By Pooji Tiwari
In September last year, a 29 member all-party panel was constituted to explore alternative systems of election that could be adopted in place of the ?first-past-the-post-? (FPTP) system currently followed in the Lok Sabha and Assembly elections. Eleven months later, the panel headed by the Deputy leader of opposition in the Rajya Sabha Anand Sharma, has submitted a six page questionnaire to the Election Commission, expressing its ?apprehensions? regarding how the FPTP may not be ?the best suited system? for elections in the country. Writing for The Indian Express, Anand Mishra observed that the questionnaire has initiated what can regarded as the ?first structured discussion on the issue.? In light of the ongoing debate about FPTP, we analyse the issues with FPTP, while exploring the feasibility of an option such as Proportional Representation in the country.
PROBLEMS WITH FPTP
Commonly followed in the United Kingdom and the erstwhile British colonies, the FPTP has long been criticised for being inaccurate in its depiction of voter trends. Popular for being simple and enabling parties to come into power with majority, the concept behind FPTP is that the candidate with the most number of votes in a constituency wins the elections. Under FPTP, there exists a mismatch of the popular vote share of the party, with respect to the number of seats held by the party in the legislative body. Thus, MPs are often elected to power despite having a small share of the popular vote. Furthermore, FPTP unfairly taxes smaller parties, that may have a substantial vote share nation/statewide, but may not have concentrated voter banks in constituencies. The panel cited the example of the 2017 UP elections in their questionnaire, where BJP won 312 seats with a 39 percent vote share, thus winning the elections with a clear majority. However, SP and BSP only managed to win 47 and 19 seats with a vote share of 22 and 21 percent respectively. ?????
UNDERSTANDING PROPORTIONAL REPRESENTATION
The idea most predominantly preferred over FPTP is proportional representation. During the drafting of the Indian constitution, various forms of proportional representation were initially considered. However, PR was eventually dropped in favour of a more stable and relatively uncomplicated FPTP. The idea behind PR is simple: the number of seats won by a voting party/ candidate is proportionate to the number of votes received. Proportional representation primarily operates in two ways: the list system and the single transferable voting system. Currently, the President, the Vice President and the members of the Rajya Sabha and the legislative assemblies are elected through the single transferable voting system. Under the list system, the MPs would be chosen out of a list of candidates declared by the party beforehand. The number of MPs elected now depends upon the proportion of votes polled for the party.
PROPORTIONAL REPRESENTATION: AS GOOD AS IT SOUNDS?
The arguments in favour of PR are many. The primary one being that it reduces the discrepancies between the votes polled and the seats won by the party. It also reduces what is known as ?tactical voting?, wherein people end up voting for the lesser of the two evils and small players do not usually get a chance. ?However, PR has its own demerits. Proportional representation makes elections party-centric as opposed to them being people centric. In a scenario where candidates are selected off of a list proposed by the party, the primary focus then becomes appeasing to the party bosses as opposed to identifying the needs of the people. An ancillary argument can also be that proportional representation also takes away the concept of a regional/ local candidate by establishing a common pool of candidates for all constituencies. However, these arguments remain inexclusive to proportional representation and can be navigated through democratic process. The problem with proportional representation remains that it in a country already fraught with an identity-caste divide, it creates spaces for further polarisation of identities.
POLARISING IDENTITIES
India is a country of multiple identities. There exist huge cultural gaps across various demographics such as geographical location, religion, gender, socioeconomic status. Political parties in general tend to be obsessed with vote bank politics, focusing on their ?target groups? in order to ensure that their vote share remains consistent. Issue based politics seems to be a far fetched dream, if the present context seems anything to go by. However, if proportional representation is implemented, it is bound to become an unattainable illusion. The PR system of elections significantly lowers the electoral threshold, thereby making coalition governments inevitable. Excluding the majority party of the FPTP, most other parties and independent candidates are likely to get a higher number of seats for their existing vote share. This further disincentivizes parties from picking up issues that are pertinent to people beyond their vote bank. It introduces new identity players into the political field whose motive is to sustain their vote bank, irrespective of the success of the government. ???
While FPTP may not be perfect, PR raises serious threats to India?s democratic fundamental of unity in diversity. The question ultimately becomes one of tactical voting: between the lesser of the two evils, what should the country choose?
