We have previously discussed the need for a United Nations Parliamentary Assembly (UNPA), a new body of delegates at the U.N. whose members will be directly elected by the people rather than selected by the governments, with the numbers allocated to each nation decided by the Schwartzberg system of weighted voting, so that the undemocratic "one-state-one-vote" paradox will be avoided, but the largest nations will be unable to completely dominate the proceedings. The creation of such an assembly would go far in eliminating the "democratic deficit" at the U.N. and vastly improve the ability of the world to establish the rule of international law. Consequently, it should be a major priority of Global Citizens in all countries.
But assuming that the UNPA becomes a reality, what sort of election system should be used to select its delegates? Presumably, each nation will decide this matter for itself, but all should carefully consider the question. After all, the creation of the UNPA would present an unprecedented opportunity to experiment with voting systems that have been developed in the last few decades in order to maximize the level of genuine democracy. It would be a shame to let such an opportunity pass by.
Let's look at a few of the possibilities.
1. First-Past-The-Post. This system (known as Winner-Take-All in the United States) is the most simple voting system imaginable, and the one currently in use for congressional and state legislative elections in the United States and to the House of Commons in the United Kingdom. If this system was adopted, each country would be divided up into constituency districts, each of which would elect a single candidate, the winner being whichever candidate gets the most votes. While simply, it is also profoundly undemocratic. If there are more than two candidates, the winner can be a person who did not have an actual majority of the vote, and all the constituents who voted for a different candidate are denied meaningful representation.
There are other problems with FPTP. Voters may decide against voting for the candidate or party they truly support, in order to "tactically" vote in a way calculated to defeat a particularly distasteful candidate. Furthermore, the presence of "spoiler" candidates who represent a tiny portion of the electorate can deny victory to the candidate who actually represents the genuine interest of the constituency.
While simple, FPTP is simply too undemocratic and has too many problems. It should be firmly rejected for UNPA elections.
2. Alternative Voting. This system (known in the United States as Instant-Runoff-Voting) is considerably better than FPTP. In AV elections, voters rank the candidates by preference rather than casting a single voter for a single individual. Over a series of ballots, the lowest-ranking candidate is eliminated each round, with the secondary votes for that candidate going to the other candidates, until a candidate obtains a majority of the votes and is declared the winner.
This system, which is already being used successfully in Australia, largely eliminates the problems of tactical voting and spoiler candidates. However, it still leaves the constituency with the conundrum of a single candidate being selected, against whom many of the people will have voted. So, while superior to FPTP, it is still imperfect. Nevertheless, for those nations which will be sending a single delegate to the UNPA, it is probably the best option available.
3. Single Transferable Vote. This system is similar to AV in that voters rank their candidates by preference rather than casting a single vote for a single individual, but it differs in that constituency districts elect more than one delegate, thus adding an element of proportional representation into the picture. Rather than a single candidate winning after receiving a majority vote on a ballot, multiple candidates are elected after receiving a sufficient number of votes (i.e. if a district elects four people, a candidate is elected upon receiving 25% of the votes).
This has all the advantages of AV, with the added benefit of electing a slate of representatives who better represent the democratically-expressed wishes of the people of the district. It should be strongly considered for elections to the UNPA. Nations with ten or fewer delegates might consider treating the entire nation as a single STV district, while larger countries that will be sending dozens of delegates could divide the nation up into multiple STV districts.
Obtaining a United Nations Parliamentary Assembly is going to be a tremendously difficult struggle. Should Global Citizens achieve this objctive, they must ensure that elections to the UNPA are as democratic and representative as possible, and the choice of what form of electoral system to use will be crucial.
Clearly, FPTP systems should be rejected because they are undemocratic. Thse nations which will send only one delegate should use an AV system, which is the most democratic system possible for elections choosing a single person. Nations sending between two and ten delegates should use STV systems that treat the entire country as a single constituency, while nations sending more than ten should divide their nation up into different constituencies that select delegates by STV.
If this is done, we not only will have a UNPA, but we can make sure that it represents the human family in the most genuine and democratic manner possible.
No comments:
Post a Comment