By: Charlie J. Hughes
There is debate still going on in Sierra Leone as to which electoral system the country should permanently adopt; following on Recommendation 78 of the Tripartite Agreement. The debate about First-Past-The-Post (FPTP) and Proportional Representation (PR) has been around for some time. The PR and FPTP debate first emerged in the circumstances of the recommendations of the Truth and Reconciliation Commission that was set up after the civil war; and the considerations for the 1996 elections.
The debate came around again as an outcome of contentions over the validity of the 2021 census for delineating constituency boundaries. The PR and FPTP debate was also there during the consultations for the Justice Cowan-led Constitutional review process under former President Ernest Koroma. In all the debates over these periods including the one now occasioned by Recommendation 78 of the Tripartite Agreement, I have never seen any serious case made for the merits of FPTP over PR. What one sees instead are rogue endeavours against PR; using misconceptions and misrepresentations.
Sierra Leoneans should first be reminded that Recommendation 78 of the Tripartite Agreement was not framed with a purpose to obtain a vote on FPTP versus PR; an endeavor now being misguidedly pushed by certain people. Recommendation 78 of the Tripartite Agreement was framed to obtain conversation and collectively engineer an electoral system that speaks directly to key considerations; borne out of our collective experience with elections. These considerations would include the cost of elections, the challenge of violence during elections, and broadening political representation, among others. It is towards such purpose that I write this piece to clear the biggest misrepresentations and misconceptions being peddled about PR as follows:
Misrepresentation 1: With PR the people don’t get to know their representatives in Parliament
False. In the PR system as used in the 2023 elections, the District is the constituency that is represented by a set number of Members of Parliament (MPs). These MPs who are always indigenes of the District are known by the people of the District. If Kenema District is represented by 6 MPs the people of Kenema will know all of them. The diction that critics of PR prefer is “community” or “constituency”. The District constituency in fact, best accommodates Sierra Leoneans’ sense of community or constituency identity; rather than this vague allotment of numbers: Constituency 007. Sierra Leoneans love to identify themselves along District-lines. I have heard of Bombali District Descendants Union, but never Constituency 110 Descendants Union. These numbered constituencies are meaningless constructs. If you care to know your MPs from Bombali District, you will know them during the primaries, during the campaigns, and while they serve.
Misrepresentation 2: With PR it is the political party that selects the candidates
This is false, except for a party with very weak internal democracy traditions that may choose to dispense with the ordinary man’s participation in selecting the candidates at primaries. The mechanism for choosing candidates for a political party under PR can be easily made participatory to convey the ordinary party members’ endorsement. It becomes merrier if the ordinary party members participate in the selection of the candidates, and go on to vote for them. It means the ordinary party members select and elect their MPs.
Misrepresentation 3: PR makes no room for independent Candidates
False. PR can be made to hold room for Independent Candidates to contest for seats in Parliament and Local Councils. In fact, it is the beauty of PR that the system can be tweaked, innovated, or improvised to accommodate critical representation concerns of the people; as it was done for women in the 2023 elections. If representation of Independent Candidates is a critical concern in Sierra Leone, then our PR can be modelled to accommodate it.
Misrepresentation 4: PR goes against the spirit of the 1991 constitution
False. Constitutions in all democracies are crafted on the spirit of inclusion of every citizen. More than any other system for electing law making representatives, PR best undergird the inclusion intentions of democratic constitutions. PR is the only system that seeks to have as far as possible, every ballot represented in a nation’s law-making assembly and Local Government. PR’s pursuit of “leave-no-vote” behind best protect the inclusion intentions of any democratic constitution. Rising from the troubles of the one-party state, inclusion was the birth-spirit of the 1991 Constitution of Sierra Leone; and should remain the sustenance of the country’s democracy.
Misrepresentation 5: With PR, MPs represent political parties in Parliament and not the people
False. MPs primarily represent constituencies in Parliament. It is simply a contradiction to represent a constituency and not represent the people in the constituency. By the simplest definition in context of Sierra Leone, a constituency is a geographically demarcated population for the purposes of representation in Parliament. Political parties are merely organising mechanisms for bringing together those who seek to represent their constituencies on the basis on certain values, ideology, history, or development aspirations. In the United States for instance, Republican Congressmen represent their constituencies; using the Republican party as the organising mechanism for those who profess to hold dear Church, Gun, and the sanctity of life.
Misrepresentation 6: With PR, MPs are not accountable to the people but to their party
False. Parliamentarians are first and foremost law makers; and all the other roles that they perform are auxiliary to ensure that the laws they make are given good effect. The point of departure therefore, in contesting the accountability of an MP is to evaluate the ‘connect’ or ‘disconnect’ between the laws he/she votes for in Parliament, and the manifest interest of the constituency he/she represents. And this is where the beauty of PR again comes. For instance, where a law is proposed to increase the percentage of diamond mining rent that accrues to the people of Kono, it reasonable to expected that the MPs representing the District from whichever party, will put the interest of the people of Kono before the interest of their respective parties. Again, if one party chooses to go rogue on Kono District, the other party will be there to stand ground for the people. In this way, PR is insurance and assurance for MPs’ accountability to their people.