Pluralist Liberal Democracy of Cambodia

Pluralist Liberal Democracy of Cambodia

By MEY Sopheakdei

I.        Introduction

Cambodia has passed a long history in the region, in which some regimes were cruel for Cambodians’ lives, but some periods were priceless and in the few decades Cambodia had a deep suffering with Pol Pot regime and cold war in the country in which the Cambodians do not want to remind it back, but the cold war was ended over a decade. Since then Cambodia is full of peace and happiness with the stability of politics in the country.

For a few decades, Cambodia had changed a lot of political regimes and had established six constitutions in the different regimes. Actually, Cambodia had first established Constitution in 1947 and brought democracy in to Cambodia around that year.  Moreover, Cambodia had emended new second constitution in 1972 (Khmer Republic). On the other hand, Cambodia had established new third constitution in 1976 (Kampuchea Democratic). However, Cambodia still established fourth new constitution 1981 (People Republic of Kampuchea). In 1989 ~1992, Cambodia had established the fifth constitution (State of Cambodia). After the Khmer Rouge regime, the first election in 1993, Cambodia had adopted a new constitution in which Cambodia is a constitutional monarchy with a liberal democracy and a multi-party political system. Since 1993, Cambodia has four elections with liberal democracy and a multi-party political system.

To understand on the liberal democracy and a multi-party political system in Cambodia, we need to know some keys of the political implementation through election, political party and political system which will be detailed below. Of course, we should know what are liberal democracy and a multi-party political system? Why does Cambodia government use liberal democracy and a multi-party political system to practice in Cambodia? And how are the liberal democracy and a multi-party political system implemented in Cambodia?

As we know Cambodia has adopted liberal democracy and a multi-party political system since the first election in 1993 in which Cambodia had the Parish Peace Agree with some other countries in the region and in others and in which Cambodian government wanted to keep peace in the country because Cambodia had passed the cruel and nightmare time over a few decades. However, this political system also has bad impact on Cambodia both political and social sectors in which it makes the political issues in the country.

To analyze the topic more understandable, we have to select the real reason to find out the causes of political issues from the liberal democracy and a multi-party political system, to dig out the advantages and disadvantages of the liberal democracy and a multi-party political system and furthermore, we also apt to seek the solution for the bad implementation of the liberal democracy and a multi-party political system in Cambodia.

II.      Pluralist Liberal Democracy of Cambodia

Cambodia's system of government officially is a multiparty liberal democracy under a constitutional monarchy, so pluralist liberal democracy political system is a system in which the political parties are formed unlimited by using representative system. This system was established and adopted in September 1993, after the conclusion of a process of political reconstruction sponsored and overseen by the United Nations. Under the framework established by the constitution, the king serves as the head of state for life. Possibly in response to the very active and often controversial roles Sihanouk has played in the political process in Cambodia since independence, the constitutional framework also clearly articulates that the king reigns but does not govern and is to serve as the symbol of the unity and continuity of the nation. The head of government is prime minister whose appointment was officially made by the monarch after a vote of confidence by National Assembly.

Moreover, When Cambodia signed the Paris Peace Agreement in 1991 and had the election in 1993 in which Cambodia had its own constitution in 1993 said repeatedly that Article 1: Cambodia is a Kingdom with a King who shall rule according to the Constitution and to the principles of liberal democracy and pluralism, Article 50 - Khmer citizens of either sex shall respect the principles of national sovereignty, liberal multi-party democracy…… Article 51: The Kingdom of Cambodia adopts a policy of Liberal Democracy and Pluralism…….. And moreover, Article 153: (Former article 134) any revision or amendment affecting the system of liberal and pluralistic democracy and the regime of Constitutional Monarchy shall be prohibited. This shows that Cambodia government has the strong willingness to implement this political system because liberal democracy and a multi-party political system is a representative system on Cambodian citizen’s willingness and on human right purpose.

Even though Cambodia adopted liberal democracy and a multi-party political system, if we say about liberal democracy it refers to the representative system on citizens’ willingness and human rights and also shows of political system in which there are two systems in liberal democracy Presidential System and Parliamentary System. Actually, Cambodia is a Parliamentary system in which it is the political institution and the voting system is only parliament which is voted directly by citizens to choose their own representatives to work in the government sector through proportional representation. There are numbers of parties in the parliament in which all citizens’ power are in their representatives’ hands as multi-party form.

In parliamentary Systems, there is the Separation of power between head of state, Present of National Assembly, and Chief of government: Head of State is king; Present of the National Assembly is from the winning Party member or majority party, and Chief of government: winning party member.  In this system, the prime minister is the important figure and plays an important role in the government, voters elect the legislature body, and then the legislature elects an executive from its own ranges and the political figures of the cabinet are also members of parliament. If the electoral system is based on proportional representation (PR), there will be likely several parties in the parliament. If no one party has a majority of seats, two or more parties will have to form a coalition.

III.    Cambodia Election System

The electoral systems are important institutional choices; they help determine the number of parties. In the world democratic country, there are two general types of electoral systems: Single Member District and Proportional Representation. Proportional representation system are based on multimember districts in which each district sends several representatives parliament .Proportional Representatives use multimember districts and assign parliamentary seats in proportion to the percentage of vote in that district .

1.  Right to vote

   The main point of pluralist Liberal Democracy is started from citizen use  own decision making directly to choose their representative .The purpose of national election level to choose representation has define as giving a trust and obligation to our representative to control and develop our community . In Cambodia ,  National election Committee always celebrate the election to establish new government in every five year and, every Cambodian who want to be a representative of citizen , they must stand for election first which called candidate .

2.  The Free and Fair Election

The political power to dominance country in the condition of Pluralist liberal democracy regime is establish by free and fair election, so it is the relation between freedoms of voting to select representative with sovereignty of citizens. The election in democracy regime is the competition political parties in order to gain political power. The Free and Fair Election needs to follow the five principles of the election in democracy regime:

A. The principle of universal election

The main definition of this principle has describe that every Cambodian who aged up to 18 yeas old always gain right to vote automatically.  Moreover, this right does not allow stopping or disturbing by individual, organization, or other policies that create a difficulty for right using to vote. The principles of universal election are strongly responsible for citizen sovereignty of decision making to develop their country well.

B.  The principle of free election.

The importance meaning of this principle refers to the freedom of decision making in the field of political of citizens on the vote paper. Every Cambodian have a absolutely right to vote with their own perspective without pressure, enforce, and threaten on their decision making of citizens that is the owner of vote

C. The principle of directly election.

The definition of this principle has separate in the two conditions. First condition is started from decision making until the last minutes of your decided, and it mean that every citizens can make a decision from their perspective without any influence from the other to vote until the final time of their decision. Moreover , every citizens must create their perspective with responsibility and critical thinking ,and the final result of these liberty is depend on the decision making  of its citizens  who is the owner of vote paper and power. Second condition states from the finishing of election until the day of counting vote paper and announce the result of election. In this condition, the vote paper and result of election does not allow to change or do and anything from any power which effect to the result election or working with vote paper

D.  The principle of equal election                                                                              

   This principle also contains three deferent meaning: First definition refers to the equality of value between vote paper and people without different policy setting or situation of living in society. Second meaning refers to the quality of people in supporting political party and participating the election without discriminate. All Cambodian are provided the equal right to select their representative in order to develop the community. Third definition refers to the quality of all political party is gained the independent right to run many activities such as political advertisement, Candidate, and same result.

E.    Principle of secret election

    The definition of this principle is provided you a secretion of decision making in election, so every citizen can vote with their perspective without worrying any pressure around you.

IV.    Cambodia Political party system

A political party is a political organization subscribing to a certain ideology or formed around very special issues with the aim to participate in power, usually by participating in elections. Cambodia is a one party dominant state with the Cambodian People's Party in power. Opposition parties are allowed, but are widely considered to have no real chance of gaining power.

Cambodia's political system is a product both of the country's troubled and oftentimes turbulent modern history and of factors rooted deeply in its premodern development. This article examines the political and governmental units that constitute Cambodia's political system and explores the political system in terms of its current structures and its historical development.

According to the political party law in which it is said that Article35 [Political Participation] (1) Khmer citizens of either sex are given the right to participate actively in the political, economic, social and cultural life of the nation. (2) Any suggestions from the people shall be given full consideration by the organs of the State and Article 42  [Associations, Political Parties] (1) Khmer citizens have the right to establish associations and political parties. These rights are determined by law. (2) Khmer citizens may take part in mass organizations for mutual benefit to protect national achievements and social order.

After we study so far in which it can let us know that political party is any political group identified by an official label that presents at elections, and is capable of placing through elections candidates for public office, unlike interest groups, which seek influence only, serious parties aim to secure the levels of government. Moreover, political party is any group of people who have the same political ideology and establish a party to serve and gain power in the election in which they compete for power.

Political parties are complex organizations, operating across domains but with the various levels of the party sharing a common identity and a broadly similar outlook. In the parliamentary democracies, parties are particularly complex. At national level, the main distinction is between the top party leaders, the members of the parliamentary party and the officials working at party headquarters, but parties are also represented in other election domains. Furthermore, we will study more about political party system and political system in Cambodia.

1.     The Party Systems

a-     Dominant-Party System

A dominant-party system, or one-party dominant system, is a system where there is a category of parties/political organizations that have successively won election victories and whose future defeat cannot be envisaged or is unlikely for the near future. A wide range of parties has been cited as being dominant at one time or another.

Opponents of the dominant party" system or theory argue that it views the meaning of democracy as given, and that it assumes that only a particular conception of representative democracy is valid. One author argues that the dominant party 'system' is deeply flawed as a mode of analysis and lacks explanatory capacity. But it is also a very conservative approach to politics. Its fundamental political assumptions are restricted to one form of democracy, electoral politics and hostile to popular politics. This is manifest in the obsession with the quality of electoral opposition and its sidelining or ignoring of popular political activity organised in other ways. The assumption in this approach is that other forms of organisation and opposition are of limited importance or a separate matter from the consolidation of their version of democracy."

One of the dangers of dominant parties is the tendency of dominant parties to conflate party and state and to appoint party officials to senior positions irrespective of their having the required qualities." However, in some countries this is common practice even when there is no dominant party. In contrast to single-party systems, dominant-party systems can occur within a context of a democratic system. In a single-party system other parties are banned, but in dominant-party systems other political parties are tolerated, and in democratic dominant-party systems operate without overt legal impediment, but do not have a realistic chance of winning; the dominant party genuinely wins the votes of the vast majority of voters every time or, in authoritarian systems, claims to. Under authoritarian dominant-party systems, which may be referred to as "electoralism" or "soft authoritarianism", opposition parties are legally allowed to operate, but are too weak or ineffective to seriously challenge power, perhaps through various forms of corruption, constitutional quirks that intentionally undermine the ability for an effective opposition to thrive, institutional and/or organizational conventions that support the status quo, or inherent cultural values averse to change.

In some states opposition parties are subject to varying degrees of official harassment and most often deal with restrictions on free speech, lawsuits against the opposition, rules or electoral systems, designed to put them at a disadvantage. In some cases outright electoral fraud keeps the opposition from power. On the other hand, some dominant-party systems occur, at least temporarily, in countries that are widely seen, both by their citizens and outside observers, to be textbook examples of democracy. The reasons why a dominant-party system may form in such a country are often debated: Supporters of the dominant party tend to argue that their party is simply doing a good job in government and the opposition continuously proposes unrealistic or unpopular changes, while supporters of the opposition tend to argue that the electoral system disfavors them (for example because it is based on the principle of first past the post), or that the dominant party receives a disproportionate amount of funding from various sources and is therefore able to mount more persuasive campaigns. In states with ethnic issues, one party may be seen as being the party for an ethnicity or race with the party for the majority ethnic, racial or religious group dominating.

b-     Single-Party System

A single-party state, one-party system or single-pay system is a type of party system government in which a single political party forms the government and no other parties are permitted to run candidates for election. Sometimes the term de facto single-party state is used to describe a dominant-party system where laws or practices prevent the opposition from legally getting power

Some single party states only outlaw opposition parties, while allowing subordinate allied parties to exist as part of a permanent coalition such as a popular front. Within their own countries, dominant parties ruling over single-party states are often referred to simply as the Party. For example, in reference to the Soviet Union, the Partymeant the Communist Party of the Soviet Union; in reference to the former People's Republic of Poland it referred to the Polish United Workers' Party.

Some one-party states may allow non-party members to run for legislative seats, as was the case with Taiwan's Tangwai movement in the 1970s and 1980s. Other single-party states may allow limited participation by approved minor parties, such as the People's Republic of Chinaunder the United Front, or the National Front in former East Germany.

Most single-party states have been ruled either by parties following Leninism, or by parties following some type of nationalist or fascist ideology, or parties that came to power in the wake of independence from colonial rule. One-party systems often arise from decolonization because one party has had an overwhelmingly dominant role in liberation or in independence struggles. Not all authoritarian states and dictatorships operate based on single-party rule. Some, especially absolute monarchies and certain military dictatorships, have made all political parties illegal.

Where the ruling party subscribes to a form of Marxism-Leninism, the one-party state system is usually called a communist state, though such states do not use that term to describe themselves, adopting instead the title of people's republic, socialist republic or democratic republic. One peculiar example is Cuba, where the role of the Communist Party is enshrined in the constitution, and no party is permitted to campaign or run candidates for election, including the Communist party. Candidates are elected on an individual referendum basis without formal party involvement, though elected assemblies predominantly consist of members of the dominant party alongside non-affiliated candidates.

One-party system: a one-party system cannot produce a political system as we would identify it in Britain. One party cannot produce any other system other than autocratic/dictatorial power. A state where one party rules would include the remaining communist states of the world (Cuba, North Korea and China), and Iraq (where the ruling party is the Ba’ath Party). The old Soviet Union was a one party state. One of the more common features of a one-party state is that the position of the ruling party is guaranteed in a constitution and all forms of political opposition are banned by law. The ruling party controls all aspects of life within that state. The belief that a ruling party is all important to a state came from Lenin who believed that only one party - the Communists - could take the workers to their ultimate destiny and that the involvement of other parties would hinder this progress. Here are the current Single Party countries who still practice the single party system such as;

c-     The Two-Party System

A two–party system is a system where two major political parties dominate voting in nearly all elections at every level of government. As a result, all, or nearly all, elected offices are members of one of the two major parties. Under a two-party system, one of the two parties typically holds a majority in the legislature and is usually referred to as the majority party while the other is the minority party. While the term two-party system is somewhat imprecise and has been used in different countries to mean different things, there is considerable agreement that a system is considered to be of a two-party nature when election results show consistently that all or nearly all elected officials belong to only one of the two major parties, such as in the United States. In these cases, the chances for third party candidates winning election to any office are remote, although it's possible for groups within the larger parties, or in opposition to one or both of them, to exert influence on the two major parties.

Two-party system: as the title indicates, this is a state in which just two parties dominate. Other parties might exist but they have no political importance. America has the most obvious two-party political system with the Republicans and Democrats dominating the political scene. For the system to work, one of the parties must obtain a sufficient working majority after an election and it must be in a position to be able to govern without the support from the other party. A rotation of power is expected in this system. The victory of George W Bush in the November 2000 election fulfils this aspect of the definition.

The two-party system presents the voter with a simple choice and it is believed that the system promotes political moderation as the incumbent party must be able to appeal to the ‘floating voters’ within that country. Those who do not support the system claim that it leads to unnecessary policy reversals if a party loses a election as the newly elected government seeks to impose its ‘mark’ on the country that has just elected it to power. Such sweeping reversals, it is claimed, cannot benefit the state in the short and long term. The best example of the two-party system is the United State of America, USA.

d-     The Multi-Party System

A multi-party system is a system in which multiple political parties have the capacity to gain control of government separately or in coalition. The effective number of parties in a multi-party system is normally larger than two but lower than ten. It is a system where there are large amounts of major and minor political parties that all hold a serious chance of receiving office, and because they all compete, a majority may not come to be, forcing the creation of a coalition.

Unlike a single-party system (or a non-partisan democracy), it encourages the general constituency to form multiple distinct, officially recognized groups, generally called political parties. Each party competes for votes from the enfranchised constituents (those allowed to vote). A multi-party system prevents the leadership of a single party from controlling a single legislative chamber without challenge.

If the government includes an elected Congress or Parliament the parties may share power according to proportional representation or the first-past-the-post system. In proportional representation, each party wins a number of seats proportional to the number of votes it receives. In first-past-the-post, the electorate is divided into a number of districts, each of which selects one person to fill one seat by a plurality of the vote. First-past-the-post is not conducive to a proliferation of parties, and naturally gravitates toward a two-party system, in which only two parties have a real chance of electing their candidates to office. This gravitation is known as Duverger's law. Proportional representation, on the other hand, does not have this tendency, and allows multiple major parties to arise.

A two-party system requires voters to align themselves in large blocs, sometimes so large that they cannot agree on any overarching principles. Along this line of thought, some theories argue that this allows centrists to gain control. On the other hand, if there are multiple major parties, each with less than a majority of the vote, the parties are strongly motivated to work together to form working governments. This also promotes centrism, as well as promoting coalition-building skills while discouraging polarization.

Brazil, Canada, Denmark, Norway, Finland, France, Germany, India, Israel, Indonesia, Japan, Ireland, Mexico, the Netherlands, New Zealand, Portugal, Taiwan and Sweden are examples of nations that have used a multi-party system effectively in their democracies (though in many cases there are two parties always larger than the others). In these countries, usually no single party has a parliamentary majority by itself. Instead, multiple political parties usually form coalitions for the purpose of developing power blocs for governing.

The multi-party system: as the title suggests, this is a system where more than two parties have some impact in a state’s political life. Though the Labour Party has a very healthy majority in Westminster, its power in Scotland is reasonably well balanced by the power of the SNP (Scots Nationalist Party); in Wales within the devolutionary structure, it is balanced by Plaid Cymru; in Northern Ireland by the various Unionists groups and Sein Fein.

Within Westminster, the Tories and the Liberal Democrats provide a healthy political rivalry. Sartori defines a multi-party system as one where no party can guarantee an absolute majority. In theory, the Labour Party, regardless of its current parliamentary majority, could lose the next general election in Britain in 2006. Even its current majority of 167 cannot guarantee electoral victory in the future.

A multi-party system can lead to a coalition government as Germany and Italy have experienced. In Germany these have provided reasonably stable governments and a successful coalition can introduce an effective system of checks and balances on the government that can promote political moderation. Also many policy decisions take into account all views and interests. In Italy, coalition governments have not been a success; many have lasted less than one year. In Israel, recent governments have relied on the support of extreme minority groups to form a coalition government and this has created its own problems with such support being withdrawn on a whim or if those extreme parties feel that their own specific views are not being given enough support.

2.     Structure of the Contemporary Political System

Cambodia's system of government officially is a multiparty liberal democracy under a constitutional monarchy. This system was established and adopted in September 1993, after the conclusion of a process of political reconstruction sponsored and overseen by the United Nations. King Norodom Sihanouk, who had first assumed the throne in 1941, before abdicating in favor of his father in 1954, returned as chief of state after theconclusion of that process. Under the framework established by the constitution, the king serves as the head of state for life. Possibly in response to the very active and often controversial roles Sihanouk has played in the political process in Cambodia since independence, the constitutional framework also clearly articulates that the king reigns but does not govern and is to serve as the symbol of the unity and continuity of the nation. The head of government, elected in 1998, is Prime Minister Hun Sen, whose appointment was officially made by the monarch after a vote of confidence by the National Assembly.

The National Assembly constitutes the first of the two legislative branches of the system of government. Its 122 members are elected by popular vote to serve five-year terms in parliament. The July 1998 elections resulted in a victory by Hun Sen's Cambodian People's Party (CPP), which secured 41 percent of the vote, and therefore 64 seats in the assembly. The CPP's major opponents were the royalist FUNCINPEC (Front Uni National pour un Cambodge Indépendant, Neutre, Pacifique, et Coopératif; National United Front for an Independent, Neutral, Peaceful, and Cooperative Cambodia) party (32 percent of the vote and 43 seats) and the Sam Rainsy Party (14 percent of the vote and 15 seats). The second legislative branch of the government is the Senate. It was formed following the November 1998 coalition agreement signed between the CPP and FUNCINPEC, which settled an impasse over FUNCINPEC allegations of electoral discrepancies in the July elections. The Senate currently has 61 members, whose appointments are officially made by the king, who also nominates two of its members. Of these appointments, CPP recommended 31 members, FUNCINPEC 21 members, and the Sam Rainsy Party 7 members.

The system of government also provides for an independent judiciary. At the head of the judiciary is the Supreme Council of the Magistracy, which was provided for in the 1993 constitution, and which was eventually formed in December 1997. Judicial authority is exercised through a supreme court and lower provincial courts.

3.      Development of the Cambodian Political System

Examining Cambodia's political system only in terms of the formal structures that were adopted as a part of the United Nations–sponsored peace process would lead to a substantially skewed understanding of the system. An appreciation for Cambodia's historical development is essential to understand the nature of the country's political system completely. In particular, we need to account for the development of the political culture that has dominated Cambodia since the Angkor era (eighth to thirteenth centuries CE), when the Khmer ruled the most powerful state in Southeast Asia. We also need to account for the destructive legacies of Cambodia's more recent past, which left the local political scene fractured and factionalized.

To keep peace in the country, Cambodia government practices the liberal democracy and a multi-party political system in which there are many political parties join the universal election which becomes the proportional representation system. Moreover, it the way that Cambodia government thought that it the best system for Cambodia practicing it, proportional representation also has its advantages and disadvantages so we will dig out the advantages and disadvantages of the proportional representative system.

According to the first article of the Cambodian Constitution states, Cambodia is a Kingdom with a King who shall rule according to the Constitution and to the principles of liberal democracy and pluralism. A political party is a group of people who have the same political ideology, form the party and compete for power in the election. Moreover, on the Article 42 of the Constitution states, Khmer citizens shall have the right to establish associations and political parties. In political party system, Cambodia has several competing parties during the election campaign and all political party members will participate to form a coalition government, so Cambodia political party system is multiparty system or pluralism system. Pluralism is a system, which gives more free and liberal in unlimited establishment of political parties. This system will have a lot of political parties in the National Assembly, however, there is also some opposition political parties get the seats in the National Assembly.

Moreover, on the Article 153: (Former article 134) of the Constitution states, any revision or amendment affecting the system of liberal and pluralistic democracy and the regime of Constitutional Monarchy shall be prohibited. This reflects that Cambodia strongly practices multi-party system in the country, so everything is liberal multi-party democracy.

V.      Proportional Representative in Cambodia

Cambodia is a country in Southeast Asia which has a long prosperous history in the region and it also has passed many political regimes. In the last few decades Cambodia had a deep suffering with Pol Pot regime, cold war and civil war in the country in which Cambodia practiced communist that made Cambodians suffer and painful, but after Cambodia had Paris Peace Agreement in 1991, Cambodia had freedom and human rights in the country in which

Cambodia prepared to have the first universal election with the proportional representative system in the country.

For a few decades, Cambodia had changed a lot of political regimes and had established six constitutions in the different regimes. Actually, Cambodia had first established Constitution in 1947 and brought democracy in to Cambodia around that year. Moreover, Cambodia had emended new second constitution in 1972 (Khmer Republic). On the other hand, Cambodia had established new third constitution in 1976 (Kampuchea Democratic). However, Cambodia still established fourth new constitution 1981 (People Republic of Kampuchea). In 1989 ~1992, Cambodia had established the fifth constitution (State of Cambodia). After the Khmer Rouge regime, the first election in 1993, Cambodia had adopted a new constitution in which Cambodia is a constitutional monarchy with a liberal democracy and a multi-party political system with the proportional representative system through the election system.

To keep peace in the country, Cambodia government practices the liberal democracy and a multi-party political system in which there are many political parties join the universal election which becomes the proportional representation system. Moreover, it the way that Cambodia government thought that it the best system for Cambodia practicing it, proportional representation also has its advantages and disadvantages so we will dig out the advantages and disadvantages of the proportional representative system.

To analyze the topic more understandable, we have to select the real reason to find out the advantages from the proportional representation in which it is the cause of keeping peace in the country, want to seek out the disadvantages from the proportional representation in order to avoid those disadvantages to keep peace in the country, and more analyze the elements of the advantages and disadvantages of proportional representation in the sense of keeping peace or political order in the country, and find the solution for the disadvantages in order to reduce the political anarchy.

Proportional Representation systems are based on multimember districts or provinces, that is, each province sends several representatives to parliament. Proportional Representation means using a type of election system in which representation is proportional to votes cast. In a proportional representation system, if a party gets 30% of the votes, they get approximately 30% of the seats in the legislature; if they get 5% of the votes, they get about 5% of the seats. In contrast, winner-take-all systems make it almost impossible for smaller parties to win seats, since they have to get a plurality or majority of the votes in a district to win a seat. As a result, although Democrats and Republicans make up about 79% of the electorate, they hold more than 99% of the seats in national assembly and in state legislatures.

On the other hand, Proportional Representation (PR) means using any one of several different types of election systems. The main types are Party List, Mixed Member Proportional, and Preference Voting. Even though there are many types of proportional representation, Cambodia practices Party List in which In a Party-List system, voters vote for their favorite party. If a party gets 40% of the vote, they get 40% of the seats. If they get 10% of the vote, they get 10% of the seats. Each party submits a list of candidates to the voters. If 100 seats are to be filled, and a party gets 10% of the votes, they will get 10 seats. Which 10 candidates get the seats? In most countries, people can select their favorite candidates from the list, and whoever gets the most votes within that party will get elected. That is called an "open-list" system. In a few countries, you just fill the seats from the top of the list. That is called a "closed-list" system. In almost all party-list system, there is a threshold that must be met before a party wins any seats at all. This typically ranges from 2-4%. This is to prevent extremist and very small parties from winning seats, and to avoid having too many parties and a fractured legislature.

Whereas Cambodia in this proportional system, it seems to have the multi-party system in which there are many political parties join the election and before the election date comes the political party leader need to list the party candidates in order to summit that list to the election committee and the seats are according to the numbers of the population in the province. If that province has 10% seats it will be 10 candidates for a political party in which on the list will be submitted to the national election committee for their parliamentary member when they win the election and get the seats in the parliament.

Proportional representation appears to be generally acceptable to all Cambodian factions. Yet it was the minor issue of which precise variant to use which provoked civil strife in the 1998 polls. In the 1997 election law, the National Assembly evidently intended to adopt the ‘highest average’ system. In drafting the electoral regulations, the national election committee and its experts mistakenly wrote down a slightly different formula in which it has advantage to larger parties and comes closer to true proportionality. The NEC caught its error and reinserted the highest average system in its final published regulations. No particular publicity was given to the correction.

Various parties and NGOs used the quota method after the elections to calculate the seats to be allocated to each political party. Only then was it realized that two methods, yielding different results, were being used, one by the NEC, the other by the opposition parties. Under the quota method, the Cambodian People Party (CPP) would have lost seats and its legislative majority. Unsurprisingly, the opposition insisted that the quota method was the best and only legal allocation formula and must be applied. The use of the ‘highest average’ system became a central opposition grievance. In fact, both the d’Hondt system and the quota method have disadvantages. D’Hondt can result in a party receiving considerably more or fewer seats than its strict percentage of the vote would justify. It often ‘violates quota’ in technical terms. The quota method does not violate quota, but suffers from the ‘population paradox’. For example, a party may increase its vote from one election to the next, while another party loses votes, yet the former may lose seats to the latter.

Extraordinary transparency is required. For Cambodia’s next national election, which is the most widely used proportional representation method, the quota method, or another formula could be used. The most important thing is that all parties understand the characteristics of each and agree on the formula.. While no system can possess all desired features simultaneously, alternatively, Cambodia could revert to the UN ‘greatest remainder’ system. Basing proportional representation on the votes received by each party nationally rather than provincially would also tend to bring the National Assembly seat allocations closer to the national vote percentages.

Therefore, eliminating the single-member districts would decrease the disproportionate representation that some of these districts currently receive. However, the CPP, noticing that it swept all but one of the one-seat districts in 1998, may be reluctant to change the status quo. However, the proportional representative also has its advantages and disadvantages in which it makes Cambodia political circumstance going smoothly and sometimes it has some political issues or deadlock. Moreover, the proportional representation means that the country’s legislature accurately reflects public opinion and party strength. Parties do not have to capture the big middle of the electoral spectrum in which they can thus articulate ideologies and principle more clearly because they do not try to please everyone. Of course only a small party or a small party of population, they can run as a party and win a seat or two in the parliament. They are not force to amalgamate into bigger parties and dilute their views as the biggest one.

Even though, small party can win the seat in the parliament, proportional representation systems do little to fight splintering, so they often lead to multiparty systems in which they many parties in the election. In the last election Cambodia had over twenty political parties joint the election such as Cambodian People’s Party, Sam Rainsy Party, Human Rights Party, Norodom Ranarridh Party, Funcinpic Party, League of Democracy Party Khmer Democratic Party, Hang Dara Democracy Movement Party, Society of Justice Party, Socialist Party, Khmer Republican Party, and Khmer Anti-Poverty Party. Actually, in the election’s result there only two or three parties won the seats in the parliament in which it considers to have the two plus party system which emerge in the proportional representation in those parties are Cambodian People Party, Sam Rainsy Party and Human Rights Party so on.

So, Proportional representation (PR) is a goal of voting systems in Cambodia. While some systems that pursue this goal can address other proportionality issues such as gender, religion, ethnicity, and these advantages are often used to promote such variants, it is not a feature of proportional representation system as such to ensure an even split of men vs. women, ethnic or religious representation that resembles the population, or any other goal. As it is used in practice in politics, the only proportionality being respected is a close match between the percentage of votes that groups of candidates obtain in elections in representative democracy, and the percentage of seats they receive. Thus a more exact term is party proportional representation, sometimes used by those who wish to highlight systems that emphasize party choice less, candidate or gender choice more, or who wish not to promote systems that overly empower the parties, at the expense of voter choice of exactly which individuals go to the legislature as representatives. In contrast those who subordinate gender, ethnic, religious, regional or candidate choice to party choice often use the term full representation in which Cambodian National Assembly has 123 members, elected for a five year term by proportional representation.

All in all, the proportional representative system is a political system in which Cambodian government adopted after Cambodian government signed on the Paris Peace agreement in Cambodia and wrote in the Cambodian Constitution in 1993 that Cambodia implements liberal democracy and a multi-party political system with the proportional representation in which Cambodia politicians can share power each other to govern the country. After passing a few decades of cold war and civil war Cambodia government has strong experiences in political career in which Cambodian politicians fought each other for governing the country, so proportional representation is the best political system that politician can share power together and even though politician form a small party or has a small numbers of people also can win the election and get one or two seat in the parliament and join to make the government by coalition in the parliament. So, Cambodian government should continue implement this political system in the country in order to keep county politics order and stable in which Cambodians have rights to form any political parties to compete for position in the government sector.

Therefore, if there are no jobs in the private sectors all people can join in the political career to get a job. Although, some opposition parties still boycott after the election result in which the government will be formed as an official government, the proportional representation is the best way to convince one or more of the other parties that get the seats in the parliament to form the government. More overall respect for the democratic system resulting from the situation where at elections, voters would have more of a viable option than with the existing government. As there would be only one common ballot paper for the whole country, investigation could be made into the feasibility of using optical character readers to both sort and count papers on election night. As papers would be eventually sorted under their common chosen parties, easy manual checks could still be randomly undertaken to guard against computer / machine error. Resultant benefits would be earlier results and diminished costs, so all Cambodia parties and people benefit from this proportional representation system in which it makes Cambodia politics stable and order that there are no war in the country, and all politician share benefits together with this political system.

VI.    Conclusion

VII. References:

.

1.       THE CONSTITUTION OF THE KINGDOM OF CAMBODIA , This Constitution was adopted by the Constitutional Assembly in Phnom Penh on September 21, 1993 at its 2nd Plenary Session

2.       Cambodian Democracy, Elections and Reform, Committee for Free and Fair Elections in Cambodia (COMFREL), February 2010.

3.       A Code of Conduct for Electoral Observers, The Election of Members of the 4^th Mandate National Assembly (On Sunday, July 27, 2008)

4.       CODE OF CONDUCT FOR POLITICAL PARTIES DURING THE ELECTION OF MEMBERS OF THE NATIONAL ASSEMBLY Phnom Penh, December 09, 2002, For the National Election Committee Chairman, unofficial translation by Im  Suosdey.

5.       Cambodia’s Electoral System: A Window of Opportunity for Reform, Jeffrey Gallup Foreword by Kassie N