PS 4304

Lecture II Notes
Electoral systems, political stability and calls for electoral reforms
Introduction
In the last lecture, we introduced this course by highlighting the process, conceptual and
theoretical basis for democratisation and democratic consolidation countries undergo. We also
indicted how democracy is measured using the framework of Freedom in the World (Freedom
House). It is obvious that democracy in its current form representative and is based on elections
such that we can’t talk of democracy without elections and crucially electoral systems, hence our
current theme. The key readings for this them is the African Journal on Conflict Resolution
4 (2) 2004. I have made it available to you. These authors cover electoral systems in Botswana;
Lesotho; Mozambique; South Africa; Tanzania and Zimbabwe and make useful
recommendations aimed at review of the systems in to manage conflict and assist the region to
move towards democratic consolidation. Matlosa in the same issue provides a general overview
of these systems and we draw heavily from his work in this theme.
Learning outcomes
o At the end of this theme you should be able to explain and review different types of
electoral systems used in the region and assess their adequacy as instruments for
political inclusion and stability.
Concepts
What is an electoral system?
Lijphart (1994:1)
- “the set of methods for translating citizens votes into representative’ seats. Thus the
electoral system is the most fundamental element of representative democracy”.
- An institution that “helps determine what parties look like, who is represented in
parliament, and ultimately who governs. Electoral systems also help mitigate conflict in
divided societies.
- So that “if one wants to change the nature of a particular democracy, the electoral system
is likely to be the most suitable and effective instrument for doing so” (Reynolds
(1999:89).
Key objectives of electoral systems:

1
  translate votes into seats parliamentary seats, it may give more weight to proportionality
(party’s votes and its seats’ share)
 a means through which citizens hold their representative accountable
 reward some parties with broadly based and inclusive appeal for support and even punish
the losers (Yet in southern Africa, electoral systems have been both a source of and
solution to conflict as we will see).
Types of electoral systems: (IDEA, 2008; See Matlosa, 2021)
Many but the most popular are plurality-majority (or for our purpose FPTP) and PR systems.
Choice of electoral systems is generally based on:
 Representatives: it must fairly reflect the popular opinion of citizens seen as
representative of the nation thereby legitimise the government.
 Accessibility: it must not be difficult for the citizens irrespective of whether or not they
are educated.
 Providing incentives for conciliatory behaviour: it must create conditions for
compromise and reconciliation especially in divided societies
 Accountability: the voters must be able to hold their representatives both in parliament
and in government accountable
 Encourage cross-cutting parties: electoral systems must foster parties based on national
rather than partisan concerns (ethnicity, religion, linguistic, or geographic cleavages) to
promote stability
 Stability of government: electoral systems must produce stable and effective
governments and effective opposition to keep the government in check and safe guard
minority rights (IDEA, 2008:8-12).
a) FPTP key features and merits:
 offers votes a clear choice between two broadly based parties and national vote
clearly translates into winning and losing parties;
 gives rise to stable and effective single-party governments;
 when there is no outright winners, parties have to form coalitions of disparate
groups and thus come up with moderate policies;
 facilitation of strong opposition, which keeps the government in check

2
  reduces the destabilising impact of extremist minority elements through under-
representation or complete exclusion
 promotes crucial vertical link between representatives and their constituencies
 improves the quality of elected candidates because the voters choose candidates
not parties.
 It is simple to use and understand especially for illiterate societies
Demerits:
 it is exclusionary and may lead to conflict in divided societies
 disproportionality between votes parties obtain and seats they get, emphasis on
geography rather than on people.
 minority candidates such as women find it harder to be elected into parliament promotes
citizens’ mobilisation on ethnic lines
 leads to wasted votes as minority voters feel they have no chance of electing their
representative leading to voter alienation and extremists embarking on anti-system
mobilisation with destabilising effect on the system
 winning parties may maintain exclusive control of government even when its popular
support declines
 highly susceptible to manipulation by ruling parties through gerrymandering boundaries
to their own advantages.
b) The PR System, key features and merits:
 avoids anomalous results of plurality and facilitates inclusivity of parliament as it ensure
minority parties representation
 encourages parties to create regionally, ethnically, and gender diverse lists because they
need to appeal for wider support and minimise hostilities
 mitigates conflict and avoids the vagaries of the FPTP system
 reduces the problem of wasted votes and regional fiefdoms
 Produces coalition governments reflective of African realities, and decisions are taken in
the open rather than behind closed doors between those in power and those who retain
economic control
Demerits:

3
  coalition governments with incoherent policies and instability of governments
 mitigates ability to create non-culturally rooted, broadly based parties
 undermines a link between the electorate and their representatives and the latter are not
accountable to the electorate but to their parties
Thus, Reynolds (1999:93) suggests that for ethnically divided societies, the Proportional
Representation systems are more suited to promote unity than plurality.
“The surest way to kill the idea of democracy in a plural society is adopt the Anglo-American
system of first-past-the-post” (Whidden cited in Reynolds 1999:93).

 No electoral system or any other constitutional mechanism is a panacea for all ills;
adoption of any one system will depend on the specific context of a given country
(Reynolds 1999:103).
 However, out of 15 SADC countries, the common system in use is the FPTP 8, with 4
using PR, 2 mixed system (Mauritius FPTP with compensatory element), and Lesotho
MMP (see Matlosa 2004, 2021).
 The contributors in this issue call for electoral reforms (reform of electoral systems)
along the lines of the MMP in their respective countries to ensure both the resolution of
election-related conflict in some countries and overall enhancement of democratic
consolidation (See African Journal on Conflict Resolution a special issue on Electoral
systems, constitutionalism and conflict management in southern Africa 2004, 4 (2),
Matlosa 2004)
 However, these calls have gone largely unheeded to by political leadership in many SADC
countries
3. The Mixed Member Proportional System
Lesotho: the only African country using MMP system in response to a long history of
election-related conflict spawned by exclusionary effect inherent in the FPTP system.
The MMP has the following features:
 retention of the constituency-based seats
 party list-based seats
 seats’ allocation formula (without a quota): total vote divided by total seats=quota (a
complex process which has led to the current stand-off between parties)

4
  two ballots (constituency and party)
 inclusive parliament hence conflict resolution mechanism
NB:
 The MMP did open up parliament and allowed representation of 10 parties, leading to
some political stability (see Makoa, 2005; Kapa 2009).
 However, the political elite abused the MMP system by forming opportunistic pre-
elections party alliances in the run-up to the 2007 elections thus turning the MMP system
it into the Mixed Member Parallel system. These parties were the Lesotho Congress for
Democracy (LCD) and National Independence Party (NIP), on one hand, and All Basotho
Convention (ABC) and Lesotho Workers Party (LWP).
 The Independent Electoral Commission treated these alliances as separate entities when
it allocated the PR seats instead of treating them as alliances that they were.
 The Marematlou Freedom Party (MFP) and other parties challenged this allocation in the
High Court, arguing that if the four parties that had formed pre-election alliances, should
be treated as alliances so that they do not unfairly take the seats that could have been
allocated to other parties based on their performance in line with the spirit of the MMP
system.
 The Lesotho High Court did not protect the MMP but made a ruling that allowed the
LCD to keep the 21 PR seats, which would have been allocated to other parties in line
with the spirit of the MMP system (see Kapa, 2009).
 Politicians later in 2011 enacted the National Assembly Electoral Act, which distorted the
MMP system by abolishing the second ballot and disregarding the threshold that parties
should meet to qualify for the PR seats. These are the key issues inherent in New Zealand
system that Lesotho borrowed.
 In New Zealand, parties had to poll (win) 5% of the popular vote (total national vote to
get a PR seat. did not protect the MMP system. Voters also had two votes: one for a
candidate in the constituencies and another for a party.
 Lesotho had two ballot in 2002 but politicians abolished the second ballot after the post-
2007 election conflict. Basotho now have only one vote instead of two. The ballot paper
has names of candidates and symbols of their parties. You vote for a party and a

5
 candidate at the same time because you put a cross or a tick on the ballot paper. That is
where Lesotho is now:
 There is no threshold, leading to one-man parties with very few votes getting seats in
parliament and distorting the principle of proportionality of seats to votes (the idea that
parties should get seats in proportion to votes they got. e.g. 10% votes, 10% seats more or
less).
 NB: Let me challenge you: Without these two key features of the system, do you
think we have a Mixed Member Proportional electoral system or what?
 NB: The current reforms are to address these issues.
Table 1: Typology of electoral systems and party systems in Southern Africa
Country Electoral System Party System
Angola Proportional Representation(PR) Dominant
Botswana Plurality Dominant
DRC PR Dominant
Eswatini Plurality No-party
Lesotho MMP Multiparty
Malawi Plurality/Majority Multiparty
Mauritius Plurality Multiparty
Madagascar Plurality/Majority Multiparty
Namibia PR Dominant
Seychelles Mixed Dominant
South Africa PR Dominant
Tanzania Plurality/Majority Dominant
Zambia Plurality Dominant
Zimbabwe Plurality/Majority Dominant

Source: Matlosa (2021:102-105)