ii. Merits and Demerits of the First Past the Post System
|
Merits of FPTP |
Demerits of FPTP |
|
Simplicity – It is very simplistic in nature using single-member districts and candidate-centred voting. |
Discrepancy and Wasted – There is commonly a discrepancy in the vote share and seat share in results, where votes given to smaller parties are ‘wasted’ since they do not gain a voice in the legislature. |
|
Stability – FPTP system presents the advantage of producing a majority government at a general election by being decisive, simple and familiar to the electorate. |
Encourages caste, religion, Ethnicity and regional politics and distortion of electoral process. It leads to the exclusion of small or regional parties from the Parliament. |
|
Freedom to choose – FPTP system allows voters to choose between people as well as parties, with voters having the opportunity to assess the performance of a candidate. |
The issue is that the victorious party has most often not secured the majority of votes. It is possible for a party to win a majority of the seats with just 20-26% of vote share; by the same token, a party may not get a simple majority even with 74% of vote share. |
|
Broad-based participation – FPTP system encourages political parties themselves to have more broad-based participation. |
FPTP often works to the disadvantage of the smaller social groups. In the social context of India, the FPTP electoral system can mean that the dominant social groups and castes can win everywhere and the oppressed social groups may continue to remain unrepresented. |
|
Connecting link – It ensures that there is a link between a constituency and its representative in the legislature, and incentivizes representatives to serve their constituents well. |
Smaller parties, when they have a broad base across constituencies, rather than a concentrated following in a few constituencies, may fail to win even a single seat even if their vote share is significant. |