Proportional Representation
As a measure of ushering in democracy in its original concept we have already discussed why it is necessary to (1) have a run-off election between the two candidates having the maximum votes in case any one candidate fails to get 50% of the votes cast (2) must return to the joint electorate system in preference to the present system of separate electorates and (3) have direct voting for every electable seat to avoid manipulation by a corrupt of few over the many. However, the major argument against all the three aforementioned measures is the fact that it will deprive smaller communities, religious groups, minorities like Christians, Hindus etc, from representation in the legislative assemblies. This “outcast” status will cause frustration among a fairly large segment of the population who will despair of ever having a voice in the mainstream of the country’s politics and may become extremist in their outlook, even looking to separate themselves (secede) from their present society. The world is witness to terrorism which has its roots in denial of (or the seeming denial of) fundamental rights to individuals and/or groups, which then resort to violent means to restore (and assert) what they feel is their God-given rights. As such while we must strive to remove the anomalies in our present version of democracy, we must also be careful in bringing in such measures that give every segment of our society their just due by giving them a voice roughly commensurate to their percentage of population in our legislative assemblies. A mechanism that is fair to all must be formed to overcome the present shortcomings in our democratic system.
