Electoral Reform Grinds to Halt in Georgia

Talks between the government and opposition over reforming Georgia’s electoral system have stalled, and radical opposition groups are threatening to take the issue onto the streets.

Georgia’s political parties agreed to reform the system in November. While they did not say so explicitly, it appears the reform plan was an attempt to prevent a repetition of the mass opposition protests seen in 2009.

As talks dragged on without agreement, eight opposition parties put forward a new set of suggestions on April 5. One proposal is to change the voting system used so that most or all members of the 150-seat parliament are awarded to each party according to how many votes it gets nationwide.

Under the present system, half the seats in parliament are filled by first-past-the post voting in constituencies, and the rest are divided up by proportional representation.

“The ruling party must agree to these changes, since the rules now in place are unfair and violate one of the basic principles of elections – that the electorate expresses its will through proportional representation of parties in parliament,” Vakhtang Khmaladze of the opposition Republican Party said:

The ruling United National Movement objects to the plan because it stands to lose many the seats it now holds. In the last election, held in 2008, it won 71 of the 75 constituency seats.

The opposition also wants the electoral roll to include biometric data as a way of reducing election fraud, but this and other suggestions are unacceptable to the United National Movement.

Petre Tsiskarishvili, who heads the governing majority in parliament, accused those behind the proposals of “virtually cutting off all roads to a constructive dialogue”.

“If you make such absurd suggestions… it’s clear you realise that the other party – meaning us – isn’t going to agree to them. No one would,” he said.

Analysts warn that the longer the wrangling goes on, the more likely it is that the eight opposition parties that came up with the reform proposal will be discredited, and displaced by more radical forces.

“Clear failure of the talks will benefit the radical opposition,” Gia Nodia, a political analyst and former education minister, said. “I think the authorities and the eight opposition parties understand this very well. It’s probably the reason why the eight parties sought to modify their proposals when the talks reached a dead end.”

Opposition protests paralysed the capital for months in 2009, but failed to secure the resignation of President Mikhael Saakashvili.

The Radical National Congress has promised to stage a new wave of protests on the central Rustaveli Avenue from May 2, in the hope of igniting the same kind of protest.

Levan Gachechiladze, leader of the Georgian Party, warned that revolution would be inevitable unless the government improved the average citizen’s living standards.

“The Georgian Party will be the political force that leads this process,” he said.

Giorgi Volski of the Centre for Geopolitical Investigations argues that both moderate and radical opposition groups have run out of steam.

“Neither the radicals nor the constructive opposition will achieve any success unless the international community becomes involved,” he said. “If the international community were to express concern over the developing situation, then a way to resolve it would immediately open up. I think that the radicals and the constructive opposition have both pretty much spent their resources.”

Nino Kharadze is a reporter for RFE/RL in Georgia.