I am obliged to vote, but according to the Belgian constitution my vote is not a full vote. For example, party A must only have 10 votes for a seat while party B must obtain 20 votes for a seat. Is this arrangement in line with European human rights law? For example, in a Swedish coalition, the MR would get more ministerial posts where normally the posts would have to be divided according to the votes obtained.
Understanding who can understand, and that in a unified Europe.
Thanks in advance.
Answer
(1) In Belgium, since after the Second World War, any adult with Belgian nationality has been allowed to participate in parliamentary elections. Adult men have been able to do that in an equal way since 1919. Indeed, from 1894 to the First World War, not all voices were equal. If you were in possession of a house, a higher diploma or head of the household at the time (more than a hundred years ago!) you would receive more votes.
(2) You are talking about the impact of each vote on the distribution of seats between parties. In Belgium, one of the most similar systems in the world applies: the D’Hondt system, named after a Ghent professor. The votes of each party are divided by 1,2,3… after which seats accrue to the largest results.
How is it possible that there can still be a difference between, for example, Hainaut and Antwerp? Well:
A. We vote by province. In larger provinces you need a lower percentage to get a seat. If you vote for Ecolo in Luxembourg, it is a vote that will not lead to a seat. Conversely, a voter in East Flanders, Antwerp or Hainaut has the most power.
Smaller provinces are good for larger parties. They are the only ones who have a chance at a seat. Names (6) or Luxembourg (4) are in that case.
B. Not everyone is going to vote. We have compulsory voting, but that does not prevent many votes from being cast either not or invalid in Hainaut, for example. The seats in parliament are distributed among the provinces according to population, not according to valid votes. Brussels also ‘benefits’ from this.
(3) Parity in the Federal Government is a guarantee for the French speakers, so that they are not pushed aside by a Flemish majority. That is stated in the Constitution, which means that the Flemish have ALSO agreed to it. There is nothing undemocratic about that.
Answered by
Prof. dr. Dr. Frederik Dhondt
History of law, History of international law, history of international relations, 18th century history, French history; constitutional history, 19th century political history
http://www.ugent.be
.