A little over two months after the extraordinary events of July-August that felled an Awami League government that had just secured itself a fourth consecutive term in office, various discussions on electoral reforms, timelines and systems have been gaining traction among the public. There is a general sense of recognition that the time is now ripe to push for changes that may have seemed outlandish or sounded like pipe dreams even just a few months ago.

Even so, the way proportional representation, an electoral system under which subgroups of an electorate are reflected proportionately in the elected body, came to dominate the political discourse over the past week or so will have come as a surprise to many. Given that the July-August mass uprising that has brought us here was surely driven to a large extent by the complete breakdown in the electoral system of the country, the way in which the next election is conducted is obviously an important discussion.

Although the interim government now in place chose to burden itself with a massive state reform project, ultimately its most important task lies in returning the country to the democratic process through a free-and-fair election. That is the deliverable upon which it will ultimately be judged.

Some political parties, led by the rejuvenated Jamaat e Islami, are advocating for national elections to be held using some form of proportional representation instead of the existing method.

But the BNP, one of the major parties, opposes this approach and supports the current system. The Awami League, still licking its wounds after being unceremoniously dumped by the public two months ago, at a time when it had effectively gamed the system by closing off all other paths to removing it from power, has been silent on the matter, but we may expect it to largely match the BNP's. position in the evolving political landscape remains unclear.

Interestingly, the political scientists we spoke to for this story, while waxing lyrical about the benefits of PR and even its superiority as a voting system, think neither the government, nor the political parties and voters are prepared for its introduction in the next polls.

They say that while the PR system offers many potential benefits, its feasibility depends on strong political will, public support and the readiness of both political actors and the electorate to transition from the current first-past-the-post (FPTP) system. One of the principal gripes about this system is that it awards potentially 100% of the representation to what might be just a 50.1% majority.

The experts suggest that the PR system could be incorporated into the constitution as a directive for future implementation, as it may help create a more vibrant parliament with diverse viewpoints, reduce the influence of money and muscle in elections, and prevent autocracy and fascism.

PR is an electoral system where the distribution of seats aligns with the proportion of total votes each party receives. For instance, if a party gets 40 percent of the total votes, the PR system would allocate 40 percent of the seats for it in parliament.

Right system, wrong timing

"PR is a good election system. I support it and I have even written a book on why it's necessary for Bangladesh. However, we won't be able to implement it in the next national election because we're not ready. Our government, political parties and voters are unprepared for it," said renowned election expert Dr Tofail Ahmed.

He noted that around 70 to 80 countries currently practise some form of proportional representation system worldwide.

"It's encouraging that political parties are advocating for the introduction of the system. However, our voters lack knowledge about it. We must first educate them, and this process will take time to ensure people understand it," he said.

Besides, the election expert said the PR system encompasses various forms and definitions, reflecting different approaches to achieving proportionality in electoral outcomes (see below). "We need a political consensus on which one we will adopt."

He said that a significant barrier to implementing this system is that major parties may not accept it, as it could disrupt their dominant power and make it more difficult for them to secure a majority.

"The BNP and Awami League are our two main parties, sharing the support of the majority of voters in the country. The BNP is opposing this system, and we aren't hearing the views from the Awami League due to the current political situation. I believe they may also not support it. If Jamaat had a larger voter base, they would likely not back it either," Tofail said.

He stated that smaller parties are in favour of the PR system, as it would provide them with the opportunity to secure seats that they might not obtain under the First-Past-The-Post system, which is said to encourage a winner-takes-all form of politics. But moving to PR is hardly a straightforward affair.

"Implementation of this system is very challenging. We should give the political parties time to understand the PR process and its benefits. It won't be wise for the interim government to impose it without political consensus," Tofail observed.

He said the reform commission on the constitution can propose incorporating a guideline in the national charter for the introduction of the system and its implementation in phases.

Tofail, also a local governance specialist, pointed out that the BNP is discussing a bicameral parliament and a national government, which could ensure the participation of people from diverse backgrounds in governance, creating a balance of power and facilitating lawmaking: "For now we should focus on these two issues alongside the restoration of the caretaker government."

His fellow political scientist, chairman of the Jatiya Nirbachon Parjabekkhon Parishad (Janipop), Prof Nazmul Ahsan Kalimullah, concurred that the PR system exists in various forms in about 80 countries worldwide, and he too has been advocating for its implementation since the 1990s.

He emphasised that it is crucial to convince the major political parties about the PR system: "Otherwise, it won't be possible to introduce this system in the future."

Meanwhile former bureaucrat Abu Alam Md Shahid Khan came up with an entirely different proposal: a mixed electoral system that combines proportional representation with the existing traditional system by increasing the number of parliamentary constituencies from 300 to 450.

"In that case, the current electoral system could apply to 300 constituencies, while the PR system would be used for 150 constituencies," he explained.

Although changes in various sectors seem to be in the air since the political changeover witnessed on August 5, the suggestion of such a drastic change to the electoral system probably wouldn't have ignited, were it not for the Jamaat-e-Islami presenting a 10-point proposal for reforming the state on October 9, that included the introduction of the PR system for holding elections.

During a seminar on electoral reform on October 12, Jamaat leader Dr Shafiqul Islam Masud, Ganosamhati Andolan Chief Coordinator Zonayed Saki, Gana Adhikar Parishad President Nurul Haque, Jatiya Party Presidium member Shameem Haider Patwary, and CPB General Secretary Ruhin Hossain Prince all advocated for the PR system. Additionally, some Islamic parties, including Islami Andolan Bangladesh, have also called for its introduction.

Contacted, BNP Secretary General Mirza Fakhrul Islam Alamgir said the PR system is not suitable for Bangladesh. "We won't support it. This method is not practised in Bangladesh, so there is no question of its application in the next election."

How does PR work?

Proportional representation voting has emerged over decades as the main alternative to the first-past-the-post system that we are familiar with, under which voters choose who to vote for from among a list of candidates, who often represent a political party. Yet among advanced Western democracies, PR has become the predominant voting system. For instance, in Western Europe, 21 of 28 countries use proportional representation, including Austria, Belgium, Cyprus, Denmark, Finland, Germany, Greece, Ireland, Luxembourg, Malta, the Netherlands, Norway, Portugal, Spain, Sweden, and Switzerland, according to Fair Vote, which researches and works to advance voting reform, and advocates a form of PR in the United States.

The basic approach of proportional representation is simple: legislators are elected in multimember districts instead of single-member districts, and the number of seats that a party wins in an election is proportional to the amount of its support among voters. So if you have a 10-member district and the Awami League wins 50% of the vote, they receive five of the ten seats. If the BNP wins 30% of the vote, they get three seats; and if a third party gets 20% of the vote, they win two seats. Electoral system designers have devised several ways to achieve these proportional results, and so there are three basic kinds of PR described below: party list, mixed-member, and single-transferable vote (also called choice voting).

These PR systems were devised to solve the many problems caused by plurality-majority voting systems. As a rule, PR voting systems are said to provide more accurate representation of parties, better representation for political and racial minorities, fewer wasted votes, higher levels of voter turnout, better representation of women, greater likelihood of majority rule, and little opportunity for gerrymandering.

Party List Voting

Party list voting systems are by far the most common form of proportional representation. Over 80% of the PR systems used worldwide are some form of party list voting. It remains the system used in most European democracies and in many newly democratised countries, including South Africa.

How It Works: Legislators are elected in large, multi-member districts. Each party puts up a list or slate of candidates equal to the number of seats in the district. Independent candidates may also run, and they are listed separately on the ballot as if they were their own party (see below). On the ballot, voters indicate their preference for a particular party and the parties then receive seats in proportion to their share of the vote. So in a five-member district, if a party, say the BNP, wins 40% of the vote, they would win two of the five seats. The two winning candidates would be chosen according to their position on the list.

There are two broad types of list systems: closed list and open list. In a closed list system-the original form of party list voting-the party fixes the order in which the candidates are listed and elected, and the voter simply casts a vote for the party as a whole. Voters are not able to indicate their preference for any candidates on the list, but must accept the list in the order presented by the party. Winning candidates are selected in the exact order they appear on the original list.

Most European democracies now use the open list form of party list voting. This approach allows voters to express a preference for particular candidates, not just parties. It is designed to give voters some say over the order of the list and thus which candidates get elected. Voters are presented with unordered or random lists of candidates chosen in party primaries. Voters cannot vote for a party directly, but must cast a vote for an individual candidate. This vote counts for the specific candidate as well as for the party. So the order of the final list completely depends on the number of votes won by each candidate on the list. The most popular candidates rise to the top of the list and have a better chance of being elected.

Party list voting has a number of advantages over plurality-majority voting. It assures accurate representation of parties in legislatures. It gives voters more choices of parties at the polls, increases voter turnout, and wastes far fewer votes. This form of PR also reduces the creation of manufactured majorities and the opportunity for gerrymandering. In addition, it assures fair representation for third parties, racial minorities, and women.

Mixed-member PR

Mixed-member proportional representation goes by a variety of other names, including "the additional member system," "compensatory PR," the "two vote system," and "the German system." It is an attempt to combine a single-member district system with a proportional voting system.

How It Works: Half of the members of the legislature are elected in single-member district plurality contests. The other half are elected by a party list vote and added on to the district members so that each party has its appropriate share of seats in the legislature. Proponents claim that mixed-member proportional voting (MMP) is the best of both worlds: providing the geographical representation and close constituency ties of single-member plurality voting along with the fairness and diversity of representation that comes with PR voting.

MMP has a number of advantages over plurality-majority voting. It produces more accurate representation of parties in legislatures, while also ensuring that each local district has a representative. It gives voters more choices of parties at the polls, increases voter turnout, and wastes far fewer votes.

Single Transferable Vote or Choice Voting

This system of proportional representation is known by several names. Political scientists call it "the single transferable vote." It is called the "Hare-Clark system" in Australia. In the United States, electoral reform activists have taken to calling it "choice voting."

How It Works: All candidates are listed in the same place on the ballot. Instead of voting for one person, voters rank each candidate in their order of choice. So if you like Candidate X best, you would mark the "1" after his name. If you like Candidate Y second best, you would mark "2" by his name, and so on. You can rank as few or as many as you want.

As the name "single transferable vote" implies, this system involves a process of transferring votes. Parties will often stand more than one candidate in each area. To get elected, a candidate needs a set amount of votes, known as the quota. The people counting the votes work out the quota based on the number of seats and the number of votes cast.

Each voter has one vote. Once the counting has finished, any candidate who has more number ones than the quota is elected. But, rather than ignore extra votes a candidate received after the amount they need to win, these votes move to each voter's second favourite candidate.

If no one reaches the quota, then the people counting the vote remove the least popular candidate. People who voted for them have their votes moved to their second favourite candidate. This process continues until every seat is filled.