SABAH- Columnist Oktay Gonensin comments on election systems in France and Turkey. A summary of his column is as follows:
Importing France’s two-round election system to Turkey has been previously brought up at various times, and then the subject was dropped. In 1994, when center-left and center-right parties were competing for the same votes, the Welfare Party’s (RP) candidates captured 20% of the voters.
A central aspect of France’s two-round system is the ‘narrow region’ practice. Under this system only one person from each region is selected. Voters vote for one candidate only rather than a long list. In this way, a direct relation is obtained between the regional voters and the candidate.
Before the second round a unanimity originating from the grassroots is ensured between parties. For example, let’s say a candidate from party A proceeds to the second round in one region, and in another region, a candidate from party B does the same. The parties then support each other, and the voters elect the best candidate for them, and they know that in the other region voters of the other party will support their party’s candidate. This an unanimity at the grassroots. As a result, surprise coalitions which are not supported by voters do not emerge.
In this system, party administrations should decide on the best candidates in terms of suitability for its own voters as well as concerning other parties’ voters. People, who are opposed to the two-round election system have certain anxieties. Although they do not express it clearly, they are concerned that right-wing parties will always be make it to the second round, and that the left wing may be erased. Under current conditions they may be right. However, if the center-left enters elections with 4 or 5 parties including new ones to be established, no matter the system, it will never be a viable alternative to the ruling party or parties.
Another anxiety, also not expressed clearly, is that parties like HADEP or ones similar to it in southeastern Anatolia may also be erased. Indeed, this shows their own weakness, “We are unable to produce policies for our citizens in the southeastern region, nor can we direct them to centrist parties by meeting their expectations, and we cannot prevent them from being used by extremist parties.”
Such criticisms and anxieties spring from today’s dysfunctional political understanding which has also led to difficulties in the current system and thus paved the way for the rise of extremist parties.
SOURCE: OFFICE OF THE PRIME MINISTER, DIRECTORATE GENERAL OF PRESS AND INFORMATION