Five worst electoral systems on the planet

 

Identifying the worst electoral systems in the world involves assessing various factors, including representation, fairness, transparency, and participation. While different countries may face unique challenges with their electoral systems, some are widely criticized for their lack of democracy, accountability, and integrity. Here are five of the worst electoral systems on the planet:

1. Authoritarian Electoral Systems:

   • Authoritarian regimes, such as those in North Korea, China, and Belarus, often hold elections that lack meaningful competition, transparency, and legitimacy.
   • These systems are characterized by restrictions on political freedoms, censorship of opposition voices, and manipulation of electoral processes to ensure the ruling party's continued hold on power.
   • Elections in authoritarian states are often marred by irregularities, coercion, and intimidation, making them neither free nor fair by international standards.

2. First-Past-the-Post (FPTP) System:

   • The First-Past-the-Post system, used in countries like the United Kingdom, Canada, and India, often leads to disproportionate representation, wasted votes, and limited voter choice.
   • FPTP can result in "false majorities" where a party wins a majority of seats in the legislature without receiving a majority of votes, leading to governments that lack broad-based support and legitimacy.
   • Critics argue that FPTP tends to favor large parties over smaller ones and can perpetuate a two-party system that marginalizes minority viewpoints and discourages political diversity.

3. Closed List Proportional Representation:

   • Closed list proportional representation systems, used in some countries like Israel and Brazil, give parties control over the ranking of candidates on electoral lists, limiting voter choice and accountability.
   • In closed list PR, voters vote for a political party rather than individual candidates, allowing party elites to determine the composition of the legislature and marginalizing independent or dissident voices.
   • Closed list PR can result in the entrenchment of political elites, patronage networks, and corruption, undermining public trust in the electoral process.

4. Single-Party States:

   • Single-party states, such as Cuba, Vietnam, and Eritrea, have electoral systems that lack genuine competition, pluralism, and accountability.
   • Elections in single-party states are often ceremonial exercises used to legitimize the ruling party's monopoly on power, rather than to offer voters a meaningful choice.
   • Opposition parties are typically banned or marginalized, and dissent is suppressed through censorship, intimidation, and repression, rendering elections meaningless as expressions of popular will.

5. Ethnic or Sectarian Electoral Systems:

   • Some countries, such as Lebanon, Iraq, and Bosnia and Herzegovina, have electoral systems based on ethnic or sectarian quotas, which can exacerbate divisions, identity politics, and social tensions.
   • Ethnic or sectarian electoral systems often privilege certain groups over others and entrench communal divisions, making it difficult to build inclusive, cohesive societies.
   • These systems can lead to political fragmentation, instability, and conflict, as competing factions vie for power and resources along ethnic or sectarian lines.

In conclusion, the worst electoral systems in the world are characterized by a lack of democracy, fairness, transparency, and accountability. Whether through authoritarianism, disproportionality, closed lists, single-party dominance, or ethnic divisions, these systems fail to uphold the principles of free and fair elections, representativeness, and popular sovereignty. Addressing the flaws and shortcomings of these electoral systems is essential for promoting democracy, human rights, and good governance on a global scale.