prof Mishra is ex-election commissioner
Source: The Himalayantimes, April 23, 2007
No comments:
Post a Comment