Georgian Young Lawyers Association

International Society for Fair Elections and Democracy

Transparency International Georgia

Recommendations about the Electoral System

After the local self-government elections, the electoral reform should focus on electoral system changes.
Notably, the existing electoral system has long been criticized by non-governmental organizations and
political parties due to its inability to translate votes into seat numbers proportionately, due to high risk of
losing votes and the lack of protection of equality of votes. Further, European Commission for
Democracy through Law (Venice Commission) and OSCE Office for Democratic Institutions and Human
Rights (ODIHR) recommend that the electoral system for both parliamentary and local self-government
elections be reviewed in order to ensure the equality of suffrage.1
Even though changes in the electoral system have long been discussed (we initiated the request to
consider the issue in proper time as early as in 2013 in the inter-factional task force IFTF), no
meaningful changes were made in 2013 or later in 2014 within the format of the IFTF.

Existing Electoral System

Georgia falls under the category of the states with the so-called mixed election system, in which both proportionate
and majoritarian election systems co-exist. In particular, the Georgian Parliament consists of 77 members elected in
proportionate election system (candidates nominated through party lists) and 73 members elected through
majoritarian election system.

EUROPEAN COMMISSION FOR DEMOCRACY THROUGH LAW (VENICE COMMISSION) AND OSCE OFFICE FOR
DEMOCRATIC INSTITUTIONS AND HUMAN RIGHTS (OSCE/ODIHR) JOINT OPINION ON THE DRAFT ELECTION CODE OF
GEORGIA, 2011, Page 8. para 22

Following elections through proportionate system, mandates are distributed among those political unions and
election blocs that will gain at least 5% of votes.2 As to majoritarian election system, winning candidate is the
one that gains most number of votes but at least 30% of votes in relevant majoritarian election district.3
Negative Aspects of the Existing Majoritarian Election System in Georgia
The risk of losing votes
In majoritarian election system there is a theoretical chance that a winning candidate could be a person who gained
over 30% of votes in the election precinct, but votes against the candidate are significantly higher than the number
of ballots castes in favor of him/her.
For instance, during October 1, 2012 parliamentary elections, winning majoritarian candidate in Kharagauli district
gained total of around 47% of votes, while the total share of votes gained by other candidates was 52.16%.4
Similarly, in Sighnaghi election district one of the candidates gained 49.01% of votes; however, total share of votes
gained by other candidates running for the office was 50.98%.5
These facts prove that there is a risk of losing votes in majoritarian elections, which can be viewed as one of the
disadvantages of the system. Further, the 30% threshold for the candidates is low and does not guarantee that a
candidate is elected with high legitimacy.6
Inequality of votes
Another important problem in majoritarian elections is related to significant inequalities in terms of number of
constituents in individual election districts, which greatly violates the principle of equality of votes. For instance,
there are 163, 654 voters registered in Kutaisi and 5 779 in Kazbegi.7 Despite the difference, constituents both in
Kutaisi and Kazbegi election districts are able to elect one majoritarian member of the parliament. 8 The Venice
Commission recommends that the difference among individual districts in terms of the number of registered voters
should be within the range of 10% and it may not exceed 15% in extraordinary circumstances. The existing
Election Code largely disregards the recommendations.9
Lack of communication between voters and majoritarian members of the parliament
In addition to election-related problems, ISFED has found lack of communication between majoritarian candidates
and voters, as illustrated by passive outreach of majoritarian MPs to voters. Most of the majoritarian MPs do not
2

See the Constitution of Georgia, Article 50, para.2. Organic law of Georgia the Election Code of Georgia, Article 125
See the organic law of Georgia the Election Code of Georgia, para.3, Article 125
4
http://results2012.cec.gov.ge/major48.html
5
http://results2012.cec.gov.ge/major13.html
6
http://www.parliament.ge/files/1055_16721_957521_saarchevno_sistemebi.pdf
7
http://www.cesko.ge/uploads/other/12/12680.pdf
8
Number of voters according to districts for 2012 parliamentary elections
http://www.cesko.ge/files/2012/PARLAMENTIS%20ARCHEVNEBI/amomrchevlebis_raodenoba.pdf
9
EUROPEAN COMMISSION FOR DEMOCRACY THROUGH LAW (VENICE COMMISSION) AND OSCE OFFICE
FOR DEMOCRATIC INSTITUTIONS AND HUMAN RIGHTS (OSCE/ODIHR) JOINT OPINION ON THE ELECTION
CODE OF GEORGIA as amended through March 2010, Opinion No. 571/2010, page 5, para.14
3

hold meetings with their constituents or rarely meet them. According to NDIs estimates, as of August 2014 only
31% of constituents are aware of who their majoritarian MP is.10

Conclusions

The existing election system for parliamentary elections fails to ensure fairness of elections and proportional
results according to the will of the voters which is an integral component of fair elections. Further, the principle of
equality of votes is also violated. Constituents registered in election districts do not enjoy equal opportunities for
casting a vote for the same number of majoritarian members. The existing rule of distribution of proportionate
mandates is in direct conflict with the essence of proportionate election system, according to which mandates
should be distributed in proportion of votes.

Criteria for Choosing Electoral System

New electoral system should remedy the existing problems and improve translation of voters will into
seat numbers.
In this light, criteria for choosing the right electoral system are as follows:

Allocation of mandates in proportion to votes;

equality of votes;
minimized risk of losing votes;
representation of small parties;
increased representation of women;
geographic representation;
simple voting procedures;
increased public trust in elections.

In light of the criteria above, we propose the so-called regional proportional representation voting system.
Regional Proportional System
Proportional representation voting (PR) is one of the predominant voting systems throughout the world.
Many countries use it, including the Netherlands, Belgium, Greece, Norway, Sweden, Spain, Switzerland
and others. The PR system was devised to solve the many problems caused by plurality-majority voting
systems.11 One of the advantages of the PR system is its simplicity and the ability to achieve proportional
results.
Party list voting systems are by far the most common form of proportional representation. In it legislators
are elected in multimember districts and the number of seats that a party wins in an election is
proportional to the amount of its support among voters. In order to win mandates, parties must also reach
a certain threshold.

10
11

https://www.ndi.org/files/NDIGeorgia_August-2014%20survey_Public-Political_GEO_VF.pdf

https://www.mtholyoke.edu/acad/polit/damy/BeginnningReading/PRsystems.htm

Proportional regional representation voting system is a type of party list voting system. Notably, in its
resolution about Georgia dated October 1, 2014, the COE Parliamentary Assembly invited all
stakeholders to consider the proportional-regional election system. 12
In proportional regional representation voting system several multimember districts are established in the
country, making it necessary to determine territorial boundaries of election districts based on geographic,
historic, cultural, social-economic and other criteria.
In addition to setting up multimember districts, it is also necessary to determine the number of seats
elected at the regional level. We believe that it should be based on the number of population. For instance,
one seat may weight 23,000 votes. Weight of a seat should be determined by the following formula:
Total number of voters : number of seats = weight of a seat
In 2014 local self-government elections, number of voters was 3 429 748, while the number of seats to be
elected in the parliament is 150. Different number of population may make it impossible to accurately
observe the principle of equality of votes; however, the difference should range from 10% to 15%, as
recommended by international organizations.
Another important problematic issue that must also be addressed is electoral threshold. As seats will be
allocated at the regional level, threshold must also be imposed at the regional as opposed to national level.
13
Threshold can be regulated by law; however, it must also be considered that with high threshold
distribution of seats may be difficult, while with low threshold not all parties who reach it will be getting
a seat. In an event of natural threshold, considering varying amounts of population threshold will also
vary and in some cases, it can be too high.
We believe that election threshold must be regulated by law and must be the same for all districts. It can
be set at 5%, which is not unreasonably high number and it will also promote competition among parties
and encourage them to actively engage with constituents. 5% threshold will also ensure high legitimacy of
elected party.
In proportional representation voting system, parties/blocs nominate lists of their candidates. We support
the use of open lists in proportional-regional election system, as it will allow voters to influence not only
the election of political parties but also the process of nomination of candidates by parties. Voters will
choose individual candidates from the list provided by each party and individual candidates will elected
according to the popular vote.

Advantages of the proportional-regional voting system

Votes are translated into seat numbers proportionately;

The risk of losing votes is decreased to minimum;

Equality of votes is ensured the number of voters may differ by districts; however, the principle
of equality of votes allows 10-15% margin of error;

12

http://assembly.coe.int/nw/xml/XRef/X2H-Xref-ViewPDF.asp?FileID=21275&lang=en
RULES FOR ELECTING GEORGIAN PARLIAMENT ANALYSIS OF THE ELECTORAL SYSTEM AND
RECOMMENDATIONS, Human Rights Education and Monitoring Center (EMC), 2013, p.34
13

Geographic representation is ensured mandates are distributed at the regional level, which will in
turn bring voters closer to their representatives. This will allow compensating for majoritarian
system.

Representation of small parties is promoted small parties will have better chances to reach the
threshold by working with voters intensively.

Women representation is increased proportionate system promotes women participation the

most. However, we believe that mandatory quoting system must also be put in place as an
additional mechanism for increasing women participation;

Voters influence the process of nomination of party candidates, weakening the party vertical this
will bring voters closer to candidates and will also increase voter responsibility in the process of
selection of candidates, which will promote a more informed decision. This will also increase
accountability of candidates before voters. Success of candidates will depend on will of voters
rather than decision of party leaders, which will prompt them to work closely with voters and will
promote stronger candidacies;

Simplicity the process of voting is clear and unambiguous. Each voter has a single vote to vote
for a party list candidate.

Disadvantages of the system:

Independent candidates dont exist in the PR voting system, as they cannot run in proportional
elections. However, this is outweighed by the fact that voters are able to choose individual
candidates from the list provided by each party. This will work in favor of strong candidates and
will bring voters closer to their elected representatives in the legislature. This will also
counterbalance absence of majoritarian legislators.

Complex ballot structure ballot papers must include party lists, which will increase the size of
ballot papers.

We are ready to participate in discussions of the electoral system outlined by the present
recommendations as well as any other proposals about new electoral system in order to help choose the
electoral system that can solve the existing challenges most effectively.