Autonomy and Electoral Reform

Editorial

During his visit to Rodrigues, this week, in the context of the celebrations of its accession to an autonomous status within the Republic of Mauritius, Prime Minister Jugnauth said that the electoral system in place in the island will need to be revisited in light of the political instability introduced in its polity due to the impact of proportional representation on final election results. Pravind Jugnauth said it was necessary in the circumstances for consultations to be held between the regional government and OPR members, which will hopefully lead to a consensus on the necessary amendments to be brought to the Rodrigues Regional Assembly Act before the next regional elections. He also expressed the hope that “serious discussions” would also take place as regards the electoral system in place in Mauritius, and a consensus reached.

As regards Rodrigues itself, earlier elections have demonstrated how there had been overturnings of election results – the 2017 one being such an instance. After the allocation of additional seats under Proportional Representation (PR), a first round electoral victory of 10-2 in favour of the OPR under the First Past The Post (FPTP) system was diluted to a 10-7 majority in favour of the OPR with five additional seats allocated to the MR-FPR alliance and none to the OPR. All this to show the incompatibility of the FPTP and the PR system in some cases when they form part of a combined package, especially when the numbers appointed under PR, while attempting better representation, can upset drastically the majority emerging from the FPTP resulting in a slim and sometimes quasi-ungovernable majority.

Mauritius has been eyeing for some time going some sort of a hybrid system that will combine the existing FPTP with a PR system in order to reflect more « fairly » the votes cast for each one of the parties (with or without the Best Loser System). If we cannot avoid throwing up unstable governments of the sort by using this device, it were best we stuck to our guns with the FPTP and the BLS. “Fairness” is no doubt a good criterion from a moral standpoint, but it is “decisiveness” of electoral outcomes which is superior when it comes to governing, and that is why we should tread carefully lest we venture into territories that may land us into nasty electoral surprises.

On the other hand, it is also a fact that under the existing electoral system which puts a premium on the FPTP, opposition parties have often been under-represented in terms of seats obtained in relation to the percentage of votes they had secured in the election. The 2019 elections have resulted in an alliance which obtained 37% of total votes yet ruling the roost as it wishes. In order to address this inequity, reports had been commissioned in the past by earlier governments in order to obtain a better balance among parties. The recommendations of the Sachs Commission, the Carcassonne Report and the Sithanen Report or modified versions thereof have however never been implemented. Other proposals for reform were turned down because it was clear from the outset that the proposals were self-serving ones, firmly tied to the political agenda of the ruling party/alliance at a particular point in time or were setting the ground for a future alliance for the next elections. As things stand presently, it’s not yet visible whether the MSM leader would be tinkering with that objective in mind. Neither can we rule out that some unpalatable concoction would indeed being prepared and would eventually be presented for electoral campaign spin and blame game purposes, knowing in advance that the Opposition would vote against any such tinkering. Only time will tell. Read More… Become a Subscriber

Mauritius Times ePaper Friday 14 October 2022