#yangilik #новости #news
⚖️ Barchamizga maʼlumki, ayni vaqtda mamlakatimizda muhim siyosiy jarayonlardan biri, yaʼni O‘zbekiston Respublikasi Oliy Majlisi Qonunchilik palatasi hamda Xalq deputatlarining viloyat va tuman (shahar) kengashlari deputatligiga saylovlarni o‘tkazish bilan bog‘liq jarayonlar o‘zining qizg‘in pallasiga kirgan.
🏛 Shu munosabat bilan Farg‘ona viloyati yuridik texnikumining pedagog-xodimlari tomonidan saylov jarayoni va qonunchiligini yoritishga qaratilgan maqolalar chop etilmoqda.
🔸 “Mutaxassislik fanlari” kafedrasi o‘qituvchisi Salimova Diyoraxon Baxtiyorovnaning “Advantages and disadvantages of the mixed electoral system” mavzusida maqolasi chop etildi.
Advantages and disadvantages of the mixed electoral system
Annotation. In Uzbekistan, the introduction of a mixed electoral system was intended to enhance the representation of various political forces and create a more balanced distribution of parliamentary seats. This system is seen as a tool to strengthen democratic institutions in the country. This article explores the main advantages and disadvantages of the mixed electoral system in Uzbekistan.
Key words: electoral system, deputy, vote, majoritarian system, candidate, quota, mandates, representative, party.
On 25 November 2023, Uzbekistan's senators approved a constitutional law on the transition to a mixed system of electing deputies. The amendments are stipulated by the presidential decree on the new wording of the Constitution ‘On priority measures for the implementation of the new version of the Constitution of the Republic of Uzbekistan’ of 8 May 2023.
In the world practice, the leading trend in the development of electoral systems is the search for the optimal model of the electoral system, which determines the best option for the participation of the population in the management of the affairs of the state, as well as to the greatest extent ensures the correspondence between the number of votes cast and the number of seats to be distributed.
Under mixed system, part of the mandates are distributed under the proportional system (by party lists) and the other part under the majoritarian system (voting for a candidate). The Electoral Code now includes a procedure for holding elections to the Legislative Chamber on the basis of a majoritarian-proportional (mixed) system. In this system, constituencies are divided into single-mandate constituencies and a single constituency. 75 deputies of the Legislative Chamber will be elected from single-mandate constituencies under the majoritarian system (voting for a candidate), the remaining 75 - under the proportional system, i.e. on the basis of votes given to political parties (on party lists).
It should be recalled that previous parliamentary elections in Uzbekistan were held under a majoritarian system, under which candidates who received a majority of votes in their constituency were considered elected. Now, deputies no longer need to win more than half of the votes to be elected. Earlier, only one deputy opposed the draft law due to the lack of independent candidates. Political parties that receive at least 7 per cent of the votes cast in a single constituency in elections to the Legislative Chamber shall acquire a mandate in accordance with the established procedure.
In the formation of the list of candidates to be included in the party list, the definition of a quota of at least 30 % for women in the electoral code is fully in line with the objective of the large-scale reforms being carried out in our country to ensure gender equality and create additional conditions and opportunities for women.
Foreign states such as Albania, Belgium, France, Georgia, Greece, Ireland, Italy, Kazakhstan, Moldova, Mongolia, Portugal and France also have established certain quotas for women in their electoral legislation.
A mixed electoral system is a way of determining the results of voting that combines elements of two electoral formulas: the proportional representation system (distribution of parliamentary mandates in proportion to the number of valid votes cast) and the majority system (on the principle of first past the post).
A number of authors point out that the mixed electoral system is the best option for parliamentary elections, as it balances the advantages and disadvantages of proportional and majoritarian systems. Accordingly, speaking about the advantages and disadvantages of the mixed electoral system, first of all, the advantages and disadvantages of the proportional and majoritarian components of the mixed system are identified and analysed separately. As a result, the identified positive sides of the mentioned electoral formulas neutralise their negative sides. However, one cannot speak about a simple mechanical combination of the advantages and disadvantages of the two systems, as the combination of the positive and negative sides of the mentioned electoral systems gives a new result.
The main advantage of the mixed electoral system is that the voter has the opportunity to vote both for a party list, choosing a specific political programme, and for a specific candidate nominated in a certain territory. Thus, on the one hand, the representation of political interests and preferences in society is ensured, the process of formation and development of multi-partyism is stimulated, and on the other hand, the connection between the voter and the elected deputies is preserved: each voter within a certain territory (constituency) has his/her representative in the parliament.
Thus, mixed electoral systems emerged as a result of the desire to reduce the negative effect of the shortcomings of a particular electoral system. However, the mixed electoral system itself is not without its shortcomings, but this only confirms the fact that there is no perfect electoral system in the world.
A mixed electoral system requires careful management and oversight due to its complexity. This need for transparency in the allocation of seats between candidates and parties can help reduce the likelihood of electoral fraud or manipulation. The detailed scrutiny of both the majoritarian and proportional aspects of the system can foster greater public confidence in the electoral process.
The undoubted advantage of such an electoral system is to ensure the realisation of passive suffrage by non-partisan citizens who have the opportunity to self-nominate.
This electoral formula simultaneously ensures party proportional representation and exactly the same representation of territories. The voter himself or herself has the undisputed right to vote both for a particular candidate and for a party list. With a mixed electoral system, a close link between voters and elected deputies is maintained.
One of the main disadvantages of the mixed electoral system is its complexity. Voters must understand two different voting processes: one for individual candidates in single-member districts and another for political parties in the proportional representation component. This complexity can confuse voters, particularly those with limited political knowledge, potentially reducing voter turnout and engagement.
The proportional aspect of the mixed system can lead to a fragmented parliament, with many small parties gaining seats. While this enhances representation, it can make it difficult to form a stable governing coalition, especially if there is significant ideological diversity between parties. In such cases, the need for coalition-building can lead to political instability and inefficiency in decision-making.
In a mixed system, some deputies are elected through single-member districts, while others are elected via party lists. Those elected through districts are typically more accountable to their local constituencies, while those elected from party lists may not have the same direct connection to specific voter groups. This discrepancy can create a division in the level of accountability, with party-list deputies potentially being less responsive to the concerns of the electorate.
Running elections under a mixed system is more expensive and logistically complex. The need to conduct two different types of voting increases the cost of organizing elections, including training electoral commissions, developing informational materials, and managing the distribution of seats. These additional costs can strain public resources and complicate election administration.
To conclude, the mixed electoral system in Uzbekistan has both significant advantages and notable disadvantages. On the one hand, it provides more equitable representation of political parties and can enhance the quality of democratic governance. On the other hand, its complexity, the potential for political fragmentation, and higher administrative costs pose challenges. To ensure the system functions effectively, it is essential to continue refining its implementation and improving voter education to minimize confusion.