With the nation quibbling with a delimitation conundrum which has divided an already polarized and dielectrically detached political society, it has come to my attention and concern to try to proffer a solution with regards to the electoral issues at hand.
More concerning and worrisome is the quandary the Zimbabwe Electoral Commission finds itself in at this very critical time when the nation is warming up to the general elections in a few months time. The discordant comportment of the Electoral Management Board ‘s commissioners has a proclivity of causing panic and despondency among the electorate.
Our people have to trust and believe in the manner in which elections are handled. A trust deficit in this regard has a propension of breaking down the social contract between the citizens and government. A presupposition and haste judgement will point fingers at ZEC and call for it’s disbandment. In as much as I have my misgivings with the conduct of ZEC, I tend to sympathize and empathize with them on the question of Delimitation. This is far beyond ZEC’s control, in fact, the problem is far much bigger than ZEC. The current filibuster points to a failed electoral system and the only panacea to rectify the logjam is through reformation and redesigning of the legislative framework(Electoral Act) and come up with a compatible electoral system.
An electoral or voting system Is a set of rules that determine how elections and referendums are conducted and how their results are determined. There are 3 types of electoral systems in constitutional democracies. There is the First-Past-the-Post system,, (FPTP)Majoritarian (Majority) then the Proportional Representation (PR) system. I’m however going to dwell much on FPTP and PR systems as these directly affect us the most. Zimbabwe currently use a hybrid system in it’s bicameral legislature.
The House of Assembly’s 210 seats are decided by the FPTP system while the Senate, Women’s quota and the recently introduced youth quota uses the PR system. It is however the House of Assembly which takes centre stage in legislative business in the country with the Senate playing a rubber stamping and cameo role. Hypothetically, It won’t a misnomer to say Zimbabwe is largely First-Past-the -Post. In this article, I’m going to juxtapose the two electoral concepts with the view of finding a more compatible and catalysing system.
*First-Past-the* *Post(Single*winner*)
This is a voting system also known as a simple majority system, it’s an electoral system in which the candidate who gets the maximum number of votes in an election gets elected in a single member constituency.
The result is based on the majority of votes obtained by the nominated candidate. In this system, the the multi- cornered contest is also experienced, where in the number of candidates contesting raises to three or four or sometimes even more than six. In such cases, the candidate getting the highest number of votes, gets the seat as if following the simple rule of majority even if it is less than 50% of the total votes.
*Proportional* *Representation*
Proportional Representation(PR )implies an election system, where the representation of all of all classes of all classes of people is ensured as each party gets as many number of seats as the proportion of votes of votes the candidate polls in the election.
In this system, any political party or interest group obtains the representation in proportion to their voting strength ,ie ,as as votes are counted, each party gets the the number of seats in Parliament according to the number of votes they obtained. In this way parties with small support base, also gets gets their representation in the legislature. Sometimes it results in a multi coalition of government like what we currently witness in Israel. From the point of view of the voter, every vote is important as it counts.
*Critique*
A critical analysis of the two electoral system is important so as to come up with a comprehensive electoral system which satisfies and guarantees democratic and fundamental rights of every citizen as votes in the constitution. A first- past-the post system as I have alluded above is exclusive and harsh to losing political parties in an election.
For example in Chegutu West constituency in 2018 harmonized elections, MDC A’s Gift Konjani lost to ZANU PF’s Dexter Nduna with a mere 18 votes. Nduna was duly installed as member of Parliament as a result but what do you make of the other losing voters? The FPTP system is totally indifferent and inconsiderate of opposing voices in elections. That system is undemocratic to an extent. The FPTP system does not embrace smaller political parties. Their continued exclusion in Parliament deprive their growth and diversity voices in Parliament.
Another interesting scenario is for example if Party X as in Zimbabwean case, lose to party Y in all 210 constituencies by a very small margin of say 50 votes out of a total number of 20 000 cast voter per every constituency, it means party X gets no seats at all in Parliament.
This is very unfair and undemocratic. However, with FPTP system, it’s easy to make members of Parliament account for their actions and performance since they are specifically serving a constituency. In as much as FPTP system give voters a clear cut choice to choose main political parties, third parties may fail to reach thresholds and wither away.
On the other hand, the Proportional Representation system is more accommodating and inclusive as it give raise to diverse voices in Parliament. A closer look at South African which uses the PR system is interesting. The EFF got sightly above 10%(1,9m votes) of total votes and was allotted 44 seats out of a total of 400 Parliamentary seats.
Had SA been using the FPTP system, EFF would not get a single Parliamentary seat because it was losing to either ANC or DA in most polling stations. It means 1.9 million voters would not have representation in Parliament, how incredible! In 2018,if Zimbabwe was using the PR system no party would have attained 2/3 parliamentary majority.
Through a FPTP system, ZANU PF got 146 against MDC A’s 63 which gifted it (ZANU PF) with a 2/3 majority and we all know the ‘legislative shenanigans’ that followed as a result. Had we used a PR system, ZANU PF would get between 112 to 115 seat and MDC A would have been allotted between 88 to 91 seats depending on the formulas and thresholds used.PR is the only electoral system where interest groups can have representation in the legislature. For example, an association of vendors can form a political party and elect their members in Parliament provided they meet certain thresholds.
The PR system promotes a political culture of coalitions and alliances thereby entrenching unity and harmonization. Just recently Israel, a highly polarized political society saw the ruling party Lukud joining hands with far right political foes in a government of national unity. Delimitation which give raise to the formation of political boundaries will be a thing of the past in a PR system as provincial boundaries are mainly used. The fears of gerrymandering and compacting of votes will dealt with.
*Conclusion*
Having analyzed the two electoral concepts, I would recommend the Proportional Representation system. This is the only prescription which can heal our fractured body politic. This article was motivated by the current ructions caused by ZEC’s preliminary report which drew fierce criticism from across the political divide. Apart from solving delimitation wars, a switch to the PR system has numerous gains that can engender and foster national healing, inclusivity and development.
Ignatious G Sadziwa
ZEAT Executive Director
