New electoral system 'may not reflect the majority'
Play
THE NEW electoral system proposed by the Constitution Drafting Commission (CDC) - of counting the votes of losing candidates to determine party-list MPs - could weaken politics, a member of the Pheu Thai Party said.
Worachai Hema, a former MP, said such a system would mean effectively ignoring the voice of the majority and allowing constituency-vote losers to form a government.
On Monday, the CDC revealed its proposed new voting system in which the votes received by failed constituency candidates would be used for party-list MPs to ensure that every ballot counts.
Worachai explained that the party of the second-placed candidate might gain more total seats if the ratio of the constituency to the party-list system facilitated, adding that it would also be possible that the total number of seats won by small parties would outnumber those won by a big party, who might have won the majority of votes.
Either way, it would allow a minority government to be formed, Worachai said.
Such a system would weaken politics, he warned. It could also pave the way for a prime minister from a small party, who could be anybody, including someone who bought a seat in the party, he said.
He concluded that the system would not reflect the voice of the majority.
A Democrat member, Nipit Intrasombat, expressed a similar opinion, saying the CDC proposed system would not reflect the intent of the majority.
He explained that the constituency and the party-list systems are different. The people might like a candidate but dislike the party, he pointed out, adding that when a vote for a favoured candidate, who lost, is transferred to the party, it might contradict the voter’s intention.
The only plus point of such a system is that it is easy because it has only one ballot paper.
He rejected the idea that the CDC proposal was fairer than the majoritarian system when no votes would go in vain. “In the past, people got to vote for the party of their choice anyway and the votes were never a waste. They were used to calculate the number of party-list MPs,” he said.
Nipit said most countries had the same voting system. “If you lose an election, you’re done,” he explained, adding that the party-list system was a different story and they should not be mixed together.
Gothom Arya, a former election commissioner, said the system designed by Meechai Ruchupan’s drafting team was rather strange. He urged the CDC to tell the public if there were other countries using it and also inform everyone of its pros and cons.
Concerns have mounted that if such a system undermined the power of big parties, the charter could get rejected in a national referendum whose voters were also supporters of those parties.
Despite that, CDC spokesman Amorn Wanichwiwatana said the CDC would still stick with this system and there was no plan B in place in the event that it meets with strong criticism.
He also revealed that the chairman of the sub-panel on the legislative system, Prapan Naikovit, was working on further details of the electoral system, including the qualifications of an election candidate and the ratio of the constituency to party-list MPs.
Also, next Tuesday the committee studying executive bodies chaired by Apichart Sukhagganond would meet with the CDC to present its report, Amorn said.
