Read Time: 7 minutes
By Hardi Yakubu
From 1992 to 2016, a total of 1,610 members were elected to Ghana’s Parliament. Out of this number, only 94 were women, representing 5.8% of the total number of MPs [1]. Meanwhile during the same period, women have constituted not less than 50% of the country’s population. It is grotesque as it is unfair. But that is what the current electoral system does. It is called the First-Past-The-Post (FPTP) system. Under this system, candidates contest elections as individuals and results are counted after voting. The one who obtains the most votes is the winner. It takes no account of historical factors, structural issues or the social milieu. There is no regard for class dimensions of the society or protection for marginalized groups. Across the globe, it has been shown that the FPTP system is exclusionary as it tends to give advantage to dominant groups who have the financial means and the social capital and are supported by the common norms of the society. The system does not make room for diversity and excludes minority parties[2]. It also promotes the winner-takes-all politics that everyone seems to be complaining about. On the other hand, Proportional Representation (PR) is a system where seats in parliament are allocated to parties based on their share of the national vote. If a party obtains 1% of the national vote, it has 1% representation in parliament. This system has been shown to promote inclusivity, cohesiveness and real democracy. Without these, the stability of a nation hangs in the balance.
For more on the general operations of the Proportional Representation system, see the paper published by the Commander-in-Chief of the Economic Fighters League, Ernesto Yeboah.
In this piece, the focus is on how the PR system can be used to deal with one intractable issue in Ghana’s governance system – the issue of low female representation in decision-making, particularly in Parliament. This matter has received some attention in both academic and political spaces. But the attention has not gone beyond lip service, and nothing really seems to change. To make any meaningful progress, fundamental changes are needed. We must do away with the FPTP system and adopt proportional representation.
Surely, we do not need convincing about the imperative for increased women representation. The case is adequately made on the basis of fairness alone, such that in a system of majoritarian rule, the section of the population who are in the majority cannot be continuously underrepresented in decision-making. But beyond fairness, there are many institutional and productivity dividends as well. According to the Westminster Foundation for Democracy, women participation in political decision-making enables progress in education, health and other policy areas. Evidence shows that all things being equal, women leaders are more compassionate and empathetic, just what we need in an environment where stealing from the poor taxpayer is now normal. Of course, it does not mean that women will be chosen merely for being women. But with current trends, lack of skills, education or experience can no longer be an excuse for denying women their rightful place on the decision-making table. Proportional representation will make sure that they get representation as a matter of course not as a token of men’s benevolence.ALSO READ What and who the President left out
Female representation under first-past-the-post system
The system we are currently running is based on plurality vote. It gives no regard to the demographic make-up of the country. Whoever is able to win the popular election makes it to Parliament. Currently, women constitute 51.2% of the total population of Ghana; for every 100 women, there are 95 men. This has been the case since 1970 as the table below shows[3].
Table 1: Gender distribution of Ghana’s population since 1960
| Census Year | Total population | Proportion of females | Proportion of males |
| 1960 | 6,726,815 | 49.5% | 50.5% |
| 1970 | 8,559,313 | 50.4% | 49.6% |
| 1984 | 12,296,081 | 50.7% | 49.3% |
| 2000 | 18,912,079 | 50.5% | 49.5% |
| 2010 | 24,658,823 | 51.2% | 48.48% |
Source: Ghana Statistical Service (2013)
Despite being majority in the population, women have always been less represented in Parliament. The proportion of women MPs in Parliament has never gone beyond 15%. In 2016, 37 women MPs (representing just 13.5%) got into Parliament out of 275. That same year, there were 534,833 more females in Ghana than males. In the just ended election, 40 women made it to parliament, a marginal increase, which is still unacceptable. The worst year for women representation in Parliament was 1969 when only 1 woman was elected out of 140 MPs. See fig. 1 below [4].
Source: Madsen (2019)
The question is; why is it that those in the majority are consistently left out of the decision-making that governs the country? The problem is the electoral system – the First-Past-the-Post. There are many problems with this system, one of which is its exclusionary feature[5]. We have already seen how it has managed to exclude other parties from the decision-making process leaving only two parties. It has also served to exclude women largely from Parliament.
At this point, it is important to recognize that this feature of our political system is a subset of a larger system that deprives women of their rightful place in society. As an example, the widespread practice of not sending girls to school in the recent past deprived them of the opportunities to develop themselves thereby providing an excuse for the political system to exclude them from formal decision-making processes. Also, limited economic opportunities make it hard for women to participate in the very monetarized competitive electoral process under the First-Past-the-Post-System. In fact, the FPTP system tends to be very expensive and women who venture into it are usually outspent by their male counterparts as revealed by the 2017 report by the Westminster Foundation for Democracy. Hence, the consistent poor representation of women in parliament as the Fig. 1 above shows.
It is noteworthy that these constraints have largely been acknowledged and if as much action was taken as the lip service paid, we would have had different results. That is, considering the fact that as far back as 1960, the Nkrumah government had by legislation reserved ten (10) seats for women, representing 9% of the total number of seats. By 1965, even with increased number of seats, the proportion of women reached 10%. This has been the biggest affirmative action initiative in Ghana’s history as far as women’s representation in Parliament is concerned. Unfortunately, it has not been followed through and today, after 60 years, we have only managed to add 5%. In fact, the very next election (1969) after the illegal overthrow of the Nkrumah government produced only one female member of Parliament (down from 19 in 1965). This also points to the unstable nature of affirmative action if adopted under the winner-takes-all system.ALSO READ ECO: Why France Kidnapped West Africa’s Eco Currency
Female representation under proportional representation
The demographic reality shown in table 1 above has not changed and will not change for the foreseeable future according to projections by the Ghana Statistical Service[6]. Many studies have proven that proportional representation system ensures better representation for females. See Norris (1989) for instance. In his study of fifty-three (53) states, Norris[7] confirmed that women are better represented under PR than under FPTP. Rwanda’s case as the country with the highest proportion of women in parliament in the whole world buttresses this in a more compelling way. Refer to table 2 below for a comparison between the current system and PR (hypothetical) in Ghana.
So what should be done?
In his paper, Adjei does not recommend radically changing the system even though he enumerates several failures of the FPTP system and shows how inclusive the Proportional Representation system is. Similarly, Gyampo [8] argues that the proportional representation system may lead to the proliferation of groups and political parties. However, leader of the Economic Fighters League, Ernesto Yeboah in his article, wonders what the fear really is concerning many political parties if indeed we are to be truly democratic[9]. Radical change is exactly what we need. Years of reformist lip service seem to have made no impact. Curtin however cautions that even though there is better representation of women under proportional representation, the adoption of the system is not a guarantee to achieving gender parity. Thus the particular design of the system is crucial.
In Ghana, to achieve fair representation for women, the proportional representation system should be adopted and designed in such a way that 51% of parliamentarians is female, just as 51% of the population is female. This will be done by requiring that each party list reflects the demographic make-up of the country. If a party secures X% of the votes in the general election, it must be allocated X% of seats in the house. Each party would then ensure that of its number of seats, 51% should be held by women. For instance, under PR, NPP would have been allocated 148 seats (i.e representing 53.4% of the total valid votes in 2016) in Parliament. To reflect the gender demography, 75 (i.e 51%) of these would have been women. Similarly, the NDC’s 122 seats under PR would have had 62 women included. This would have ensured that the total make-up of the House reflects the sex ratio of the country’s population (for every 95 men, there are 100 women); thus out of 275 seats, 140 would have been held by women across various political parties while 135 would have been held by men. Table 2 shows that the Proportional Representation (PR) system will ensure a fairer representation for women.ALSO READ Coronavirus in Ghana: Can the poor survive a lock down?
Some will ask, what if the demography changes in the future and men become the dominant demographic group (in terms of numbers)? The beauty of the PR system being proposed here is that it prescribes representation based on gender demographic factor. At all times, the representation will just reflect what the country’s population data say, so it does not discriminate. It ensures balance and fair representation. If in a future census, males make up 51% of the population, the distribution of seats will so reflect.
Another suggestion might be to simply tweak the current system in some way to make it representational. Or to adopt affirmative action. Some have argued for an intra-party affirmative action in the form of the reservation of “safe seats” for women. The reality is that this has been talked about for decades and nothing is changing. The system is just not friendly to such initiatives. When in 2015, the NPP introduced an initiative to prevent women incumbents from being contested by men, it was quickly shelved.
Besides, such gestures are quite problematic; first, they are very tokenist; second, they do not address structural issues and barriers; third, they may create a bad impression for the women beneficiaries who may be seen as having been given the seats out of men’s benevolence rather than their own competence and merit; lastly, as shown by the example from the 1960s, they are at the whims and caprices of those in power.
Conclusion
It is clear that the first past the post system created by the 1992 sakawa constitution has failed; it has failed to guarantee us a true democracy. Rather it has given us a two-party dictatorship where two parties alternate in turns to steal and oppress. It has failed to give power to the majority – the youth and women. We need a proportional representation system which will guarantee fair representation for women who constitute more than 50% of the population of Ghana but who are not given their fair share of decision-making power in our governance system. We need a new system based on fairness and social justice.