Exploring Voting Systems: Which is the Best Option for Bangladesh?

Bangladesh is on the brink of significant state reforms, including a major overhaul of its electoral system. A government committee has been established to explore various options, with discussions involving political parties, experts, and ordinary citizens. While voting in elections may seem simple to many, the wide variety of electoral systems around the world highlights the complexity of democratically selecting leaders. In Bangladesh, like in many countries, the electoral process is largely dominated by two parties, which may not be the most effective approach for a truly representative democracy.

In such a system, elections often boil down to whoever secures the most votes. However, as more parties become involved in a democratic environment, the flaws of these straightforward voting mechanisms begin to surface. For example, if there are three candidates and one receives 34% of the vote while the others get 33% each, is it fair for a candidate with only 34% support to represent the entire population?

To ensure every vote impacts the election outcome, it's crucial to explore alternative voting systems. Many of these systems acknowledge that in a pluralistic democracy, there will be more than two candidates or parties. Some systems also recognize that voters may have a first choice, second choice, and so on, and that all of these preferences should be considered seriously.

This area of study is known as social choice theory, which uses rigorous mathematical and economic principles. While it may be challenging to delve into the complexities of social choice theory in this article, with comprehensive electoral reforms being discussed, let’s examine some common voting systems worldwide and explore what options the future might hold for Bangladesh.

Plurality Voting or First-Past-the-Post

The current voting system in Bangladesh, as well as in at least 39 other countries, is the first-past-the-post or plurality voting system. In this system, the candidate with the most votes wins, even if they don’t achieve a majority, and regardless of voter turnout. Many countries using this system are former British colonies, and it has been in use in the UK since medieval times.

The main criticism of this system is that it allows candidates to be elected even if they don’t have majority support. Additionally, the system discourages having more than two candidates, as candidates with similar ideologies can split the vote, which may result in a candidate with an opposing ideology winning. This often leads to a two-party system, a phenomenon known as Duverger's Law.

Under this system, there is a risk of extremist ideologies gaining power, as voters may hesitate to support alternative parties, fearing it would allow their opposite ideologies to win. This could help explain the rise of figures like Donald Trump within the US Republican Party.

Runoff Elections (Two Rounds)

A well-known example of this system is the French presidential election. If no candidate achieves over 50% of the vote in the first round, the top two candidates move on to a second round, where the winner is guaranteed to have more than 50% of the vote.

The main advantage of this system is that the winner receives majority support. However, the downside is that, when reduced to just two candidates, voters may feel forced to choose between the "lesser of two evils," especially if the first round was close. Another criticism is the cost and logistical challenges of running two separate elections, as well as the potential instability between the two rounds.

Ranked Choice Voting (Instant Runoff, Contingent Voting, Single Transferable Vote)

Ranked choice voting builds on the concept of runoff elections but allows voters to rank candidates in order of preference. If no candidate receives more than 50% of the first-choice votes, the candidate with the fewest first-choice votes is eliminated, and their votes are transferred to their voters' second-choice candidates. This process continues until one candidate secures 50% of the vote.

The advantage of this system is that it allows voters to express their preferences more fully, even if their first-choice candidate isn't likely to win. However, some criticisms include voter confusion and situations where candidates may benefit from fewer first-choice votes as long as they garner significant second-choice support.

Proportional Representation

Proportional representation is a system that has garnered attention recently in Bangladesh, supported by several political figures and parties. In this system, political parties present a list of candidates in order of preference, and voters vote for the party they support. After the votes are counted, each party is allocated seats based on the proportion of votes they received.

For example, if Party A wins 40% of the vote, Party B gets 30%, and Party C gets 20%, each party would be allocated seats according to their share of the vote. This system is widely used around the world, with 85 countries, including many in Europe, adopting it. A variation, called mixed-member proportional representation, combines first-past-the-post and proportional representation.

The benefit of this system is that it allows even smaller parties to gain representation in parliament, making the system more inclusive. This is particularly significant in Bangladesh, where even a small share of the vote can represent millions of people. However, some critics argue that proportional representation could lead to fragmented parliaments and coalition governments that lack stability, resulting in an inefficient legislative process.

In conclusion, as Bangladesh contemplates reforms to its electoral system, it’s essential to consider a variety of voting systems to ensure fairer representation and a more participatory democracy. Each system has its strengths and weaknesses, and careful thought will be required to determine which approach best aligns with the country's democratic aspirations.