1

ISSUES IN TRANSITIONING FROM PROPORTIONAL TO MIXED-MEMBER PROPORTIONAL ELECTORAL SYSTEM IN IN SRI LANKA

Sujata Gamage, PhD MPAsujata@lirneasia.net

Dr. Sunil Gunaratne Memorial LectureNational Archives AuditoriumFebruary 11, 2016

2

Context 2003-2007

Interim Report of Parliamentary Select Committee on Electoral Reforms140+(70+15)=225Dissenting comments by SLMC and CWC

April 19, 2015SLFP165+(65+25)=255Presented to Cabinet and published in Sunday Times

June 12, 2015UNP145+(55+37)=237Gazetted as the 20th Amendment to the Constitution

June 26, 2015Parliament dissolved

2015--2016Public opinion sought for a new constitution

3

Terminology - familiar

Level (District, 22; National, 1) Seats (District MPs,196); National List, 29) PR is used to allocate both types among the

parties Cut-off point for qualifying for PR seats is 5% Highest remainder method is used to assign PR

seats (5.51+4.49 ~ 6+4) Preferential votes used to select individuals to be

returned as MPs

4

Terminology – new

Mixed-member methods Mixed Member Majoritarian / Mixed Member Proportional / Variation

Types of Members FPP / Additional

Additional MPs Best runners-up / Party list

Party Lists Closed and ranked / Open

5

Global TrendsShugart & Wattenburg, 2001

Century Type

19th Majoritarian

20th Proportional

21st Mixed

Mixed Methods : Germany and NZ as exemplars

6

Typology of Mixed MethodsShugart & Wattenberg, 2001

Yes Compensato

ry

MM with partial compensation

Hungary, Italy

--

NO

Parallel

MM

Armenia, Georgia, Japan, Lithuania, Macedonia, Mexico, Russian Federation, Thailand,

Ukraine

MMP

Bolivia, Germany

No Yes

Seats Linked?

Vote

s Li

nked

?

7

Asia slow to adoptElectoral methods in 16 ‘Democracies’ in Asia, Croissant, 2003

MM Method Country

Majoritarian Bhutan**, Bangladesh, India, Maldives, Malaysia, Pakistan, Singapore

Mixed-Member Majoritarian

Thailand** 83% Korea* 82%Philippines* 80%Taiwan* 70% Japan** 62% Nepal 40%?

Mixed-Member Proportional

-

Proportional Cambodia [1993]**, Indonesia (2004)*, Sri Lanka(1978)*

Percentages denote percent Members elected via majoritarian or FPP methods*Executive President; **King;

8

Sri Lanka cannot go back to M or MMM?

1946-1977 Majoritarian 1978 New Constitution 1982 PR, DDC (Party lists) 1989-2015 PR (Preferential voting) 2016 MMM-Vote linked (Local gov.) 2020 M (Local gov.)?

MMP (Parliament)????? (Provincial Councils)

9

An MMP architecture for Sri LankaAs proposed in Gazette 20A-June2015

Allocate 200 MPs (36+164, per 98(3)) Allocate 145 FPP units (25+4+116=145) 5-10 Multi-member seats? 135-140 PDs? Nominations and election at PD level Aggregate FPP results to district level; Determine

PR of 200 using appropriate method Return FPP winners Return Additional Members to fill rest of 55 seats

10

Evaluating electoral reforms Aurel Croissant, 2002; Donald L. Horowitz, 2003

Representation Party-building Governability

11

Evaluating proposed 20A-2015 Method in the Sri Lankan context

Representation Governability Party-building [National identity]

12

Representation

13

PR MMPR affects different groups differentlyalthough the final result is proportional

Small Parties: MMPR with one ballot is seen as bad

Minorities Territorial (Jaffna) –not very worried Partially territorial (N-E) –very worried Dispersed (Mahanuwara, Badulla) –very worried Highly dispersed (Puttlam, K’galle, R’pura & other) –looking to improve

Women Mixed results for women’s representation

14

Sinhalese SL Tamil IOT Muslim ALL

Jaffna & Vanni - 11 - 2 13Batticaloa, Digamadulla, Trinco

4 5 - 7 16Nuwara Eliya 3 - 5 - 8Mahanuwara 9 - 1 2 12Badulla 6 - 2 - 8Colombo 16 - 1 2 19Kegalle 1Other 12 electoral districts

119 - - - 120National List 19 4 - 6 29ALL 176 20 9 20 225

Ethnic Distribution of MPs, 2015

15

Implications & RecommendationsSmall Parties

One-ballot is highly recommended. JVP, e.g., should educate their cadres

16

Implications & RecommendationsMinorities

TerritorialPDs will change (say from historical 9 to 5 or so in Jaffna). Point out that the number of total MPs will be allocated as usual according to §99 (3). Seek changes to 99(3) or its implementation

Partially territorial Build trust in the delimitation process (independent Commission now;

Delimitation principle from 1946 (14)1 is included in Gazette20A-2015) Close and rank the District Lists Close the National Lists

Dispersed Same as above

Highly dispersed Close and rank District Lists

17

Article 14(c) of 1946 Soulbury Constitution is in Gazette 20A-2015, word to word

96A. (1) In the division of electoral districts into polling divisions, the following factors shall be taken into consideration by the Delimitation Commission:- (a) where it appears to the Delimitation Commission that there is, in any area of an electoral district, a substantial concentration of persons united by a community of interest, whether racial, religious or otherwise, but differing in one or more of these respects from the majority of the inhabitants of that area, the Commission may make such division of the electoral districts into polling divisions, as may be necessary to render possible the representation of that interest;

18

District list99 (7) Where the number of members of a recognized political party or independent group elected to represent the polling divisions within a particular electoral district according to the resulting number under paragraph (2) is less than the number of members to be elected under the proportional representation system, the determination of the balance number of members each recognized political party or independent group which contested such election but not elected becomes entitled to shall be based on the percentage of votes received in relevant polling divisions (reference to the valid number of votes of the polling divisions) by the candidates from such recognized political party or independent group for each polling division and members shall be elected on descending order starting from the candidate who received the highest percentage until the total number of members entitled to represent the Parliament from such recognized political party or independent group under the proportional representation system is arrived at: Provided that the Secretary of a recognized political party or a leader of an independent group shall be entitled to nominate not more than half the number of members to be elected under proportional representation system from among candidate who was not elected but secured highest percentage of valid vote cast under this paragraph and where such recognized political party or independent group is entitled to only one additional member in terms of the proportional representation system, the Secretary of such recognized political party or the leader of the independent group may instead of the member who obtained the highest percentage and elected, nominate a suitable candidate who contested at such polling division but not elected [Gazette20A-June2015].

19

Implications & RecommendationsWomen

Latest proposal (20A-2015 Gazette) (b) Notwithstanding any provision to the contrary not less than ten per

centum of the total number of candidates (any fraction not being taken in to account) or in any case a minimum of one on each nomination paper submitted under paragraph (1)(a) shall consist of women or a woman, as the case may be.

[In the event not even one woman is nominated as a candidate for a PD, a woman should be ranked #1 in the district list.]

20

Governability

21

Governability is an issue with PR or MMPR

1-UNP/UNF

2-SLFP/PA/

UPFA/MEP

3-ITAK&OTHER

4-JVP/DNA

5-JHU/SU

6-EPDP

6-SLMC/NUA

7-CWC/

OTHER8-IND

1989125

(51.6%)

1994 105(49.8%)

2000 89 107(45.1%) 8 10 1 4 4 1 1

2001109

(45.6%)

77 16 16 2 5

2004 82 105(45.6%) 22 9 1 5 1

2010 60 144(60.3%) 14 7

2015 106(45.7%) 95 16 6 - 1 1 -

Even with 22 bonus seats winning Party gets less than the 113 required for a majority, except in 1989 and 2010.

22

Majority Bonus System, Italy -2005,

A 54% of the seats are awarded to winning party if it receives more than 40% of the votes. If not, a runoff ballot between the two most voted parties is carried out to determine the winner. Rest of seats are divided according to the results of the first round.

The Simple Majority Bonus system awards a fixed number of seats to the winning party or alliance.

The Jackpot System adds a flexible number of seats to give a fixed number of total seats to the winning party or alliance. (e.g. increase UNP seats from

23

Way forward Present politicians and civil society with a slate

of choices in the form of a Web site for doing what-if scenarios for: dividing up 200 seats across districts allocating 145 FPP seats PR calculation at the Province level not district D’Hondt or St-Lague method in place of HR method Other

Stress the importance of balancing representation with governability

Technical committee to evaluate and present to politicians

24

Thank you

25

Mixed Member (MM) methodsWhen MPs are elected solely on an FPP basis, the result is more often than not disproportionate to the votes received by each party. (2014, India; 1997 and before in Sri Lanka). PR methods give a proportionate result, but, there is no constituency basis for MPs returned. MM methods are combined to get best of FPP and PR methods. Essentially a set number of MPs are returned on an FPP basis. Next, additional members are returned to make the final result partly or nearly proportionate. There are two ways to achieve this. MM-Parallel

FPP members are returned by election at constituency level and Additional Members are returned on a PR basis in two parallel processes. The proportionality of final result is determined by FPP:PR ratio and the method used to allocate PR seats. This method is also called MM-Majoritarian because FPP result would drive the final result most of the time.

MM-Proportional Seats in the Parliament are allocated according to PR. Those who win FPP are

returned first; Additional members are returned to fill the other seats while maintaining the original proportionality more or less.