Implementing Proportional Representation in Thailand

Abstract

Thailand has undergone many changes to the electoral system for members of the House of Representatives. From the use of the plurality systems, the mixed-parallel systems, the mixed-member apportionment system, to the return to the use of the mixed-parallel system once again in the present. However, this has not been able to solve the inefficiency and instability of the political system due to the electoral systems had not reflected the will of the people, both the majority and the minority, adequately in proportion. Resulting in having representatives who do not eagerly respond to the needs of the people.

This article aimed to examine the key characteristics of different types of electoral systems, criteria for judging electoral systems, and the key features of two proportional representation systems. Which includes (1) party-list proportional representation (List-PR) from case studies of Norway, Finland, and Sweden. And (2) mixed-member proportional (MMP) from case studies of Germany, New Zealand, and the electoral system according to the draft Constitution of 2558 B.E. (2015) proposed to the National Reform Assembly. This was to conduct a comparative analysis with the current mixed-parallel system according to the Constitution of 2560 B.E. (2017), as amended in 2564 B.E. (2019). The study found that proportional representation systems have the potential to reflect the will of the people and lead to an efficient and stable political system better than the mixed-parallel system. However, to implement these systems in Thailand, there must be some modifications to align with the characteristics of Thailand's political and administrative structure.