Home > 3.2 Proportional systems > GEORGIA - Opinion on the Unified Election Code
Download file    
Paragraph 82

In order to enhance the re-institutionalisation of the fluid party system, two further changes would be sensible:


(1)   A “differentiated threshold” should be introduced, i.e. a separate one for parties (e.g. 4%) and higher ones for electoral alliances (e.g. 6% for two-party alliances, 8% for coalitions of three and more parties). “Invented” in the transition processes of Central and Eastern Europe in the early 1990s,[7] differentiated thresholds had all in all positive effects on the consolidation of competitive party systems since they provided not only an incentive to build electoral coalitions, but also stimulated fusion processes among mini-parties (with similar programmes) and thus contributed to increasing intra-fractional cohesion within Parliament.


(2)   In order to guarantee a pluralist representation in the proportional part of the electoral system, the special provisions in case no party passes the legal threshold should be re-designed in a less strict manner. In such extraordinary case, holding repeat elections within a smaller sample of parties (with at least 2% of the original vote), as Article 105.17 states, is a viable regulation. However, if one party passes the threshold, no repeat elections are foreseen by law. Since the proportional part of an electoral system is not intended to produce a one-party system in Parliament, the relevant qualification on repeat elections in Article 105.16 ought to be altered from “none of the parties” into “less than two parties”. Additionally, the legislator might consider lowering the legal threshold for repeat elections, like the Polish Electoral Law of 1993 did.[8]