Adopting PR could help reduce political polarisation by incentivising parties to collaborate and build coalitions, promoting policies that reflect broader consensus rather than focusing solely on regional or constituency-based wins
DOUGLAS RASBASH
Special Correspondent
If justice is applying the rules and equity is about fairness, the stunning election results can be judged as being just but unfair. In Botswana’s recent elections, the disparities between the percentage of popular votes and the allocation of parliamentary seats starkly underscore the need for electoral reform.
The current first-past-the-post (FPTP) system used in Botswana, while consistent with the rules, is increasingly criticised as unfair because it fails to equitably translate the will of the people into representation. Under proportional representation (PR), Botswana could achieve a more accurate reflection of voter support in its National Assembly, enhancing democratic legitimacy and fairness.
The election results reveal these issues clearly. The Umbrella for Democratic Change (UDC) won 37% of the popular vote but secured a disproportionately high 36 out of 61 seats. In contrast, the ruling Botswana Democratic Party (BDP) received 31% of the popular vote yet won only 4 seats, demonstrating how FPTP magnifies majorities in certain constituencies but fails to represent actual voter support across the nation.
Similarly, the Botswana Congress Party (BCP) obtained 20% of the vote and won 15 seats while the Botswana Patriotic Front (BPF), with 8% of the vote, won 5 seats. Let us record that 63% of the electorate actually voted against the UDC. These inconsistencies highlight the misalignment between votes and seats, which often disadvantages smaller or regionally concentrated parties.
Our FPTP system has created a significant imbalance between the percentage of votes received by each party and their representation in the National Assembly. Let us break down the discrepancies:
- Umbrella for Democratic Change (UDC):
- Votes: 37% of the total.
- Seats: 36 out of 61, which translates into approximately 59% of the seats.
- Under PR: If PR were applied, 37% of 61 seats would be around 23 seats, not the 36 they received under FPTP. Thus, the UDC gained significantly more seats than a proportional system would allocate.
- Botswana Democratic Party (BDP):
- Votes: 31%.
- Seats: 4 out of 61, or about 7% of the seats.
- Under PR: With PR, 31% of 61 seats would yield about 19 seats. The BDP’s actual seat count under FPTP was far below what they would receive under PR, illustrating how this system can penalise parties with widely spread support.
- Botswana Congress Party (BCP):
- Votes: 20%.
- Seats: 15 out of 61, or 25% of the seats.
- Under PR: At 20% of the vote, The BCP would have received around 12 seats under PR, slightly fewer than the 15 they won.
- Botswana Patriotic Front (BPF):
- Votes: 8%.
- Seats: 5 out of 61, or 8% of the seats.
- Under PR: The BPF’s result under FPTP is actually aligned with a PR outcome, as 8% of 61 seats would translate to about 5 seats.
Total Impact of Proportional Representation (PR)
If proportional representation had been applied:
- The UDC would have fewer seats (23 instead of 36), bringing their representation in line with their 37% popular support.
- The BDP would be awarded significantly more seats (19 instead of 4), making the seat distribution reflect their 31% vote share more accurately.
- The BCP would likely hold 12 seats rather than 15, reflecting their 20% vote share.
- The BPF would remain with 5 seats, matching their 8% share under both systems.
Summary
Under PR, the seat distribution would look like this:
- UDC: 23 seats (37%)
- BDP: 19 seats (31%)
- BCP: 12 seats (20%)
- BPF: 5 seats (8%)
This model highlights that a PR system would have resulted in a more equitable representation of each party’s voter support. It would prevent disproportionate majorities where one party’s seat share is significantly inflated at the expense of others.
With PR, each vote carries equal weight, making the National Assembly a true reflection of Botswana’s diverse political landscape and a fairer platform for representation. This approach could encourage collaboration among parties because none would likely hold an outright majority under PR, fostering a political environment based on consensus and coalition-building.
Proportional representation, used in countries such as Germany and New Zealand, is widely recognised for its capacity to deliver a more equitable distribution of seats based on the actual vote percentage.
With PR, parties would win seats that more closely match their share of the vote, ensuring that even smaller parties with a significant percentage of support can influence legislative processes and voice their constituencies’ needs.
Polarisation
In Botswana, PR would prevent scenarios where a party with substantial voter support is sidelined by the structural biases of the FPTP system, thereby fostering a multi-party democracy where the diversity of public opinion is adequately represented.
Further, adopting PR could help reduce political polarisation by incentivising parties to collaborate and build coalitions, promoting policies that reflect broader consensus rather than focusing solely on regional or constituency-based wins. It would also enhance the accountability of MPs, who would have to appeal to the national electorate rather than just localised strongholds.
In conclusion, Botswana’s FPTP system, while functional, now risks undermining voter confidence and democratic fairness. By moving towards proportional representation, Botswana could ensure that the National Assembly mirrors the true political landscape, empowering voters to see their choices accurately reflected in the halls of power.
This shift would mark a step towards a more inclusive and representative democracy where each vote truly counts. With the economy under stress, the government must do everything to ensure social stability. It must realise that 63% of the electorate actually rejected their mandate.
The UDC and the BCP pledged electoral reform which the people have endorsed in the mandate they have been granted. Let us see if the momentum for change will now be taken seriously.