 |
|
|
E-mail:
|
|
Headquarters ICES:
Klumpkestraat 15
6241 JC Bunde
Netherlands
Òåë.: +31-64-627-6282
Branch of ICES in Israel:
P.O.B. 20596
Tel-Aviv 61202, Israel
Tel.: +972-5235-14605
Fax: +972-3505-5335
ICES office in the United States:
10015 Lake Creek Pkwy,
Unit 1221, Austin, TX,
78729 USA
Phone: +1-512-709-3992
ICES office in the Germany:
P.O. Box 190113,
97040, Wuerzburg Germany
Phone: +49-931-886-841
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
What electoral system is better for Armenia?
21 ôåâðàëÿ 2012 | Alexander Tsinker
|
Top debates and discussions are underway in Armenia on the threshold of parliamentary elections. What electoral system to use this time? That is the question. What is better for Armenia: to retain the existing mixed electoral system or to transfer to the 100% proportional electoral system?
Parliamentary hearings were held on the given issue in Yerevan last week. Both the disputing parties brought quite strong arguments basing on the international experience. Each party brought parallels with the countries where the electoral system confirming their stance is applied.
What electoral system is better for the Armenian voters and political parties: single-mandate or proportional?
Every system has its advantages and disadvantages. That is why many countries used the mixed electoral system. In case of such model of voting the single-mandate and proportional electoral systems replenish each other. Disadvantages of one system are neutralized by the advantages of the other. Together these systems contribute to maximum efficient and full consideration of voter interests.
Starting 1995, mixed electoral system has been used in Armenia. Although during the parliamentary elections in 1995 around 80% of parliamentarians were elected in single-mandate constituencies, already in 2007 the share of single-mandate seats in the parliament totaled a little more than 30%.
Theoretically, 25 single-mandate seats are enough to represent various small groups of population and vivid persons not belonging to any parties, but theoretically. The disputing parties in Armenia have their practical and quite weighty notes and arguments.
I will not analyze them now, for I’m a strong supporter of the thesis saying that “rules can not be changed during the game”. One should not change the electoral system 2.5 month before elections. One should not forget either that permanent electoral system is the best proof of the democracy level of a country.
Looking not too far ahead when Internet will cover even the most remote populated areas, I’d risk making by forecasts. For such “compact” states like the Baltic countries, Armenia, Georgia, Israel and other countries with not large population the optimal electoral system is the open list proportional representation system.
As for the upcoming parliamentary elections in Armenia, I think, the major problem here is not the type of electoral system. It is important that the entire process of elections be transparent, maximum open and clear for the population. This will restrict vote-fraud opportunities and upgrade the citizens’ confidence in the voting result and the electoral system. |
|
Arminfo |
 back  top |
 print version |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
