Sizing up an appropriate electoral system
Sizing up an appropriate electoral system
By Olle Tornquist
JAKARTA (JP): In an important article in The Jakarta Post on
Dec. 5, Mulyana W. Kusumah, secretary-general of the Indonesian
Independent Committee for General Election Monitoring (KIPP)),
pointed to what might be the positive effects for democratization
of an electoral system based on a simple majority in one-person
constituencies; the so-called district system.
No doubt there is much to the argument that such a district
system may help undermine authoritarianism, and especially the
dominance of centralized established parties and certain leaders.
It might be added, however, that such a system is also likely
to generate fiercer conflicts between people mobilized on the
basis of ethnic and religious loyalties. Both to win the only
seat and after the election, groups may end up fighting each
other rather than trying to compromise.
Furthermore, since the winner takes all (and only large
parties will benefit from a national proportional/distribution of
additional seats), this system is not likely to result in the
inclusion of many of the weak groups that were excluded under the
country's authoritarian regimes.
Even more important, the new rules of the game to be decided
upon are likely to be formative and of great importance for a
long period of time. Most powerful groups will adjust their
machineries to the new institutions and thereafter change will be
difficult.
Hence, it may also be crucial to consider the effects of
different electoral systems on the possibility of not only
undermining the remnants of authoritarianism but also
consolidating and further developing democracy.
For the future, then, I would argue, experience from other
relevant countries suggests that a proportional system in rather
large constituencies may be preferable, especially if combined
with decentralization, local elections and democratization of
parties.
There are two major reasons for this. First, one-member
constituencies are likely to promote personality-oriented
politics and local boss-rule on the basis of guns, goons and gold
-- plus ethnic and religious loyalties.
Second (and even worse), such boss-rule within a district
system would make it extremely difficult for new concerned groups
in civil society to enter politics by gradually organizing new
mass movements and democratic parties based on societal interests
and ideas -- thus compensating for their economic weakness and
lack of muscle. They usually have to limit themselves to extra-
parliamentary struggles, lobbying, and to betting on the least
worst passion.
For instance, the above were the clear and frustrating
experiences of democrats in cases such as the Philippines after
Marcos.
In conclusion, while no electoral system is ideal, it may be
important to consider the effects beyond the undermining of
authoritarianism -- on the consolidation and further development
of democracy.
The writer is professor of politics and development, at the
University of Oslo, Norway.