Analysis of the First-Past –the-Post Electoral System in Malawi

Dr. Henry G. ChingaipeInstitute for Policy Research & Social Empowerment

Email: henrychingaipe@yahoo.co.uk26th June 2014

Outline of Presentation1. Introduction Definition of an electoral system The significance of electoral systems in

democratic politics and governance Typology of electoral systems2. Malawi’s Electoral System: Empirical outcomes Description of the system Advantages of the system Disadvantages of the system2. Securing Legitimacy and Legality for a Malawian President: A Case for TRS Description of the TRS Advantages of the TRS Disadvantages of the TRS

3. Electoral Systems and the Inclusion/Exclusion of Women How FPTP excludes women – the case

of Malawi How PR includes women – lessons from

Mozambique and South Africa4. Alternative routes to inclusion for women: Affirmative action/quota – Lessons from Uganda and Tanzania5. Concluding remarks Legitimacy of government in Malawi: Is

it about Electoral systems or system of government or other factors?

A case for TRS and associated reforms A case for statutory quota for women

Electoral system: Definition• The mechanisms by which the preferences of citizens

are translated into seats in representative institutions.

• At the most basic level, electoral systems translate the votes cast in an election into seats won by parties and candidates

• The key variables of an electoral system are: The electoral formula used i.e. whether the system

is majoritarian or proportional AND what mathematical formula is used to calculate the allocation of seats.

Electoral system cont’d

• The ballot structure i.e. whether the voter votes for a candidate or a party AND whether the voter makes a single choice or expresses a series of preferences.

• constituency magnitude i.e. how many representatives a constituency or ward elects.

Types of Electoral Systems• There are many types of electoral systems but they

fall in three broad categories that are further distinguished into a total of 12 main types

• In addition, there are ‘other’ electoral systems, which do not fit perfectly well in these three broad categories. Such systems are also rarely used.

Electoral systems- A TypologyElectoral system

majority

FPTP

TRS

BV

PBV

AV

PR

List PR

STV

Mixed

MMP

parallel

Other

SNTV

LV

BC

Electoral System: Importance• The subject of electoral systems ought to be of central interest to anyone

concerned with the operation of democratic systems of Government because they structure and condition some of the important democratic institutional setups of a country:

The nature of political parties and the party systems that emerge are influenced by the kind of electoral systems in place.

Nature of political representation-The relationship that exits between those elected and their respective electorate is also shaped to some extent by electoral systems.

Whether politics will be adversarial and confrontational or accommodative and consensus oriented may have to with the type of electoral system(s) in use.

Furthermore, with regard to chances of winning, what or who is elected under one system may not be elected under another.

Malawi’s Electoral System

• Known as ‘first past the post’ (FPTP), ‘winner takes all’, ‘single member constituency’ and ‘single ballot’.

Basic Features• Provides for the election of an individual candidate to

represent people of a clearly defined geographical area.

• In voting, each voter places a single mark beside the name of the candidate of his or her choice.

• In order to win, a candidate requires only one more vote than the closest competitor.

Advantages of FPTP

• Can produce single party Executive leading to more capability to implement policies and legislation (more relevant in parliamentary government)

• Produces a clear opposition and government• Relatively simple for the electorate, especially where

illiteracy is high.• Considered superior in representation of

constituency interests because of a direct, vertical connection between elected representatives and voters.

Advantages of FPTP

• Discriminates against minority parties either through underrepresentation or complete exclusion and therefore curtails the destabilizing impact of tiny (extremist) parties

• FPTP system improves the quality of elected office holders because voters are free to choose between candidates rather than just political parties.

Disadvantages• The System has the potential to produce a winner elected by a

minority. – Presidential level: 1994, 2004,2014– Parliamentary: 99 in 2004; 110 in 2009; 134 in 2014

• This puts the legitimacy of the winner at stake. Thus, a candidate may be legally elected but may lack legitimacy to feel accepted by a majority of the electorate.

• Losing parties and/or candidates secure votes but no seats. This means that the votes for losing candidates are ‘wasted’ because they are not represented by anyone in Parliament. – This amounts to systemic disenfranchisement. This increases alienation

from the political system and the likelihood of anti-system movements.

Disadvantages cont’d

• The system exaggerates and encourages regional and tribal fiefdoms or other parochial identities

• Interests of the electorate whose parties have no chance of winning in fiefdoms have no chance of being represented. – This poses challenges for nation building.– Disenfranchisement

• The system is particularly open to manipulation by ruling parties through gerrymandering -1999??

Disadvantages• The FPTP system also entrenches the ‘monetization of

politics’ syndrome. The system puts the candidate in the limelight and compels him or her to engage in extravagant expenditures aimed at keeping votes or winning new ones.

• System does not favour the election of women – Next presentation by Mrs Emma Kaliya.

• In the event of a vacancy in Parliament, the system demands a by-election and scales up the costs of electoral administration.

• Requires review of constituency boundaries periodically in relation to population – currently there

Constituency Demarcation

• The MEC is mandated and obliged by the Constitution in Section 76 (2) to determine constituency boundaries on the basis of approximately equal numbers of voters eligible to register, subject to population density; ease of communication; geographical features and existing administrative areas.

• 76(2)(b) the MEC is mandated and obliged to review constituency boundaries at intervals of not more than 5 years and alter them in accordance with the principles provided in section 76(2)

Constituency Demarcation cont’d

• Last review published in January 1999• Non compliance due to late appointments of

commissioners and lack of funding• EC Strategic plan says review will be done in

2017 in preparation for the 2019 TPE• Look out for gerrymandering: 1999 report

recommended 70 new constituencies: 11N, 17C, 42S. (247 member Parliament)

Is there a Case?

2014 2009 2004

Smallest constituency Likoma 6,842 Likoma 5,107 Likoma 4,794

Largest constituency Lilongwe City Central 99,629 Lilongwe City Central 87,088

Lilongwe North 71,081

Range 92,805 81,981 66,287

Mean constituency voter population

7,537,548/193 = 39054.65 5,871,819/193 = 30423.93 5,752 028/193 =29,803

Voter population differences in smallest and largest constituencies

• The principle of political equality and equality of population of eligible voters per constituency is seriously undermined (over-representation in 111 constituencies; Underrepresentation in 82 constituencies.

• The findings on under-representation and over-representation entail that there is need to rethink a few things that are based on constituencies. For instance, there is need to think of a formula of differentiation in the allocation of Constituency Development Fund (CDF) to make it variable with the population.

• Preliminary calculations suggest that numbers of constituencies must increase in 9 districts: Dowa, Mchinji,Lilongwe,Dedza,Balaka and Blantyre

• However, there is a strong enough opinion that rather than increasing constituencies, the country should be seeking ways of reducing the number of seats in the National Assembly (!).

Securing Legitimacy for a President

• The Two Round System (TRS) is also known by other names, notably, ‘Run-off’, ‘double-ballot’ and ‘successive ballots.’

• Each of the names indicates a central feature of the system: that it is not one election but takes place in two rounds.

• The objective is for the wining candidate to be elected by an ABSOLUTE MAJORITY of VALID votes

• This system is commonly used in presidential elections.

TRS Cont’dBasic features• Voters express a simple preference for a single

candidate just as in FPTP.• If a candidate receives an absolute majority, he or

she is elected outright with no need for a second ballot.

• Normally, in such a re-run, the top-most two candidates contest

• In Kenya, in addition to a candidate obtaining an absolute majority (50%+1), the candidate has also to obtain at least 25% of the vote cast in at least half of the provinces.

TRS- Advantages• It allows voters to have a second choice for their chosen

candidate, or even to change their minds on their favored choice.

• It encourages diverse interests to coalesce behind the successful candidates from the first round in the build-up to the second round, thus encouraging bargains and trade-offs between parties and candidates.

• In countries like Kenya, where the TRS is combined with the regional threshold requirement, the system has the potential of ensuring that who ever wins has not only an absolute majority, but also a relatively balanced regional/provincial legitimacy.

TRS - DISADVANTAGES• The system places considerable pressure on the

electoral administration to run a second election soon after the first thereby significantly increasing the overall cost of the election.

• It places an additional burden on the voter with voter apathy affecting the second round – a lower absolute majority may be worse off than a higher simple majority.

•

TRS - DISADVANTAGES

• It shares many of the disadvantages of ‘first past the post’. – wasted votes for losing candidate ; voters losing with their candidate(RWANDA: Ruling party no more than 51% of cabinet).

• In countries which are not politically stable, the waiting period between the first and second elections may pose a great danger as it may result in political uncertainties which may have wider political social and economic repercussions.

Conclusion

• Key Questions– Retain FPTP or adopt PR?– For presidential elections: Retain FPTP or adopt

TRS?– Is it really about Electoral systems or system of

Government? Presidential, Parliamentary; Semi-presidential?

*** THANK YOU VERY MUCH***

INCLUSION & EXCLUSION OF WOMEN

FPTP and Women• Research has shown that this system does not favour

the election of women and other marginalised groups• Why do few women contest and even fewer get

elected under this formula?• Constituency magnitude influences party strategies

and criteria for picking candidates -the party has no chance to balance the party ticket to take care of gender concerns or objectives.

• A party candidate will either be male or female because the nominating decision is a strictly ‘zero-sum’ game

FPTP & Women• Are local party elites to blame? -Not necessarily. They are influenced

by their perceptions about the probability of winning the seat for their party

• Women who wish to be considered by the local party selection committee have to contend with the selectors’ stereotypes and sexist assumptions about the attributes of an ‘electable’ candidate

• The absolute number of female candidates is low but has been growing. – In 1999, it was 60 out of 666 nominees (9%)– In 2004, it was 153 out of 1,365 (11.2%).– In 2009, it was 239 (20.3%).– In 2014 it is 257• There is still lack of enthusiasm for political positions among women

(50/50 cannot just be in results!).

FPTP & Women• Under FPTP any attempt by a political party to

increase the number of women MPs has to mean selecting them for ‘safe’ or winnable seats.– However, this inevitably means throwing out sitting male

MPs. • The establishment of a new party seems to provide

opportunities for women because the problem of de-selecting sitting MPs does not arise.

• For example in 2004,NDA and RP fielded more women candidates than AFORD and MCP. So too DPP in 2009

Female Candidates in Parliamentary elections

UDF

AFORD

MCPMDP

NPF UPMDU

INDEPEN

DENTCONU

PETRA

PPM

MGODE

MAFUNDE

NDA RPNSM NUP

NCDPFP

NARCCODE

MPPNRP

DPP

UMODZI UIP UP PPPDM NCP

CCPNLP

NASAF

TOTA

L CONTE

STED

WINNER

S0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

160

180

200

220

240

260

280

19941999200420092014

FPTP & Women cont’d• The cut-throat and personalized nature of the

system and the extent to which it hinges on access to resources to run individual campaigns for both primary and actual elections militate against the participation of women

• This is the case because many women do not have access to resources and are culturally sensitive to flagrant personality attacks and innuendos that are characteristic of political campaigns.

FPTP & Women• Numbers of women have increased

– 5.65% in 1994 – 8.8% in 1999 – 14% in 2004. – 22% in 2009

• These results show that under FPTP gradual increases can be achieved through positive action.

• Positive action seeks to encourage members of the group suffering discrimination and to widen opportunities open to them

• However the growth rate is far below the desired rate in tandem with international, regional and national targets.

• In light of this, there have been calls for PR

Women & PR• Why do countries with PR show a strong increase in

the number of female representatives? – PR systems have consistently higher constituency

magnitudes, which lead to higher party magnitudes.– PR systems (esp. LIST) makes parties more conscious to

balance their tickets. Gatekeepers divide winning slots among various internal party interests – ANC in South Africa; Frelimo in Mozambique

– PR systems focus on the party rather than on the individual. Thus candidates are taken out of the direct spotlight that is cited as a major disincentive to the political participation of women under the FPTP system.

Women & PR• A PR system is superior for women if there

are low electoral thresholds as high ones discourage the creation of mini parties, which often let in few representatives, usually male.

• Closed party lists where the party determines and ranks candidates have much potency in delivering more women into Parliament. This is the case because, once decided, women’s names cannot be struck off or demoted.

Women & PR

• However, this depends on the criteria that political parties use to select and place candidates on the party list.

• It only delivers more women if the party has adopted some form of affirmative action in selecting its list candidates as is the case in Mozambique and South Africa

• However, PR on its own does not guarantee increased women’s presence in Parliament. It needs to be complimented by deliberate gender quota systems, often at the level of political party

• Thus the real magic resides not in the electoral system per se but in affirmative action through quota systems

Affirmative Action Through Quotas• There are constitutional (and/or statutory)

and voluntary quotas.• With the former, women must constitute at

least a minimum proportion of the elected representatives.– Argentina and Brazil where quotas are fixed at

30% and 20% respectively – Uganda: one woman per district – Tanzania 20% of the seats in Parliament .

AA Through Quotas

• If the electoral system in use is FPTP, the quota system reserves either ‘actual seats’ in the Assembly, for example in Tanzania, or constituencies, for example in Uganda.

• The second alternative is where political parties adopt their own quotas for women as parliamentary candidates. –but does not guarantee election.

AA & Quotas• Electoral quotas which revolve around

‘fielding female candidates’ work better with PR than FPTP electoral systems in terms of delivering results

• Quota systems that reserve ‘ actual seats’ or ‘constituencies’ work better with FPTP systems.

Quota: Advantages

• Introducing quotas shows recognition that women do not start out with the same advantages as their male colleagues. They are disadvantaged by the impact of inter-generational institutional matrices, which decisively reduce their chances for candidature, and of being elected.

• With quotas, the burden of recruitment is shared between those who run the recruitment process and the individual women

AA & Quotas

• However, quotas are a much debated issue, they raise serious questions and in some cases strong resistance.

• Opinions vary even among women themselves regarding their effects and fairness in increasing women’s representation

Arguments for and Against Quota

Against• They stigmatize and call into

question the caliber and credentials of qualified women who can be elected on merit

For• Women are free to contest for

constituency or ward seats on merit

• Only women who have been candidates but have not been successful may be considered for quota seats

• The problem is not that women are not capable, it is the fact that women are not visible and audible in decision making political structures

Arguments cont’d

Against• They are against the

principle of equal opportunities for all

For• Liberal notion of equality of

opportunity does not translate into actualized opportunities for women because of social and contextual factors

• Quota represents a shift of focus from equality of opportunity which assumes a levelled playing field for men and women to equality of outcomes through direct and exact means of achieving societal goals

Arguments cont’d

Against• They amount to sex

discrimination and therefore unlawful and unconstitutional

For• The low numbers despite equality of

opportunity, show that there is systemic sex discrimination in practice because of social constraints on women that limit their capacity to meaningfully use equality of opportunity that is in the laws

• Quota represents positive discrimination in the sense that it does not reduce opportunities for men but increases opportunities for women

• Quota does not discriminate but compensates for actual barriers that prevent women from their fair share of political seats.

Arguments cont’d

Against• Quotas for women require

that other minority groups should have quotas too

For• The issue here is not that women are a

minority. The issue is that women are a majority in our society but are excluded;

• Social, poverty and demographic indicators show that women are disadvantaged in many respects which suggests that the current levels of representation are far below to effect positive change hence the need for a critical mass that will help

• Malawi have international obligations and quota represents the best possible method for delivering on those commitments while lifting the profile of women

A quota for Women in MW?

• If YEEES• What matters most are the specific

administrative details for implementing quotas. Thus the trick is to devise an implementing strategy that upholds many fundamental democratic values.

One Option for Mw

• Introduce quotas of magnitude 30% for both the National Assembly and Local Government Councils.

• These will be additional seats to those that are based on constituencies and wards respectively. Thus, women will be free to contest for constituency and ward seats as they have always done before. This quota will ensure that women constitute at least a critical mass of 30%.

• The 30% additional seats should be distributed to political parties based on a proportional formula that is tied to electoral results.

• There are two options for this. Either based on the proportion of constituency seats won by parties or on the proportion of votes won by parties that have seats in the national assembly or in the local council.

• Introduce a threshold: only political parties that have at least 5% of constituency seats will be eligible for a share of quota seats for women

One option cont’d• Eligible political parties will prepare and submit lists of names of female

candidates of their parties who lost in the constituency or ward elections followed by those who lost in primary elections.

• The list of candidates must be in the order of priority based on the proportion of votes that the candidates amassed in the election.

• Political parties will submit the lists of their Parliamentary candidates to the MEC Chairperson (or Speaker of Parliament)who will apply the formula of proportionality to determine how many candidates from each political party will share the quota seats and which candidates will actually take the seats.

• For local councils political parties will submit the lists of their local government candidates to the Chairperson of Council who will apply the formula of proportionality to determine how many candidates from each political party will share the quota seats and which candidates will actually take the seats.

THANK YOU FOR YOUR ATTENTION