Election History Bites | Proportionality with a caveat

The single transferable vote system and Malta’s district-based election does not deliver a proportional result between votes won nationally and seats obtained. To this very day it is still possible for a single candidate contesting in only one district, whether as an independent or with a third party, to get elected in parliament by obtaining enough votes on just that district.

However, an important change took place in 2007 when the Constitution was amended to introduce a proportionality mechanism. In this way, extra seats are added to the respective parties’ tallies after the vote counting is over, to ensure there is proportionality between votes obtained nationally and seats in parliament. The extra seats could be added to the winning or the losing party.

However, such a mechanism only kicks in if either of these two scenarios is present: If only two parties are represented in parliament; and if more than two parties elect MPs but one of them obtains an absolute majority of votes.

If three parties elect MPs and none of them have an absolute majority of votes, the 2007 mechanism does not kick in and it is the number of seats won that determines who forms the next government.

In the 2013 election the Labour Party obtained 39 seats while the Nationalist Party obtained 26 seats after the vote counting exercise ended. However, the proportion of seats won by the PL overstated the party’s electoral strength while the PN’s seat tally understated its vote. According to the constitutional mechanism the PN was awarded four extra seats to bring the parliamentary balance closer to the election result. A similar situation happened in the 2017 and 2022 elections when the PN Opposition was awarded two extra seats each time.

Election History Bites powered by Agenda Bookshop is a series of election-inspired stories that will be published from Monday to Friday every morning throughout the election campaign