In the legal literature, two approaches to understanding the electoral system are common: broad and narrow.

Broadly speaking, the electoral system is understood as a set of social relations that develop regarding the formation of bodies state power and local self-government through the implementation of the electoral rights of citizens. With this approach, the electoral system includes the principles and conditions for the participation of citizens in elections, the procedure for their appointment, preparation and conduct, the range of subjects of the electoral process, the rules for establishing voting results and determining election results. The electoral system in a broad sense, in essence, is identified with the election campaign, which is the activity for preparing elections, carried out from the day of the official publication of the decision to call elections until the day the commission organizing the elections submits a report on the expenditure of budgetary funds allocated for them. For this reason, the use of the concept of an electoral system in a broad sense is hardly justified.

Narrow understanding of the electoral system As a rule, it is associated with the methods (techniques) of establishing the voting results and determining the winner in the elections and is considered as a kind of legal formula by which the results of the election campaign are determined at the final stage of the elections. So, in accordance with Art. 23 of the Federal Law "On general principles local government organizations in Russian Federation» under the electoral system in municipal elections understood conditions for recognizing a candidate (candidates) as elected (elected), lists of candidates - admitted to the distribution of deputy mandates, as well as the procedure for distributing deputy mandates between the lists of candidates and within the lists of candidates. At the same time, one should not forget that the rules for tabulating the results of voting depend, in addition to the methods for determining the result, on a number of electoral actions that have a direct impact on the decision to elect a particular candidate. Based on this, in a legal sense, it is preferable to link a narrow understanding of the electoral system with a set of norms that fix the rules:

• formation of constituencies;
• nomination of candidates (lists of candidates);
• determining the role of political parties (electoral associations) in elections;
• approval of the form of the ballot;
• determination of election results and determination of winners, including the distribution of deputy mandates among political parties (electoral associations);
• conducting, if necessary, a repeat voting (second round of elections);
• filling vacant seats.

Types of electoral systems

In their totality, they give the most complete picture of the elements that form the electoral system, the various combinations and content of which determine selection various kinds electoral systems.

In the history of the development of electoral legislation, many approaches to the design of electoral systems have been formed. At the same time, the choice of one or another type of electoral system is one of the key issues. political life country, the decision of which is significantly influenced by the state of democratic development and the balance of political forces. It is no coincidence that the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation came to this conclusion. In the ruling of November 20, 1995 on the refusal to accept for consideration the request of a group of deputies of the State Duma of the Federal Assembly of the Russian Federation and the request of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation to verify the constitutionality of a number of provisions of the Federal Law of June 21, 1995 "On the election of deputies of the State Duma of the Federal Assembly of the Russian Federation » The Court emphasized that the choice of one or another version of the electoral system and its fixing in the electoral law depends on specific socio-political conditions and is a matter of political expediency. In Russian conditions, this choice is made by the Federal Assembly of the Russian Federation in accordance with the rules of legislative procedure. This circumstance, however, does not mean at all that the issue of the electoral system is purely political and lacks legal meaning. The legal significance of the electoral system consists in the proper legislative consolidation of the entire set of rules governing relations related to the determination of election results and forming the legal design of the electoral system, including the consolidation of its various types.

The current electoral legislation provides for the possibility of using the following types of electoral systems: majoritarian, proportional and mixed (majority-proportional) electoral system.

Majoritarian electoral system

The point is to divide the territory where elections are held into constituencies in which voters vote personally for certain candidates. To be elected, a candidate (candidates, if the elections are held in multi-member constituencies) must receive a majority of the votes of the voters who took part in the voting. From a legal point of view, the majoritarian electoral system is distinguished by its universality of application, which allows it to be used for the election of both collegial bodies and individual officials. The right to nominate candidates under this electoral system is vested both in citizens by way of self-nomination and in political parties (electoral associations). In the event of the formation of vacant mandates, due, among other things, to the early termination of the powers of deputies (elected officials), it is mandatory to hold new (additional, early or repeated) elections.

Majoritarian electoral system has varieties. Depending on the electoral districts formed, majoritarian electoral systems are distinguished, which involve voting in a single constituency, single-seat and multi-seat electoral districts. The majority system based on a single constituency is used only in the election of officials. When deputies of legislative (representative) bodies of state power, representative bodies of municipalities are elected, either single-member or multi-member constituencies are used. Moreover, the maximum number of mandates per one multi-member constituency cannot exceed five. At the same time, this restriction does not apply to elections to local self-government bodies of a rural settlement, as well as another municipality, the boundaries of a multi-member constituency of which coincide with the boundaries of a polling station.

There are majoritarian systems of relative, absolute and qualified majority. The relative majority system assumes that in order to be elected, it is required to collect the largest number of votes in relation to other candidates. It can be used in elections of deputies of legislative (representative) bodies of state power, representative bodies of municipalities, as well as in the elections of heads of municipalities.

Under an absolute majority system, to elect a candidate, it is necessary that he receives more than half of the votes of the number of voters who took part in the voting. If none of the candidates manages to gain such a number of votes, a second ballot is held for the two candidates for whom the largest number of votes were cast in the first round of elections. To win in the second round using such a system, it is enough to gain a relative majority of votes. The absolute majority system is used in the elections of the President of the Russian Federation, and also, if it is provided for by the law of the subject of the Federation, in the elections of heads of municipalities. In principle, one cannot exclude its use in the elections of deputies of legislative (representative) bodies of state power, representative bodies of municipalities, but such cases are unknown to the current electoral legislation.

The system of qualified majority is quite rare. It is based on the fact that in order to win the elections, it is necessary not only to gain this or that majority of votes, but the majority fixed in the law (at least 1/3, 2/3, 3/4) of the number of voters who voted. At present, it is practically not used, although earlier cases of its use took place in some subjects of the Federation. Thus, the now repealed Law of Primorsky Territory of September 28, 1999 "On the election of the governor of Primorsky Territory" provided that the candidate who received the largest number of votes, provided that it was at least 35% of the number of voters who took part in the vote.

proportional electoral system

The following features are characteristic. Its application is limited to elections of deputies of legislative (representative) bodies; it does not apply to the election of officials. Only political parties (electoral associations) have the right to nominate candidates. Under such a system, voters do not vote personally for candidates, but for lists of candidates (party lists) put forward by electoral associations, and lists of candidates who have overcome the barrier, i.e., who have received the minimum required number of votes established by law, which is not may exceed 1% of the number of voters who took part in the voting. The resulting vacancies will be filled by the following candidates from the lists of candidates (party lists) admitted to the distribution of mandates, as a result of which no by-elections are foreseen.

Russian legislation knows two types of proportional electoral system, due to the use of closed (hard) or open (soft) lists of candidates. When voting by closed lists, a voter has the right to vote only for one or another list of candidates as a whole. Open lists allow a voter to vote not only for a specific list of candidates, but also for one or more candidates within that list. In our country, a clear preference is given to closed lists. Voting by open lists is provided only in a few subjects of the Federation (Republic of Kalmykia, Tver region, Yamalo-Nenets Autonomous Okrug).

The proportional electoral system is used in the elections of deputies of the State Duma of the Federal Assembly of the Russian Federation. In the subjects of the Federation in its pure form, it is rare (Dagestan, Ingushetia, Amur Region, Sverdlovsk Region, the city of Dagestan). St. Petersburg). As for municipal elections, the proportional electoral system is generally uncharacteristic for them. A rare exception in this regard is the city of Spass k-Dalniy of Primorsky Krai, whose charter provides for the election of all deputies of the city district on party lists.

Mixed electoral system

A mixed (majority-proportional) electoral system is a combination of majoritarian and proportional systems with a statutory number of deputy mandates distributed over each of them. Its application allows you to combine the advantages and smooth out the shortcomings of the majority and proportional systems. At the same time, political parties (electoral associations) are given the opportunity to nominate the same persons as candidates both on a party list and in single-mandate (multi-mandate) constituencies. The law only requires that in the event of simultaneous nomination in a single-mandate (multi-mandate) constituency and in the list of candidates, information about this must be indicated in the ballot prepared for voting in the corresponding single-mandate (multi-mandate) constituency

The mixed system is currently used in the elections of legislative (representative) bodies of state power in almost all subjects of the Federation. This is due to the fact that the federal law“On the Basic Guarantees of Electoral Rights and the Right to Participate in a Referendum of Citizens of the Russian Federation” (Article 35) requires that at least half of the deputy mandates in the legislative (representative) body of state power of a constituent entity of the Federation or in one of its chambers be distributed among the lists of candidates nominated by electoral associations in proportion to the number of votes received by each of the lists of candidates.

When holding elections of deputies of representative bodies of municipalities, the mixed majority-proportional system is used much less frequently. In all likelihood, this is due to the fact that federal legislation does not require the mandatory use of elements proportional system in relation to the municipal level of the formation of representative bodies of power.

In the literature, the term "electoral system" is described in two senses. In a broad sense, this concept means public relations directly related to the elections and constituting their order. They are regulated by constitutional law, as well as the norms established by public associations. An important role is played by traditions and customs, norms of political ethics and morality.

The main principles of the electoral system are singled out: universality, free-willed participation in elections and equality of citizens in the process, mandatory vote, competitiveness, equal opportunities for all applicants, "transparency" of conduct and preparatory work.

Accordingly, under the electoral system

one can understand the mechanism by which state power and self-government are formed in the constituent entities of the Russian Federation. This process includes several main points: a system of bodies fixed by lawmaking, which is directly entrusted with the authority to carry out activities and conduct an election campaign; as well as the activities of subjects of legal relations and political structures.

In the narrow sense of the word, this system is considered as a way enshrined in legal acts that allows you to establish the results of elections and distribute deputy mandates. This process directly depends on the voting results.

The main systems are determined, first of all, by the principles of formation of

organ of power. They differ in different states. However, thanks to centuries of experience, two main types have been distinguished: majoritarian and proportional. These types of electoral systems, or rather their elements, find themselves in other diverse models.

Based on personal representation in power. Therefore, a certain person is always nominated as a candidate for a position. However, the mechanism for nomination may vary: some types of electoral systems allow self-nomination of candidates, for example, from public associations, while others require candidates to run exclusively from political parties. However, with any alignment of forces, consideration takes place on a personal basis. Therefore, a capable, adult citizen, having come to the polls, will vote for a specific person as an independent unit of the described process.

As a rule, those types of electoral system, the basis of which is the majority, hold elections in single-mandate constituencies. The number of such constituencies directly depends on the number of mandates. The winner is the campaigner who receives the most votes in the county.

proportional system.

It is based on the principle of party representation. Accordingly, in this case it is they who put forward lists of certain candidates for whom it is proposed to vote. Types of electoral systems based on proportionality offer to actually vote for a political party that protects the interests of certain strata. The mandates are subject to distribution proportionally in accordance with the number of votes cast (as a percentage).

The places in the body of power that the party has received are occupied by people from the list put forward by it and in accordance with the priority established by it. Usually they are received by the first 90 candidates from the corresponding list.

mixed system

Attempts to make the most of the types of electoral systems described above have led to the emergence of mixed systems. Their essence boils down to the fact that some of the deputies are elected by the majority system, and some - by proportional. Accordingly, the voter has the opportunity to vote for both the candidate and the political party. This system was used in Russia when choosing deputies of the State Duma of the first four convocations.

If we analyze in detail the types of modern electoral systems, it turns out that how many countries in the world, so many types. I'm talking, of course, about democracies. But there are only three main types of electoral systems. With its advantages and disadvantages.

What types of electoral systems are the best today? No serious political scientist can answer this question for you. Because it is like in clinical medicine: “it is not a disease in general that needs to be treated, but a specific patient” - everything is taken into account, from the age and weight of a person to the most complex genetic analyzes. So it is with the types of electoral systems - numerous factors play a role: the history of the country, time, political situation, international, economic and national nuances - it is impossible to list everything in the article. But in reality, when the most important basic principles of the political structure of the country, connected with the right to vote, absolutely everything must be taken into account. Only in this case it will be possible to talk about an adequate electoral system "here and now."

Statements and definitions

The concept and types of electoral systems are presented in the sources in several versions:

1. The electoral system in the broadest sense is

“a set of legal norms that form the electoral right. Suffrage is a set of legal norms regulating the participation of citizens in elections.

1. The electoral system in the narrow sense is

"a set of legal norms that determine the results of voting."

If we think from the point of view of organizing and holding elections, then the following formulation seems to be the most adequate.

The electoral system is a technology for transforming the votes of voters into mandates of delegates. This technology should be transparent and neutral so that all parties and candidates are on an equal footing.

The concept and definition of suffrage and the electoral system varies from one historical stage to another and from one country to another. Nevertheless, the main types of electoral systems have already developed into a clear, unified classification, which is accepted all over the world.

Types of electoral systems

The classification of types is based on the mechanism for the distribution of mandates based on the results of voting and the rules for the formation of power structures and authorities.

In a majoritarian system, the candidate or party with the most votes wins. Types of majoritarian electoral system:

• In an absolute majority system, you need 50% + 1 vote to win.
• In a plurality system, a simple majority is needed, even if it is less than 50%. The simplest and most understandable variety for the voter, which is very popular in local elections.
• The system needs more than 50% of the votes at a predetermined rate - 2/3 or ¾ of the votes.

Proportional system: authorities are elected from parties or political movements that provide lists of their candidates. Voting goes for this or that list. Party representatives receive mandates of power based on the votes received - in proportion.

Mixed system: Majority and proportional systems are applied simultaneously. Part of the mandates is obtained through a majority of votes, the other part - through party lists.

Hybrid system: the combination of majoritarian and proportional systems does not proceed in parallel, but sequentially: first, parties nominate their candidates from lists (proportional system), then voters vote for each candidate personally (majority system).

Majoritarian electoral system

The majority system is the most common electoral scheme. There is no alternative, if one person is elected to one position - president, governor, mayor, etc. It can also be successfully applied in parliamentary elections. In such cases, single-mandate constituencies are formed, from which one deputy is elected.

Types of majoritarian electoral system with different definitions of the majority (absolute, relative, qualified) are described above. Detailed description requires two additional subspecies of the majority system.

Elections held under an absolute majority scheme sometimes fail. This happens when there are a large number of candidates: the more there are, the less likely any of them will get 50% + 1 vote. This situation can be avoided with the help of alternative or majoritarian-preferential voting. This method has been tested in the elections to the Australian Parliament. Instead of one candidate, the voter votes for several on the principle of "desirability". The number “1” is placed against the name of the most preferred candidate, the number “2” is placed opposite the second most desirable candidate, and further down the list. The counting of votes is unusual here: the winner is the one who scored more than half of the "first preference" ballots - they are counted. If no one has scored such a number, the candidate who has the fewest ballots in which he was marked under the first number is excluded from the count, and his votes are given to other candidates with “second preferences”, etc. The serious advantages of the method are the ability to avoid repeated voting and maximum consideration of the will of the electorate. Disadvantages - the complexity of counting ballots and the need to do this only centrally.

In the world history of suffrage, one of the oldest is the concept of a majoritarian electoral system, while the types of preferential electoral process are new formats that imply extensive explanatory work and a high political culture of both voters and members of election commissions.

Majority systems with repeat voting

The second way to deal with a large number of candidates is more familiar and widespread. This is a re-vote. The usual practice is to re-ballot the first two candidates (accepted in the Russian Federation), but there are other options, for example, in France in the elections to the National Assembly, everyone who has won at least 12.5% ​​of the votes from their constituencies is re-elected.

In the system of two rounds in the last, second round, it is enough to gain a relative majority of votes to win. In a three-round system, an absolute majority of votes is required in the repeat ballot, so sometimes a third round must be held in which a relative majority is allowed to win.

The majoritarian system is great for electoral processes in two-party systems, when the two dominant parties, depending on the results of the vote, change positions with each other - who is in power, who is in opposition. Two classic examples are British Labor and Conservatives or American Republicans and Democrats.

Advantages of the majority system:

Disadvantages of the majority system:

• If there are many candidates, the person with the fewest votes (10% or less) may win.
• If the parties participating in the elections are immature and do not have serious authority in society, there is a risk of creating an inefficient legislature.
• Votes cast for losing candidates are lost.
• The principle of universality is violated.
• It is possible to win with a skill called “oratory skills”, which is not related to, for example, legislative work.

proportional electoral system

The proportional system originated at the beginning of the 20th century in Belgium, Finland and Sweden. The technology of elections based on party lists is highly variable. Varieties of proportional methods exist and are implemented depending on what is more important at the moment: clear proportionality or high certainty of voting results.

Types of proportional electoral system:

1. With open or closed party lists.
2. With or without interest barrier.
3. A single multi-member constituency or multiple multi-member constituencies.
4. With permitted electoral blocs or with prohibited ones.

A separate mention is made of the option of elections by party lists with additional single-mandate constituencies, which combines two types of systems - proportional and majoritarian. This method is described below as hybrid - a kind of mixed electoral system.

Advantages of the proportional system:

• Opportunity for minorities to have their own deputies in parliament.
• Development of a multi-party system and political pluralism.
• An accurate picture of the political forces in the country.
• Possibility of entry into power structures for small parties.

Disadvantages of the proportional system:

• Deputies lose touch with their constituents.
• Interparty strife.
• The dictates of the party leaders.
• "Unstable" government.
• The "locomotive" method, when famous personalities at the head of party lists, after voting, refuse mandates.

panashing

Extremely interesting method which deserves special mention. It can be used in both majoritarian and proportional elections. This is a system in which the voter has the right to choose and cast their vote for candidates from different parties. It is even possible to add new names of candidates to the party lists. Panache is used in a number of European countries, including France, Denmark, and others. The advantage of the method is the independence of voters from candidates belonging to a particular party - they can vote according to personal preferences. At the same time, this same advantage can result in a serious disadvantage: voters can choose candidates who are “lovable to the heart” and who cannot find a common language because of completely opposite political views.

Suffrage and types of electoral systems are dynamic concepts, they develop along with the changing world.

Mixed electoral system

Mixed options for elective campaigns are the optimal types for “complex” countries with a heterogeneous population on grounds of various kinds: national, cultural, religious, geographical, social, etc. States with a large population also belong to this group. For such countries, it is extremely important to create and maintain a balance between regional, local and national interests. Therefore, the concept and types of electoral systems in such countries have always been and are in the focus of increased attention.

European "patchwork" countries, historically assembled from principalities, separate lands and free cities centuries ago, still form their elected authorities according to a mixed type: these are, for example, Germany and Italy.

The oldest classic example is Great Britain with a Scottish Parliament and a Welsh Legislative Assembly.

The Russian Federation is one of the most "suitable" countries for the use of mixed types of electoral systems. Arguments - a huge country, a large and heterogeneous population in almost all criteria. The types of electoral systems in the Russian Federation will be described in detail below.

In a mixed electoral system, there are two types:

• Mixed unrelated electoral system, where mandates are distributed according to the majority system and do not depend on "proportional" voting.
• Mixed linked election system, in which parties receive their mandates in majoritarian districts, but distribute them depending on the votes within the proportional system.

Hybrid electoral system

Mixed system option: integrated election option with consistent principles of nomination (proportional list system) and voting (majority system with personal voting). There are two stages in the hybrid type:

• First promotion. Lists of candidates are formed in local party cells in each constituency. Self-nomination within the party is also possible. Then all lists are approved at a party congress or conference (this should be the highest party body according to the charter).
• Then the vote. Elections are held in single-member constituencies. Candidates can be selected both for personal merit and for belonging to any party.

It should be noted that hybrid types of elections and electoral systems are not held in the Russian Federation.

Advantages of a mixed system:

• Balance of federal and regional interests.
• The composition of power is adequate to the balance of political forces.
• Legislative continuity and stability.
• Strengthening political parties, stimulating a multi-party system.

Despite the fact that the mixed system is essentially the sum of the advantages of the majority and proportional systems, it has its drawbacks.

Disadvantages of a mixed system:

• The risk of fragmentation of the party system (especially in countries with young democracies).
• Small fractions in parliament, "patchwork" parliaments.
• Possible victory of the minority over the majority.
• Difficulties with the recall of deputies.

Elections in foreign countries

An arena for political battles - such a metaphor can describe the implementation of the right to vote in most democratic countries. At the same time, the main types of electoral systems in foreign countries are the same three basic methods: majoritarian, proportional and mixed.

Often, electoral systems differ in the numerous qualifications included in the concept of suffrage in each country. Examples of some electoral qualifications:

• Age requirement (in most countries you can vote from 18 years old).
• Settlement and citizenship requirement (can be elected and be elected only after certain period residence in the country).
• Property qualification (proof of payment of high taxes in Turkey, Iran).
• Moral qualification (in Iceland you need to have a "good temper").
• Religious qualification (in Iran you need to be a Muslim).
• Gender qualification (prohibition of voting for women).

If most qualifications are easy to prove or determine (for example, taxes or age), then some qualifications such as “good character” or “leading a decent lifestyle” are rather vague concepts. Fortunately, such exotic moral norms are very rare in modern electoral processes.

The concept and types of electoral systems in Russia

All types of electoral systems are represented in the Russian Federation: majoritarian, proportional, mixed, which are described by five federal laws. The history of Russian parliamentarism is one of the most tragic in the world: the All-Russian Constituent Assembly became one of the first victims of the Bolsheviks back in 1917.

It can be said that main view electoral system in - majoritarian. President of Russia and top officials elected by majority absolute majority.

A proportional system with a percentage barrier was used from 2007 to 2011. during the formation of the State Duma: those who received from 5 to 6% of the vote had one mandate, parties that received votes in the range of 6-7% had two mandates.

A mixed proportional-majoritarian system has been used in elections to the State Duma since 2016: half of the deputies were elected in single-member districts by a majoritarian relative majority. The second half was elected on a proportional basis in a single constituency, the barrier in this case was lower - only 5%.

A few words about the unified voting day, which was established within the framework of the Russian electoral system in 2006. The first and second Sundays of March are the days of regional and local elections. As for the single day in autumn, since 2013 it has been appointed to the second Sunday of September. But, given the relatively low turnout in early autumn, when many voters are still resting, the timing of the autumn voting day can be discussed and adjusted.

Electoral systems have gone through a long evolutionary path. As a result of almost three centuries of development, representative democracy has developed two main forms of citizen participation in the formation of state authorities and local self-government: majoritarian and proportional electoral systems.

Based on them in modern conditions mixed forms are also used. Considering these systems, we pay special attention to the fact that they differ not so much in formal aspects as in political goals achieved when using these electoral systems.

· Majoritarian electoral system characterized by the fact that a candidate (or a list of candidates) who receives the majority of votes provided for by law is considered elected to one or another elective body.

Most are different . There are electoral systems requiring absolute majorities (it's 50% + 1 vote or more). Such an electoral system exists, for example, in Australia.

Majoritarian system of relative majority means that the one who gets more votes than each of his rivals wins the election .

Majoritarian electoral system is called "first-comer-to-finish system". They also talk about her "winner takes all".

Currently such a system operates in four countries - USA, Canada, Great Britain, New Zealand .

Sometimes both varieties of the majority system are used simultaneously.. For example, in France, in the elections of deputies of parliament in the first round of voting, an absolute majority system is used, and in the second - a relative one.

Under a majoritarian system, as a rule, direct ties between a candidate (hereinafter a deputy) and voters arise and become stronger. .

Candidates are well aware of the state of affairs in their constituencies, the interests of voters, and are personally acquainted with their most active representatives. Accordingly, the voters have an idea of ​​who they trust to express their interests in government.

It's obvious that Under a majoritarian system, representatives of a stronger political current in the country win elections. In turn, this contributes to the ousting of representatives of small and medium-sized parties from parliament and other government bodies.

The majority system contributes to the emergence and strengthening of the tendency to become in the countries where it is used, two or three party systems .

· proportional electoral system means that mandates are distributed strictly in proportion to the number of votes cast.

This system is common in modern world wider than the majority. In Latin America, for example, elections are held only by proportional system .

When using a proportional electoral system, the goal is to ensure broad and proportional representation of political parties, as well as social and national groups in government bodies. .

This system contributes to the development of a multi-party system . She is used in Australia, Belgium, Sweden, Israel and many other countries.

Like the majority proportional system has varieties . There are two types of it:

· proportional electoral system at the national level. In this case, voters vote for political parties throughout the country. Constituencies are not allocated;

· proportional electoral system based on multi-member constituencies. In this case deputy mandates are distributed on the basis of the influence of political parties in constituencies.

Majoritarian and proportional electoral systems have their advantages and disadvantages. . Let's dwell on them in more detail.

To the number positive properties of the majoritarian electoral system refers to what is in it opportunities for the formation of an effective and stable government have been laid.

The fact is that it allows large, well-organized political parties to easily win elections and establish one-party governments .

Practice shows that the authorities created on this basis are stable and capable of pursuing a firm state policy . The examples of the USA, England and other countries testify to this quite convincingly.

However The majority system has a number of significant shortcomings. Under a majoritarian system, only the fact that a candidate receives a majority of votes matters for the distribution of parliamentary mandates. The votes given to all other candidates are not taken into account and in this sense disappear..

Interested forces can, under a majoritarian system, manipulate the will of voters . In particular, Significant opportunities lie in the "geography" of constituencies .

As experience shows, the rural population votes more traditionally than the urban population. Interested political forces take this circumstance into account when forming constituencies . As many as possible electoral districts with a predominance of the rural population are allocated.

In this way, The shortcomings of the majoritarian electoral system are very significant. The main one is that a significant part of the country's voters (sometimes up to 50%) remains unrepresented in government.

The advantages of a proportional electoral system include the fact that the bodies of power formed with its help present a real picture of the political life of society, the alignment of political forces.

She is provides a system feedback between the state and civil society organizations , ultimately contributes to the development of political pluralism and multi-party system.

However the system under consideration has very significant shortcomings. . (Example Italy using this system: 52 governments have changed since 1945 ).

The main disadvantages of this system can be reduced to the following.

Firstly , with a proportional electoral system, it is difficult to form a government . Reasons: lack of a dominant party with a clear and firm program; creation of multi-party coalitions, including parties with different goals and objectives. Governments established on this basis are unstable.

Secondly , the proportional electoral system leads to the fact that political forces that do not enjoy support throughout the country receive representation in government bodies.

Thirdly , under a proportional electoral system due to the fact that voting is carried out not for specific candidates, but for parties, direct communication between deputies and voters is very weak.

Fourth,since under this system voting goes for political parties, this circumstance contributes to the dependence of deputies on these parties. Such a lack of freedom of parliamentarians can adversely affect the process of discussing and adopting important documents.

The disadvantages of the proportional system are obvious and significant. Therefore, there are numerous attempts to eliminate or at least mitigate them. This left a visible imprint on the proportional electoral systems themselves..

World practice shows that if the majority systems are relatively the same, then all proportional systems are different .

The proportional system of each country has its own specifics, which depend on its historical experience, the established political system and other circumstances..

Although all proportional systems have as their goal the achievement of proportional representation, this goal is realized to a different extent.

According to this criterion There are three types of proportional electoral systems.

1. Systems that fully implement the principle of proportionalism;

2. Electoral systems with insufficient proportionalism;

3. Systems that, although they achieve proportionality between the votes cast and the mandates received, however, provide for various protective barriers to the penetration of representatives of certain political forces into parliament.

An example is the electoral system of Germany. Here, candidates from political parties that do not win 5% of the votes throughout the country do not get into parliament. Such a "selection meter" is used in a number of other states.

As already emphasized, electoral systems have come a long way in their development. During this process (in the post-war period) the formation of a mixed electoral system began, that is, a system that should incorporate the positive characteristics of both majoritarian and proportional electoral systems.

The essence of the mixed electoral system is that a certain part of the deputy mandates is distributed in accordance with the principles of the majoritarian system. It contributes to the formation of sustainable government .

As is known, the electoral system as an institution of electoral law is understood in two meanings. First, the electoral system is the whole set of principles, methods, norms governing the holding of elections in the state. In our opinion, such a position gives too broad an idea of ​​the electoral system. Although in practice such an interpretation is not only allowed, but also applied. Thus, in 2013 the 20th anniversary of the electoral system in the Russian Federation and its subjects is celebrated. In this case, the concept of "electoral system" is interpreted extensively.

The second interpretation of the term "electoral system" is based on the inclusion in it of the conditions for recognizing a candidate (candidates) as elected, and lists of candidates - admitted to the distribution of deputy mandates, as well as the procedure for distributing deputy mandates between the lists of candidates and within the list of candidates. It is this interpretation of the concept of "electoral system" that seems to us more correct.

In accordance with it, three types of electoral systems can be distinguished: majoritarian, proportional and mixed.

Majoritarian electoral system applies exclusively to the election of individual candidates, not lists of candidates. When using the majoritarian electoral system, the candidate who receives the most votes is considered elected. There are majoritarian electoral system of absolute majority and majoritarian electoral system of relative majority.

Majoritarian system of absolute majority assumes the victory of the candidate who received more than half of the votes. In this case, it can be either 50% plus one vote, or 99%. In any case, in this scenario, the candidate will be considered elected.

Such a system is used, for example, in the elections of the President of the Russian Federation in the main voting, in the elections of the heads of a number of municipalities.

Majoritarian system of relative majority applied in elections where the winner is the candidate who receives more votes than the rest of the candidates. When applying the plurality electoral system, it is not at all necessary that the number of votes cast for the winning candidate exceed 50%, although such cases do occur in practice. So, in the elections of the Head of Yekaterinburg on March 2, 2008, the acting head received 54.01% of the votes.

As a rule, such a system is used in the elections of a part of deputies of the legislative (representative) bodies of state power of the constituent entities of the Russian Federation, in the repeated voting in the elections of the President of the Russian Federation, in the elections of deputies of representative bodies of individual municipalities. It seems that the majoritarian electoral system is easier to organize the preparation and conduct of elections. However, it cannot be said that it reflects the full legitimacy of the election of a particular person. This circumstance is especially evident when the winning candidate gains from 10 to 20% of the votes. Thus, in the elections of 14 out of 28 deputies of the Pervouralsk City Duma (Sverdlovsk Region), seven two-member constituencies were formed, in which the elections were held on the basis of a majoritarian electoral system of relative majority. As a result of the application of just such a system in one of the constituencies, a candidate who received 666 votes became elected. The total number of voters in this constituency was 18,185.

Using proportional electoral system voting is carried out not for a specific candidate, but for lists of candidates nominated by electoral associations. Formally, the voter votes for the list of candidates, but in fact he gives his vote to a particular electoral association. Often, voters are not interested in the persons included in the list of candidates, initially trusting the electoral association.

Those lists of candidates who have gained a certain percentage of votes are allowed to distribute deputy mandates. So, in accordance with paragraph 4 of Art. 82 of the Law on Elections of Deputies of the State Duma, the CEC of the Russian Federation recognizes the elections of deputies of the State Duma as invalid if not a single federal list of candidates received seven or more percent of the votes of the voters who took part in the voting. We believe that the 7% barrier is a rather serious obstacle to the passage of small parties to power. Meanwhile, the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation in Resolution No. 26-P of November 17, 1998 "On the case of checking the constitutionality of certain provisions of the Federal Law of June 21, 1995 "On the election of deputies of the State Duma of the Federal Assembly of the Russian Federation"" and in the Ruling of November 2 2000 No. 234-0 "On the refusal to accept for consideration the complaint of a number of public associations on violation of constitutional rights and freedoms by the provisions of the federal laws "On the election of deputies of the State Duma of the Federal Assembly of the Russian Federation" and "On the basic guarantees of electoral rights and the right to participate in referendum of the citizens of the Russian Federation” formulated the following legal position.

The so-called barrier point (percentage barrier), which means some limitation of the proportionality of representation, is provided for in the legislation of a number of countries with a mixed electoral system. Such a restriction avoids the fragmentation of the deputy corps into many small groups, which can be formed by a proportional electoral system in the absence of a percentage barrier. It is aimed at ensuring the normal functioning of the parliament, the stability of the legislature and the constitutional order as a whole.

From Art. 13, 19 and 32 of the Constitution of the Russian Federation, which correspond to Art. 26 of the International Covenant "On Civil and Political Rights" of December 16, 1966 and art. 14 of the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms of November 14, 1950, it follows that the equality of electoral rights of citizens, as well as the equality of electoral associations, means their equality before the law and the right to equal and effective protection by law without any discrimination. However, in relation to electoral law, the equality of persons and associations elected cannot mean equality of their results, since elections are an opportunity for voters to determine their preferences and vote for the respective candidate or list of candidates, which entails the appearance of winners and losers. The rules by which elections are held are the same for all electoral associations and for all citizens participating in elections on federal lists.

This procedure does not violate Art. 3 of the Constitution of the Russian Federation, since it does not prevent the holding of free elections, i.e. ensuring the free expression of the will of the people in elections to the legislature. Nor does it distort the essence of popular representation. Citizens who did not vote at all or voted, but not for those candidates who became deputies, cannot be considered as deprived of their representation in parliament. All legally elected deputies of the State Duma are representatives of the people and, consequently, representatives of all citizens who have the right to manage the affairs of the state through their representatives. A candidate who wins the election on the terms determined by law, regardless of which constituency, single-mandate or federal, he is elected, becomes a deputy of the State Duma as a representative body of the Russian Federation, i.e. representative of the people in accordance with the meaning of Art. 3 of the Constitution of the Russian Federation.

Thus, the Constitution of the Russian Federation does not exclude the possibility for the legislator to establish a certain percentage of votes that must be collected in elections in support of the federal list of candidates put forward by the electoral association so that the electoral association has the right to participate in the distribution of deputy mandates. According to the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation, in countries with a stable multi-party system, the 5% threshold is an average indicator that allows, without distorting the principle of proportionality, to fulfill the tasks for which it is introduced in proportional and mixed electoral systems, and therefore is not considered excessive. Meanwhile, in the Russian Federation, with its still emerging and unstable multi-party system, the 5% barrier, depending on various conditions, can act both as acceptable and as excessive.

Since in 1995 the electoral associations that overcame the established threshold received more than half of the votes of the voters who took part in the voting, the majority principle was not violated. Consequently, the 5% barrier, taking into account its implementation in the electoral process in 1995, could not be regarded as excessive.

At the same time, the 5% barrier cannot be used contrary to the purpose of proportional elections. Therefore, the legislator should strive to ensure that, when applying it, the maximum possible implementation of the principle of proportional representation is ensured.

Also, the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation recommended to the Federal Assembly of the Russian Federation to determine a mechanism of legal regulation that allows to comply with the requirements arising from the democratic nature of the foundations of the constitutional order of the Russian Federation, the establishment of specific provisions that fix such a mechanism (the introduction of a "floating" barrier, the announced blocking of associations, etc.) .

It should be noted that on October 7, 2011, the State Duma adopted in the third reading the Federal Law "On Amendments to Certain Legislative Acts of the Russian Federation in connection with the reduction of the minimum percentage of votes required for admission to the distribution of deputy mandates in the State Duma of the Federal Assembly of the Russian Federation", which provides for the reduction of the barrier to 5% in the elections of deputies of the State Duma. But since the Federal Law will be adopted already during the election campaign, its effect will apply to the next election campaign, which will be held in 2016. those parties for which at least 5% of voters voted. Despite the fact that the political situation in the state may change in five years, we nevertheless believe that a return to the five percent barrier is an effective and positive step.

According to paragraph 16 of Art. 35 of the Law on Guarantees of Electoral Rights, the law of the subject of the Russian Federation may provide for the minimum percentage of votes received by the list of candidates, necessary for admission to the distribution of deputy mandates, which cannot be more than 7% of the number of votes of voters who took part in the voting. Thus, the electoral legislation of the Sverdlovsk, Novosibirsk, Volgograd regions, Primorsky Territory establishes the maximum percentage allowed by the federal legislator. For example, Art. 66 of the Law of the Sakhalin Region dated April 10, 2008 "On Elections of Deputies of the Sakhalin Regional Duma" establishes a 6% threshold for the distribution of deputy mandates. Clause 8 of Art. 84 of the Law of the Republic of Altai dated June 24, 2003 "On Elections of Deputies of the Republic of Altai" establishes a 5% threshold for the distribution of deputy mandates between the lists of candidates.

In addition, in accordance with paragraph 16 of Art. 35 of the Law on Guarantees of Electoral Rights, at least half of the deputy mandates in the legislative (representative) body of state power of a constituent entity of the Russian Federation or in one of its chambers are distributed among the lists of candidates nominated by electoral associations in proportion to the number of votes received by each of the lists of candidates. Thus, at least half of the deputies of the legislative (representative) bodies in the constituent entities of the Russian Federation must be elected using a proportional electoral system.

Mixed electoral system involves the simultaneous use of majoritarian and proportional systems in elections to one body of power. Previously, a vivid example of this type of electoral system was the election of deputies of the State Duma, when 225 deputies were elected by the majority system of relative majority, and 225 - on the basis of a proportional electoral system. To date, a mixed electoral system is used in a number of constituent entities of the Russian Federation and municipalities. Thus, 25 deputies of the Legislative Assembly of the Sverdlovsk Region are elected on the basis of a majoritarian system of a relative majority in single-member districts, and the other 25 are elected on the basis of a proportional system based on lists of candidates from electoral associations.

Some authors single out the so-called majority electoral system of a qualified majority, implying that when using this type of electoral system, the winner is the candidate for whom at least 2/3 of the voters voted. However, this type of electoral system is not used in the Russian Federation, since, as noted above, the majority electoral system of an absolute majority does not imply any specific majority for recognizing a candidate as elected. It is important that the candidate gets more than half of the votes.

• In accordance with the electoral legislation, the number of voters who took part in the voting is defined as the number of voters who not only received ballot papers (both inside and outside the polling station), but also dropped these ballots into ballot boxes.
• See: Materials of the Electoral Commission of the Municipal Formation "city of Yekaterinburg".