Context: The results of the Lok Sabha elections were declared last week. The ruling National Democratic Alliance (NDA) has won 293 seats with a 43.3% vote share while the Opposition bloc INDIA (including Trinamool Congress) has secured 234 seats with a 41.6% vote share. Other regional parties and independents polled around 15% but ended up with only 16 seats in total.

• There is a growing consensus among a broad cross-section of citizens and political parties in India that the current First-Past-The-Post (FPTP) electoral system must be replaced with proportional representation.

What is First Past the Post System?

• FPTP is a simple electoral system used in many countries, including the United States, Canada, the United Kingdom, and India. 

• In this system, the candidate who receives the most votes in a constituency or district wins the seat, regardless of whether they have an absolute majority (more than 50% of the votes).

Features of the FPTP

• Voting: Each voter casts one vote for their preferred candidate.

• They choose from a list of candidates, usually representing different political parties or independent candidates.

• Counting Votes: After voting closes, the votes are counted, and the candidate with the most votes is declared the winner.

• There is no requirement for the winning candidate to receive more than 50% of the total votes cast.

• Winner Takes All: The candidate who wins the most votes in a constituency or district is awarded the seat, and the other candidates receive nothing, even if they have a significant share of the vote.

Significance

• The FPTP system is simple and the most feasible method in a large country like India. 

• FPTP provides greater stability to the executive in parliamentary democracy because the ruling party/coalition can enjoy a majority in the Lok Sabha/Legislative assembly without obtaining a majority of the votes (more than 50%) across constituencies.

Criticism

• One common criticism is that it can lead to disproportionate representation, where parties with significant overall support may not win a proportionate number of seats.

• It may result in over or under representation of political parties when compared to their vote share. 

• It also discourages smaller parties or independent candidates from participating, as they may struggle to win seats under this system.

• Elected representatives tend to pay more attention to those who voted for them. 

• The representative is often compelled to indulge in vote-bank, competitive politics or sectoral politics to remain popular and ensure re-election in the next round. 

Proportional Representation (PR)

• It is an electoral system where the distribution of seats in a legislative body is closely aligned with the proportion of votes received by each participating political party or group.

• Unlike First Past the Post (FPTP), where the candidate with the most votes in each constituency wins, PR aims to ensure that the overall composition of the legislative body reflects the overall distribution of voter preferences.

There are various types of proportional representation systems

• Party List PR: In this system, voters cast their vote for a political party rather than a specific candidate.

• Seats are then allocated to parties in proportion to the total number of votes each party receives. 

• Parties provide a ranked list of candidates, and seats are filled based on the order of candidates on the list.

• Mixed-Member Proportional (MMP): This system combines elements of both FPTP and PR.

• Voters cast two votes: one for a candidate in their local constituency and one for a political party. 

• Some seats are filled by the winners of the local constituency races, while additional seats are allocated to parties to ensure proportionality based on the overall party vote.

• Single Transferable Vote (STV): In STV, voters rank candidates in order of preference in multi member constituencies.

• Candidates are elected based on achieving a certain quota of votes, with surplus votes from elected candidates and votes from eliminated candidates being redistributed until all seats are filled.

• Mixed-Member Majoritarian (MMM): This system combines FPTP with additional proportional seats.

• A portion of seats are filled by FPTP, while additional seats are allocated to parties to ensure proportionality based on the overall party vote.

Significance

• Proportional representation systems aim to provide fairer representation for a broader range of political viewpoints, reduce wasted votes, and encourage voter turnout. 

Criticism

• The main criticism against the PR system is that it could potentially result in instability as no party/coalition may obtain a majority to form the government in our parliamentary democracy. 

• Some experts assert that the PR system slows down decision-making, resulting in the weakening of the government itself. 

• It is possible that extreme pluralism can allow tiny minority parties to hold larger parties to ransom in coalition negotiations. The inclusiveness of the PR system is thus cited as a drawback.  

• The PR system may reduce accountability to voters because an ousted party of the government can still remain in office by finding new coalition partners after an election.

• Under a PR system, it may be difficult to remove a reasonably sized centre party from power. 

Road Ahead

• The discrepancies and associated flaws of the FPTP can be reduced, if not eliminated, to make India’s democratic system more responsive and reflective of the will of the people. 

• There is a consensus among supporters of democracy that the ruling party and the opposition are equally significant for the sustainability and functioning of a democratic system.

• Because of the FPTP electoral system, the opposition has been eliminated or reduced to a minimum several times in the past, for example in 1984, 2014, and in the first three general elections held after Independence. 

• The law commission in its 170th report, ‘Reform of the electoral laws’ (1999), had recommended the introduction of the MMPR system on an experimental basis. 

• It had suggested that 25% of seats may be filled through a PR system by increasing the strength of the Lok Sabha.