Electoral threshold

Last updated

The electoral threshold, or election threshold, is the minimum share of all the votes cast that a candidate or political party requires to achieve before they become entitled to representation or additional seats in a legislature. This limit can operate in various ways, e.g. in party-list proportional representation systems where an electoral threshold requires that a party must receive a specified minimum percentage of votes (e.g. 5%), either nationally or in a particular electoral district, to obtain seats in the legislature. In single transferable voting, the election threshold is called the quota and it is possible to pass it by use of first choice votes alone or by a combination of first choice votes and votes transferred from other candidates based on lower preferences (and in the last resort to fill the target number of seats, it is possible to be elected under STV even if a candidate does not pass the election threshold). In mixed-member-proportional (MMP) systems the election threshold determines which parties are eligible for top-up seats in the legislative body (but some MMP system still allow a party to retain the seat they won in their electoral district even when they did not receive the threshold nationally).

Contents

The effect of this electoral threshold is to deny representation to small parties or to force them into coalitions, with the presumption of rendering the election system more stable by keeping out fringe parties. Proponents say that simply having a few seats in a legislature can significantly boost the profile of a fringe party and that providing representation and possibly veto power for a party that receives only 1 percent of the vote is not appropriate. [1] However, others argue that in the absence of a ranked ballot or other proportional systems, supporters of minor parties are effectively disenfranchised when barred from the top-up seats and are denied the right to be represented by someone of their choosing.

Two boundaries can be defined—a threshold of representation is the minimum vote share that might yield a party a seat under the most favorable circumstances for the party, while the threshold of exclusion is the maximum vote share that could be insufficient to yield a seat under the least favorable circumstances. Arend Lijphart suggested calculating the informal threshold as the mean of these. [2]

The electoral threshold is a barrier to entry for political parties to the political competition. [3]

Recommendations for electoral thresholds

The Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe recommends for parliamentary elections a threshold not higher than three percent. [4] For single transferable vote, to put the natural threshold at about ten percent, John M. Carey and Simon Hix recommend a low district magnitude of approximately six. [5] [6] Most STV systems used today set the number of votes for the election of most members at the Droop quota, which in a six-member district is 14 percent.

Electoral thresholds in various countries

World map showing electoral thresholds of lower houses.
Note that some countries may have more rules for coalitions and independents and for winning a specific number of district seats
.mw-parser-output .legend{page-break-inside:avoid;break-inside:avoid-column}.mw-parser-output .legend-color{display:inline-block;min-width:1.25em;height:1.25em;line-height:1.25;margin:1px 0;text-align:center;border:1px solid black;background-color:transparent;color:black}.mw-parser-output .legend-text{}
<1
1-1.9
2-2.9
3-3.9
4-4.9
5-5.9
6-6.9
7+ Election thresholds map.svg
World map showing electoral thresholds of lower houses.
Note that some countries may have more rules for coalitions and independents and for winning a specific number of district seats
  <1
  1–1.9
  2–2.9
  3–3.9
  4–4.9
  5–5.9
  6–6.9
  7+

In Poland's Sejm, Lithuania's Seimas, Germany's Bundestag and New Zealand's House of Representatives, the threshold is 5 percent (in Poland, additionally 8 percent for a coalition of two or more parties submitting a joint electoral list and in Lithuania, additionally 7 percent for coalition). However, in New Zealand, if a party wins a directly elected seat, the threshold does not apply.

The threshold is 3.25 percent in Israel's Knesset (it was 1% before 1992, 1.5% from 1992 to 2003 and 2% form 2003 to 2014) and 7 percent in the Turkish parliament. In Poland, ethnic minority parties do not have to reach the threshold level to get into the parliament and so there is always a small German minority representation (at minimum, one member) in the Sejm. In Romania, for the ethnic minority parties there is a different threshold than for the national parties that run for the Chamber of Deputies.

There are also countries such as Portugal, South Africa, Finland, the Netherlands and North Macedonia that have proportional representation systems without a legal threshold, although the Netherlands has a rule that the first seat can never be a remainder seat, which means that there is an effective threshold of 100 percent divided by the total number of seats (with 150 seats to allocate, this threshold is currently 0.67%).

Australia

The Senate of Australia is elected using single transferable vote (STV) and does not use an electoral threshold or have a predictable "natural" or "hidden" threshold. At a normal election, each state returns six senators and the Australian Capital Territory and the Northern Territory each return two. (For the states, the number is doubled in a double dissolution election.) As such, the quota for election (as determined through the Droop quota) is 14.3 percent or 33.3 percent respectively. (For the states, the quota for election is halved in a double dissolution election.) However, as STV is a ranked voting system, candidates who receive less than the quota for election in primary votes can still end up being elected if they amass sufficient preferences to reach the Droop quota. Therefore, the sixth (or, at a double dissolution election, the 12th) Senate seat in each state is often won by a party that received considerably less than the Droop quota in primary votes. For example, at the 2022 election, the sixth Senate seat in Victoria was won by the United Australia Party even though it won only 4 percent of the primary vote in that state.

Germany

Germany, has a regular threshold of 5 percent, and ethnic minority parties have no threshold. [7] The 2021 election demonstrated the exception for ethnic minority party: the South Schleswig Voters' Association entered the Bundestag with just 0.1 percent as a registered party for Danish and Frisian minorities. The exception to the 5 percent electoral threshold by winning three constituency seats has been repealed in 2023. That exception allowed the Left to qualify for list votes despite getting just 4.9 percent.

Norway

In Norway, the nationwide electoral threshold of 4 percent applies only to leveling seats. A party with sufficient local support may still win the regular district seats, even if the party fails to meet the threshold. For example, the 2021 election saw the Green Party and Christian Democratic Party each win three district seats, and Patient Focus winning one district seat despite missing the threshold.

Slovenia

In Slovenia, the threshold was set at 3 parliamentary seats during parliamentary elections in 1992 and 1996. This meant that the parties needed to win about 3.2 percent of the votes in order to pass the threshold. In 2000, the threshold was raised to 4 percent of the votes.

Sweden

In Sweden, there is a nationwide threshold of 4 percent for the Riksdag, but if a party reaches 12 percent in any electoral constituency, it will take part in the seat allocation for that constituency. [8] As of the 2022 election, nobody has been elected based on the 12 percent rule.

United States

In the United States, as the majority of elections are conducted under the first-past-the-post system, legal electoral thresholds do not apply in the actual voting. However, several states have threshold requirements for parties to obtain automatic ballot access to the next general election without having to submit voter-signed petitions. The threshold requirements have no practical bearing on the two main political parties (the Republican and Democratic parties) as they easily meet the requirements, but have come into play for minor parties such as the Green and Libertarian parties. The threshold rules also apply for independent candidates to obtain ballot access.

List of electoral thresholds by country

Africa

CountryLower (or sole) houseUpper houseOther elections
For individual partiesFor other typesOther threshold
Benin10% [9]
Burundi2% [10]
LesothoNone, natural threshold ~0.4%
Mozambique5% [11]
Rwanda5%
South AfricaNone, natural threshold ~0.2%

    Asia and Oceania

    CountryLower (or sole) houseUpper houseOther elections
    For individual partiesFor other typesOther threshold
    AustraliaSingle-member districts for the House of Representatives
    East Timor4% [12] [13] [14]
    Fiji5%
    Indonesia4% [15]
    Israel3.25%
    Kazakhstan5%
    Kyrgyzstan5% and 0.5% of the vote in each of the seven regions
    Nepal3% vote each under the proportional representation category and at least one seat under the first-past-the-post voting
    New Zealand5% [16] 1 constituency seat
    Palestine2%
    Philippines2%Other parties can still qualify if the 20% of the seats have not been filled up.
    South Korea3% [17] [18] 5 constituency seats5% (local council elections) [19]
    Taiwan5% [20]
    Tajikistan5% [21]
    ThailandNone, natural threshold ~0.1% [22]

      Europe

      CountryLower (or sole) houseUpper houseOther elections
      For individual partiesFor other typesOther threshold
      Albania3%5% for multi-party alliances to each electoral area level [23]
      Andorra7.14% (114 of votes cast) [24]
      Armenia5%7% for multi-party alliances
      Austria4%0% for ethnic minorities
      Belgium5% (at constituency level; no national threshold)
      Bosnia and Herzegovina3% (at constituency level; no national threshold)
      Bulgaria4%
      Croatia5% (at constituency level; no national threshold)
      Cyprus3.6%1.8% in European Parliament elections
      Czech Republic5%8% for bipartite alliances, 11% for multi-party alliances; does not apply for EU elections
      Denmark2% [25] [26] 1 constituency seat
      Estonia5%
      FinlandNone, but high natural threshold due to multiple districts
      FranceNot applicable5% in European Parliament elections [27] and in municipal elections for cities with at least 1000 habitants [28] [29]
      Georgia5% [30] 3% for local elections in all municipalities but Tbilisi (2.5%) [30]
      Germany5%
      0% for ethnic minorities0% in European Parliament elections
      Greece3%
      Hungary5%10% for bipartite alliances, 15% for multi-party alliances, 0.26% for ethnic minorities (for the first seat only)
      IrelandNatural threshold 8 – 12% because 3 to 5 seats in each constituency
      Iceland5% (only for compensatory seats) [31]
      Italy3%10% (party alliances), but a list must reach at least 3%, 1% (parties of party alliances), 20% or two constituencies (ethnic minorities)3%
      Kosovo5%
      Latvia5%
      Liechtenstein8%
      Lithuania5%7% for party alliances
      Maltanatural threshold 12% due to district magnitude of 5
      Moldova5%3% (non-party), 12% (party alliances)
      Monaco5% [32]
      Montenegro3%Special rules apply for candidate lists representing national minority communities. [33]
      Netherlands0.6̅% (percent of votes needed for one seat; parties failing to reach this threshold have no right to a possible remainder seat) [34]
      Northern Cyprus5%
      North MacedoniaNone, but high natural threshold due to multiple districts
      Norway4% (only for compensatory seats)
      Poland5%8% (alliances; does not apply for EU elections); 0% (ethnic minorities)
      PortugalNone, but high natural threshold due to multiple districts
      Romania5%10% (alliances)
      Russia5%
      San Marino5% [35]
      Scotland5%
      Spain3% (constituency). Ceuta and Melilla use first-past-the-post system.None5% for local elections. Variable in regional elections.
      Sweden4% (national level)
      12% (constituency)
      SwitzerlandNone, but high natural threshold in some electoral districts
      Serbia3% [36] 0% for ethnic minorities [37] [36]
      Slovakia5%7% for bi- and tri-partite alliances, 10% for 4- or more-party alliances [38]
      Slovenia4%
      Turkey7% [39] 7% for multi-party alliances. Parties in an alliance not being subject to any nationwide threshold individually. No threshold for independent candidates.
      Ukraine5% [40]
      Wales5%

      The electoral threshold for elections to the European Parliament varies for each member state, a threshold of up to 5 percent is applied for individual electoral districts, no threshold is applied across the whole legislative body. [41]

      North America

      CountryLower (or sole) houseUpper houseOther elections
      For individual partiesFor other typesOther threshold
      Costa RicaNone, but high natural threshold due to its use of some multiple-member districts with less than 10 seats
      Mexico3%

        South America

        CountryLower (or sole) houseUpper houseOther elections
        For individual partiesFor other typesOther threshold
        Argentina3% of registered voters [42] 1.5% of valid votes for primaries
        Bolivia3%
        BrazilNo national electoral threshold, for parties threshold is 80% of the natural threshold in the district; for candidates 20% of the natural threshold in the district. [43] [44] threshold for financial contributions is 2% at constituency level or 11 deputies in 9 states, [45] [46] [47] increasing 2026 to 2.5% and 2030 to 3%
        ChileNone, but high natural threshold due to its use of multiple-member districts with less than 10 seats
        Colombia3%
        EcuadorNone, but high natural threshold due to its use of multiple-member districts with less than 10 seats
        ParaguayNone, but high natural threshold due to its use of multiple-member districts with less than 10 seats
        Peru5% [48]
        Uruguay1%3%

          The German Federal Constitutional Court rejected an electoral threshold for the European Parliament in 2011 and in 2014 based on the principle of one person, one vote. [49] In the case of Turkey, in 2004 the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe declared the threshold of 10 percent to be manifestly excessive and asked Turkey to lower it. [50] On 30 January 2007 the European Court of Human Rights ruled by five votes to two and on 8 July 2008, its Grand Chamber by 13 votes to four that the former 10 percent threshold imposed in Turkey does not violate the right to free elections (Article 3 of Protocol 1 of the ECHR). [51] It held, however, that this same threshold could violate the Convention if imposed in a different country. It was justified in the case of Turkey in order to stabilize the volatile political situation over recent decades. [52] [53]

          Natural threshold

          The number of seats in each electoral district creates a "hidden" natural threshold (also called an effective, or informal threshold). The number of votes that means that a party is guaranteed a seat can be calculated by the formula () where ε is the smallest possible number of votes. That means that in a district with four seats slightly more than 20 percent of the votes will guarantee a seat. Under more favorable circumstances, the party can still win a seat with fewer votes. [54] The most important factor in determining the natural threshold is the number of seats to be filled by the district. Other factors are the seat allocation formula (Saint-Laguë, D'Hondt or Hare), the number of contestant political parties and the size of the assembly. Generally, smaller districts leads to a higher proportion of votes needed to win a seat and vice versa. [55] The lower bound (the threshold of representation or the percentage of the vote that allows a party to earn a seat under the most favorable circumstances) is more difficult to calculate. In addition to the factors mentioned earlier, the number of votes cast for smaller parties are important. If more votes are cast for parties that do not win any seat, that will mean a lower percentage of votes needed to win a seat. [54]

          Notable cases

          An extreme example occurred in Turkey following the 2002 Turkish general election, where almost none of the 550 incumbent MPs were returned. This was a seismic shift that rocked Turkish politics to its foundations. None of the political parties that had passed the threshold in 1999, passed it again: DYP received only 9.55 percent of the popular vote, MHP received 8.34 percent, GP 7.25 percent, DEHAP 6.23 percent, ANAP 5.13 percent, SP 2.48 percent and DSP 1.22 percent. The aggregate number of wasted votes was an unprecented 46.33 percent (14,545,438). As a result, Erdoğan's AKP gained power, winning more than two-thirds of the seats in the Parliament with just 34.28 percent of the vote, with only one opposition party (CHP, which by itself failed to pass threshold in 1999) and 9 independents.

          Other dramatic events can be produced by the loophole often added in mixed-member proportional representation (used throughout Germany since 1949, New Zealand since 1993): there the threshold rule for party lists includes an exception for parties that won 3 (Germany) or 1 (New Zealand) single-member districts. The party list vote helps calculate the desirable number of MPs for each party. Major parties can help minor ally parties overcome the hurdle, by letting them win one or a few districts:

          The failure of one party to reach the threshold not only deprives their candidates of office and their voters of representation; it also changes the power index in the assembly, which may have dramatic implications for coalition-building.

          Memorable dramatic losses due to electoral threshold

          Coalitions due to electoral thresholds

          There has been cases of tries to attempts to circumvent thresholds:

          Amount of wasted vote

          Electoral thresholds can sometimes seriously affect the relationship between the percentages of the popular vote achieved by each party and the distribution of seats. The proportionality between seat share and popular vote can be measured by the Gallagher index while the amount of wasted votes is a measure of the total number of voters not represented by any party sitting in the legislature.

          The failure of one party to reach the threshold not only deprives their candidates of office and their voters of representation; it also changes the power index in the assembly, which may have dramatic implications for coalition-building.

          The amount of wasted vote changes from one election to another, here shown for New Zealand. [59] The wasted vote changes depending on voter behavior and size of effective electoral threshold, [60] for example in 2005 New Zealand general election every party above 1 percent received seats due to the electoral threshold in New Zealand of at least one seat in first-past-the-post voting, which caused a much lower wasted vote compared to the other years.

          In the Russian parliamentary elections in 1995, with a threshold excluding parties under 5 percent, more than 45 percent of votes went to parties that failed to reach the threshold. In 1998, the Russian Constitutional Court found the threshold legal, taking into account limits in its use. [61]

          After the first implementation of the threshold in Poland in 1993 34.4 percent of the popular vote did not gain representation.

          There had been a similar situation in Turkey, which had a 10 percent threshold, easily higher than in any other country. [62] The justification for such a high threshold was to prevent multi-party coalitions and put a stop to the endless fragmentation of political parties seen in the 1960s and 1970s. However, coalitions ruled between 1991 and 2002, but mainstream parties continued to be fragmented and in the 2002 elections as many as 45 percent of votes were cast for parties which failed to reach the threshold and were thus unrepresented in the parliament. [63] All parties which won seats in 1999 failed to cross the threshold, thus giving Justice and Development Party 66 percent of the seats.

          In the Ukrainian elections of March 2006, for which there was a threshold of 3 percent (of the overall vote, i.e. including invalid votes), 22 percent of voters were effectively disenfranchised, having voted for minor candidates. In the parliamentary election held under the same system, fewer voters supported minor parties and the total percentage of disenfranchised voters fell to about 12 percent.

          In Bulgaria, 24 percent of voters cast their ballots for parties that would not gain representation in the elections of 1991 and 2013.

          In the 2020 Slovak parliamentary election, 28.47 percent of all valid votes did not gain representation. [64] In the 2021 Czech legislative election 19.76 percent of voters were not represented. [65] In the 2022 Slovenian parliamentary election 24 percent of the vote went to parties which did not reach the 4 percent threshold including several former parliamentary parties (LMŠ, PoS, SAB, SNS and DeSUS).

          In the Philippines where party-list seats are only contested in 20 percent of the 287 seats in the lower house,[ clarification needed ] the effect of the 2 percent threshold is increased by the large number of parties participating in the election, which means that the threshold is harder to reach. This led to a quarter of valid votes being wasted, on average and led to the 20 percent of the seats never being allocated due to the 3-seat cap[ clarification needed ] In 2007, the 2 percent threshold was altered to allow parties with less than 1 percent of first preferences to receive a seat each and the proportion of wasted votes reduced slightly to 21 percent, but it again increased to 29 percent in 2010 due to an increase in number of participating parties. These statistics take no account of the wasted votes for a party which is entitled to more than three seats but cannot claim those seats due to the three-seat cap.[ clarification needed ]

          Electoral thresholds can produce a spoiler effect, similar to that in the first-past-the-post voting system, in which minor parties unable to reach the threshold take votes away from other parties with similar ideologies. Fledgling parties in these systems often find themselves in a vicious circle: if a party is perceived as having no chance of meeting the threshold, it often cannot gain popular support; and if the party cannot gain popular support, it will continue to have little or no chance of meeting the threshold. As well as acting against extremist parties, it may also adversely affect moderate parties if the political climate becomes polarized between two major parties at opposite ends of the political spectrum. In such a scenario, moderate voters may abandon their preferred party in favour of a more popular party in the hope of keeping the even less desirable alternative out of power.

          On occasion, electoral thresholds have resulted in a party winning an outright majority of seats without winning an outright majority of votes, the sort of outcome that a proportional voting system is supposed to prevent. For instance, the Turkish AKP won a majority of seats with less than 50 percent of votes in three consecutive elections (2002, 2007 and 2011). In the 2013 Bavarian state election, the Christian Social Union failed to obtain a majority of votes, but nevertheless won an outright majority of seats due to a record number of votes for parties which failed to reach the threshold, including the Free Democratic Party (the CSU's coalition partner in the previous state parliament). In Germany in 2013 15.7 percent voted for a party that did not meet the 5 percent threshold.

          In contrast, elections that use the ranked voting system can take account of each voter's complete indicated ranking preference. For example, the single transferable vote redistributes first preference votes for candidates below the threshold. This permits the continued participation in the election by those whose votes would otherwise be wasted. Minor parties can indicate to their supporters before the vote how they would wish to see their votes transferred. The single transferable vote is a proportional voting system designed to achieve proportional representation through ranked voting in multi-seat (as opposed to single seat) organizations or constituencies (voting districts). [66] Ranked voting systems are widely used in Australia and Ireland. Other methods of introducing ordinality into an electoral system can have similar effects.

          See also

          Notes

          1. Reynolds, Andrew (2005). Electoral system design : the new international IDEA handbook. Stockholm, Sweden: International Institute for Democracy and Electoral Assistance. p. 59. ISBN   978-91-85391-18-9. OCLC   68966125.
          2. Arend Lijphart (1994), Electoral Systems and Party Systems: A Study of Twenty-Seven Democracies, 1945–1990. Oxford: Oxford University Press. pp. 25–56
          3. Tullock, Gordon. "Entry barriers in politics." The American Economic Review 55.1/2 (1965): 458-466.
          4. Resolution 1547 (2007), para. 58
          5. Carey and Hix, The Electoral Sweet Spot, p. 7
          6. Carey, John M.; Hix, Simon (2011). "The Electoral Sweet Spot: Low-Magnitude Proportional Electoral Systems" (PDF). American Journal of Political Science . 55 (2): 383–397. doi: 10.1111/j.1540-5907.2010.00495.x .
          7. "Germany passes law to shrink its XXL parliamen". Deutsche Welle.
          8. Swedish Election Authority. "Elections in Sweden The way it's done!" (PDF). p. 13.
          9. Benin Country Report 2022, Bertelsmann Stiftung
          10. Electoral system IPU
          11. Electoral system IPU
          12. Electoral system Inter-Parliamentary Union
          13. Archived 19 June 2018 at the Wayback Machine Fourth amendment to the Law on Election of the National Parliament. Article 13.2
          14. Timor Agora: PN APROVA BAREIRA ELEISAUN PARLAMENTAR 4%, 13 February 2017, retrieved 23 March 2017.
          15. "New election bill, new hope for democracy".
          16. Electoral Commission: What is MMP?
          17. "국가법령정보센터".
          18. 공직선거법 제189조 제1항(The first clause of Article 189 of the Public Official Election Act)
          19. 공직선거법 제190조의2 제1항(The first clause of Article 190-2 of the Public Official Election Act)
          20. "Legislative Yuan Elections – Central Election Commission". Archived from the original on 9 April 2014. Retrieved 20 June 2014.
          21. "Tajikistan ruling party to win polls, initial count shows". Deutsche Welle . Retrieved 2 March 2020.
          22. "Thailand's New Electoral System". 21 March 2019. Retrieved 4 September 2022.
          23. The Electoral Code of the Republic of Albania Archived 31 March 2010 at the Wayback Machine , Artikel 162; vor der Wahl 2009 waren es bei völlig anderem Wahlsystem 2,5% bzw. 4% der gültigen Stimmen auf nationaler Ebene (nur für die Vergabe von Ausgleichssitzen; Direktmandate wurden ohne weitere Bedingungen an den stimmenstärksten Kandidaten zugeteilt)
          24. OSCE (19 February 2020). "PRINCIPALITY OF ANDORRA PARLIAMENTARY ELECTIONS 7 April 2019 ODIHR Needs Assessment Mission Report" . Retrieved 19 February 2020.
          25. "Folketingsvalgloven" . Retrieved 24 February 2014.
          26. Bille, Lars; Pedersen, Karina (2004). "Electoral Fortunes and Responses of the Social Democratic Party and Liberal Party in Denmark: Ups and Downs". In Mair, Peter; Müller, Wolfgang C.; Plasser, Fritz (eds.). Political parties and electoral change . SAGE Publications. p.  207. ISBN   0-7619-4719-1.
          27. "Projet de loi relatif à l'élection des représentants au Parlement européen (INTX1733528L)". Légifrance. 3 January 2018. Retrieved 7 January 2018.
          28. "Les municipales, une élection pour profs de maths". Slate FR. 30 March 2014. Retrieved 21 April 2023.
          29. "Quel est le mode de scrutin pour les élections municipales dans les communes de 1 000 habitants et plus ?". Vie Publique. 9 February 2021. Retrieved 21 April 2023.
          30. 1 2 "Election code of Georgia". Legislative Herald of Georgia. 27 December 2021. Retrieved 2 September 2023.
          31. , Election to Altthingi Law, Act no. 24/2000, Article 108
          32. "Election Profile". IFES. Retrieved 11 February 2013.
          33. "These rules apply to lists representing a minority nation or a minority national community with a share of the total population of up to 15 per cent countrywide or 1.5 to 15 per cent within each municipality. If no minority list passes the 3 per cent threshold, but some lists gain 0.7 per cent or more of the valid votes, they are entitled to participate in the distribution of up to 3 mandates as a cumulative list of candidates based on the total number of valid votes. Candidate lists representing the Croatian minority are entitled to 1 seat if they obtain at least 0.35 per cent of the valid votes." Source: OSCE, 2016, Montenegro Parliamentary Elections 2016: OSCE/ODIHR Election Observation Mission Final Report
          34. "Who can vote and for whom? How the Dutch electoral system works". DutchNews.nl. 30 January 2017. Retrieved 18 November 2019.
          35. "OSCE report on 2019 parliamentary elections".
          36. 1 2 "Parliament agrees to 3% electoral threshold". Serbian Monitor. 10 February 2020. Retrieved 5 March 2020.
          37. OSCE. "REPUBLIC OF SERBIA PARLIAMENTARY ELECTIONS Spring 2020 ODIHR Needs Assessment Mission Report".
          38. Slovak law number 180/2014 § 66, in Slovak
          39. "Turkey lowers national threshold to 7% with new election law". Daily Sabah. 31 March 2022. Retrieved 31 March 2022.
          40. Electoral Code becomes effective in Ukraine
          41. The European Parliament: electoral procedures
          42. Código Electoral Nacional, Article 160
          43. New rule complicates distribution of vacancies of Deputies, Jairus Nicholas May 3,2022
          44. Brazil Law No. 14,211, of October 1, 2021
          45. Oliveira, José Carlos (30 June 2018). "Eleições deste ano trazem cláusulas de desempenho para candidatos e partidos". Chamber of Deputies of Brazil (in Brazilian Portuguese). Retrieved 10 August 2021.
          46. "Sem votação mínima, 14 partidos ficarão sem recursos públicos". R7 (in Brazilian Portuguese). 9 October 2018. Retrieved 11 August 2021.
          47. "Com dura cláusula de barreira, metade das siglas corre risco de acabar". O Tempo (in Brazilian Portuguese). 12 July 2021. Retrieved 9 November 2021.
          48. "Peru's small political parties scramble to survive". April 2016.
          49. "Karlsruhe vs. EU electoral reform could go into the third round". EURACTIV MEDIA NETWORK BV. 18 May 2022.(in German)
          50. "Council of Europe Resolution 1380". Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe. 22 June 2004.
          51. Turkish Daily News, 31 January 2007, European court rules election threshold not violation
          52. Yumak and Sadak v. Turkey, no. 10226/03.
          53. Negating Pluralist Democracy: The European Court of Human Rights Forgets the Rights of the Electors, KHRP Legal Review 11 (2007)
          54. 1 2 "Report on Thresholds and other features of electoral systems which bar parties from access to Parliament (II)". venice.coe.int. 2010. Retrieved 26 August 2018.
          55. "Report on Thresholds and other features of electoral systems which bar parties from access to Parliament". venice.coe.int. 2008. Retrieved 26 August 2018.
          56. "Prowestliche Parteien sind Bulgariens große Wahlverlierer". Weser-Kurier. 28 March 2017. Retrieved 15 October 2022.
          57. "Bulgaria election: All you need to know about country's fourth vote in just 18 months Access to the comments". Euronews . 2 October 2022. Retrieved 15 October 2022.
          58. "Results 2022 Saarland state election". German State Statistical Officer.(in German)
          59. "2020 GENERAL ELECTION – OFFICIAL RESULTS AND STATISTICS". ElectionResults.govt.nz. Electoral Commission. 30 November 2020.
          60. Chang, Eric C.C.; Higashijima, Masaaki (2023). "The Choice of Electoral Systems in Electoral Autocracies". Government and Opposition. 58: 106–128. doi: 10.1017/gov.2021.17 . S2CID   235667437.
          61. Постановление Конституционного Суда РФ от 17 ноября 1998 г. № 26-П – см. пкт. 8 (in Russian) Archived 21 April 2008 at the Wayback Machine
          62. Toker, Cem (2008). "Why Is Turkey Bogged Down?" (PDF). Turkish Policy Quarterly. Turkish Policy. Retrieved 27 June 2013.
          63. In 2004 the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe declared this threshold to be manifestly excessive and invited Turkey to lower it (Council of Europe Resolution 1380 (2004)). On 30 January 2007 the European Court of Human Rights ruled by five votes to two (and on 8 July 2008, its Grand Chamber by 13 votes to four) that the 10 percent threshold imposed in Turkey does not violate the right to free elections, guaranteed by the European Convention of Human Rights. It held, however, that this same threshold could violate the Convention if imposed in a different country. It was justified in the case of Turkey in order to stabilize the volatile political situation which has obtained in that country over recent decades. The case is Yumak and Sadak v. Turkey, no. 10226/03. See also B. Bowring Negating Pluralist Democracy: The European Court of Human Rights Forgets the Rights of the Electors // KHRP Legal Review 11 (2007)
          64. "Results 2020 Slovak parliamentary election". Statistical Office of the Slovak Republic.
          65. "Results 2021 Czech legislative election". Czech Statistical Office.
          66. "Single Transferable Vote". Electoral Reform Society.

          Related Research Articles

          <span class="mw-page-title-main">Proportional representation</span> Voting system that makes outcomes proportional to vote totals

          Proportional representation (PR) refers to any type of electoral system under which subgroups of an electorate are reflected proportionately in the elected body. The concept applies mainly to political divisions among voters. The essence of such systems is that all votes cast – or almost all votes cast – contribute to the result and are effectively used to help elect someone – not just a bare plurality or (exclusively) the majority – and that the system produces mixed, balanced representation reflecting how votes are cast.

          <span class="mw-page-title-main">Additional-member system</span> Mixed electoral system with compensation

          The additional-member system (AMS) is a mixed electoral system under which most representatives are elected in single-member districts (SMDs), and the other "additional members" are elected to make the seat distribution in the chamber more proportional to the way votes are cast for party lists. It is distinct from parallel voting in that the "additional member" seats are awarded to parties taking into account seats won in SMDs, which is not done under parallel voting.

          Mixed-member proportional representation is a mixed electoral system in which votes are cast for both local elections and also for overall party vote tallies, which are used to allocate additional members to produce or deepen overall proportional representation.

          The D'Hondt method, also called the Jefferson method or the greatest divisors method, is an apportionment method for allocating seats in parliaments among federal states, or in proportional representation among political parties. It belongs to the class of highest-averages methods. The D'Hondt method reduces compared to ideal proportional representation somewhat the political fragmentation for smaller electoral district sizes, where it favors larger political parties over small parties.

          <span class="mw-page-title-main">Electoral reform in New Zealand</span>

          Electoral reform in New Zealand has been a political issue in the past as major changes have been made to both parliamentary and local government electoral systems.

          <span class="mw-page-title-main">2003 Croatian parliamentary election</span>

          Parliamentary elections to elect all 151 members of the Croatian Parliament were held on 23 November 2003. They were the fifth parliamentary elections to take place since the first multi-party elections in 1990. Voter turnout was 61.7%. The result was a victory for the opposition Croatian Democratic Union (HDZ) which won a plurality of 66 seats, but fell short of the 76 needed to form a government. HDZ chairman Ivo Sanader was named the eighth Prime Minister of Croatia on 23 December 2003, after parliament passed a confidence motion in his government cabinet, with 88 MPs voting in favor, 29 against and 14 abstaining. The ruling coalition going into the elections, consisting of the Social Democratic Party (SDP), Croatian People's Party (HNS), Croatian Peasant Party (HSS), Party of Liberal Democrats (Libra) and the Liberal Party (LS), did not contest the elections as a single bloc; the SDP ran with the Istrian Democratic Assembly (IDS), the Party of Liberal Democrats (Libra) and the Liberal Party, HNS ran with the Alliance of Primorje-Gorski Kotar (PGS) and the Slavonia-Baranja Croatian Party (SBHS), while HSS ran on its own.

          Vote splitting is an electoral effect in which the distribution of votes among multiple similar candidates reduces the chance of winning for any of the similar candidates, and increases the chance of winning for a dissimilar candidate. This is commonly known as the spoiler effect, which can discourage minor party candidacies.

          At a national level, Greece holds elections for its legislature, the Hellenic Parliament.

          Regular elections in Albania are mandated by the Constitution and legislation enacted by Parliament. The Parliament (Kuvendi) has 140 members elected for four-year terms. The electoral system is open list proportional representation. There are 12 multi-member constituencies corresponding to the country's 12 administrative regions. Within any constituency, parties must meet a threshold of 3 percent of votes, and pre-election coalitions must meet a threshold of 5 percent of votes.

          There are five types of elections in Slovakia: municipal elections, regional elections, parliamentary elections, presidential elections and elections to the European Parliament. All four types of elections are normally held after fixed periods, although early elections can occur in certain situations. Elections are conventionally scheduled for a Saturday - the polls normally open at 7:00 in the morning and close at 22:00 in the evening. Citizens aged 18 years or older are eligible to vote. Those serving prison sentences for particularly serious crimes, as well as those deprived of legal capacity, including persons with mental disabilities, are denied the right to vote. Voter registration is passive and decentralized with the voter register maintained by municipalities based on the permanent residence register. Voter lists are updated continuously based on municipal records and input provided by state institutions or other municipalities. Voters may verify their data in voter lists, and, if necessary, request correction until the day before election day. On election day, a voter can be added to a voter list upon presenting an identity card with proof of residency. Some 4.4 million voters are registered and valid to vote in the elections. Voters are only able to vote from abroad during the Parliamentary Elections in Slovakia.

          Elections in Hungary are held at two levels: general elections to elect the members of the National Assembly and local elections to elect local authorities. European Parliament elections are also held every 5 years.

          Parliamentary elections were held in Croatia on 29 October 1995 to elect the 127 members of the Chamber of Representatives. The election was held in conjunction with special elections for Zagreb City Assembly, which resulted with Zagreb Crisis.

          In electoral systems, a wasted vote is any vote that does not receive representation in the final election outcome. Plurality voting systems have the greatest number of wasted votes.

          The German federal election system regulates the election of the members of the national parliament, called the Bundestag. According to the principles governing the elections laws, set down in Art. 38 of the German Basic Law, elections are to be universal, direct, free, equal, and secret. Furthermore, the German Basic Law stipulates that Bundestag elections are to take place every four years and that one can vote, and be elected, upon reaching the age of 18. All other stipulations for the federal elections are regulated by the Federal Electoral Act. Elections always take place on a Sunday. Mail votes are possible upon application.

          Electoral reform is a change in electoral systems which alters how public desires are expressed in election results.

          <span class="mw-page-title-main">2016 Slovak parliamentary election</span>

          Parliamentary elections were held in Slovakia on 5 March 2016 to elect the 150 members of the National Council. The ruling left-wing populist Direction – Social Democracy (SMER–SD) party remained the strongest party, but lost its majority. The Slovak Democratic and Christian Union – Democratic Party (SDKÚ-DS), which led the government between 2000–06 and 2010–12, was defeated heavily, failing to cross the electoral threshold and losing its representation in the National Council. The centre-right Christian Democratic Movement (KDH) also failed to cross the threshold for the first time since 1990, whilst the far-right nationalist Kotleba – People's Party Our Slovakia (ĽSNS) entered parliament for the first time.

          The electoral system of Turkey varies for general, presidential and local elections that take place in Turkey every five years. Turkey has been a multi-party democracy since 1950, with the first democratic election held on 14 May 1950 leading to the end of the single-party rule established in 1923. The current electoral system for electing Members of Parliament to the Grand National Assembly has a 7% election threshold.

          <span class="mw-page-title-main">2020 Slovak parliamentary election</span>

          Parliamentary elections were held in Slovakia on 29 February 2020 to elect all 150 members of the National Council.

          <span class="mw-page-title-main">Italian electoral law of 2017</span>

          The Italian electoral law of 2017, colloquially known by the nickname Rosatellum bis or simply Rosatellum after Ettore Rosato, the Democratic Party (PD) leader in the Chamber of Deputies who first proposed the new law, is a parallel voting system, which acts as a mixed electoral system, with 37% of seats allocated using a first-past-the-post electoral system and 63% using a proportional method, with one round of voting. The Chamber and Senate of the Republic did not differ in the way they allocated the proportional seats, both using the largest remainder method of allocating seats.