LK INNOVATE

Writer and researcher: Dr. Lokman Khan

Bangladesh is currently navigating a critical juncture, with its political future and choice of electoral system at the forefront of national debate. The decision on which electoral system to adopt is paramount, as a misstep could plunge the nation into future chaos. What works for other countries may not necessarily suit Bangladesh, given its unique culture, social fabric, and political awareness. This article will examine the two primary electoral systems—First-Past-the-Post (FPTP) and Proportional Representation (PR)—and argue why FPTP is the more appropriate choice for Bangladesh.

First-Past-the-Post (FPTP) / Plurality Voting

How it works: In each electoral constituency, the candidate who receives the most votes wins, regardless of whether they secure an absolute majority (over 50%).
Used in: United States (House of Representatives), United Kingdom (House of Commons), India (Lok Sabha), Canada.

Advantages:

• Simplicity and Quick Results: The FPTP system is remarkably straightforward for voters to understand. They vote directly for their preferred candidate, and the candidate with the most votes wins. This simplicity allows for rapid vote counting and swift declaration of results, reducing uncertainty and accelerating the formation of a new government. For a developing nation like Bangladesh, where timely decision-making and long-term planning are crucial, a quick transition of power is highly beneficial.
• Strong Majority Governments: FPTP often leads to the formation of single-party majority governments, even if the winning party doesn’t secure over 50% of the national vote. This creates a strong and stable government capable of effective policy formulation and implementation. In a developing country like Bangladesh, a strong government is vital for driving progress. Weak or coalition governments often suffer from slow decision-making and internal conflicts, which can hinder national development.
• Candidate Accountability: Under FPTP, voters directly elect a specific candidate to represent their constituency. This fosters a direct sense of expectation and accountability between the elected representative and their constituents. Local communities can easily approach their Member of Parliament (MP) with their concerns, and the elected representative is incentivized to work for local development, knowing they must face the same electorate in the next election. This strengthens political engagement at the grassroots level.
• Reduced Influence of Extremist Parties: The FPTP system makes it challenging for smaller and extremist parties to gain parliamentary seats, as they must secure a plurality of votes in specific constituencies. This can temper political polarization and encourage the growth of centrist politics, which is essential for maintaining stability in a diverse society like Bangladesh.

Disadvantage:

• Disproportionate Results and Underrepresentation of Smaller Parties: A common criticism of FPTP is that it can lead to a disproportionate allocation of seats relative to the total votes received, potentially underrepresenting smaller parties that have diffused support across the nation.

Proportional Representation (PR)

How it works: Voters typically cast their ballot for a political party, and seats in the legislature are allocated to parties in proportion to the total votes they receive nationwide.
Used in: Netherlands, Israel, Sweden, Brazil.

Advantages:

• Fairer Representation of Parties: The primary benefit of PR is that it ensures a more accurate reflection of the popular vote in the legislature, allowing smaller parties to gain representation.

Disadvantages:

• Fragmented Parliaments and Coalition Governments: The most significant drawback of PR is its tendency to produce fragmented parliaments and weak coalition governments. Since many smaller parties can enter parliament, no single party often achieves a majority. This necessitates the formation of coalition governments involving multiple parties. In a politically sensitive country like Bangladesh, where a lack of trust often plagues political parties, a fragile coalition government could undermine national stability. Disagreements among coalition partners, delays in policy formulation, and frequent threats of government collapse could impede the nation’s progress.
• Government Instability: Coalition governments are often inherently unstable. Disagreements or conflicts of interest among coalition partners can lead to a government’s collapse at any time, resulting in frequent elections that disrupt economic and social advancement.
• Lack of Candidate Accountability: In PR systems, voters do not directly choose individual candidates. Instead, they vote for a party, and candidates are typically drawn from party lists. This can diminish the direct accountability of elected representatives to the local populace, as their selection is primarily dependent on their party’s internal processes.
• Rise of Extremist Parties: PR systems can allow small, even extremist, parties to gain seats in parliament with a relatively low percentage of votes. This could exacerbate societal divisions and promote extremist ideologies, posing a significant threat to social harmony and religious tolerance in Bangladesh.
  Why FPTP is the Right Choice for Bangladesh
  Considering Bangladesh’s current political and social context, the FPTP system appears to be the more suitable choice. Here’s why:
• Political Stability: Bangladesh’s paramount need is a stable government that can sustain its rapid economic growth and social development. FPTP facilitates the formation of strong, single-party majority governments, ensuring political stability. Coalition governments formed under PR systems could introduce significant instability to Bangladesh’s fragile political culture.
• Simplicity and Public Engagement: Given the diverse levels of political awareness across Bangladesh’s large population, the simplicity of FPTP is a major advantage. Voters easily understand that they are casting a vote for their local representative and expect accountability from them. This makes the political process more meaningful at the grassroots level.
• Ensuring Representative Accountability: The direct link between an elected MP and their constituents fosters immediate expectations and accountability. In Bangladesh’s largely rural society, this personal connection and an MP’s focus on local issues are immensely important.
• Curbing Extremism: Preventing the rise of divisive and extremist forces in Bangladeshi society is crucial. The FPTP system makes it harder for such groups to gain parliamentary representation, contributing to overall social cohesion.

Conclusion

No electoral system is a magical panacea; rather, it must align with a country’s political, social, and cultural realities. While the FPTP system has its limitations, its advantages far outweigh its drawbacks for Bangladesh in its current scenario. For the formation of a strong, stable, and accountable government that can steer the nation towards sustained progress, the FPTP system appears to be the most effective and secure choice for Bangladesh. For a developing nation that prioritizes stability over volatility, embracing the FPTP system with foresight would be the wisest course of action.