TEPAV published a policy note titled "The Impact of the Election Threshold on the Parliamentary Structure in June 12, 2011 Elections".

ANKARA- TEPAV stressed that even though the 2011 election appears to be fairer on the basis of the compared to the 2002 and 2007 elections, the cumulative impact of the election threshold as high as 10% turned small parties into signboard parties forcing voters to shift away from the parties of their primary choice 2011. ""Fairness in Representation Deteriorates" TEPAV added.

The policy note "The Impact of the Election Threshold on the Parliamentary Structure in June 12, 2011 Elections" prepared for TEPAV by Türkmen Göksel (PhD) and Yetkin Çınar (PhD) of Ankara University Faculty of Political Sciences was published. The note, highlighting that while the Justice and Development Party (the AKP) improved its votes by 3.3% compared to the 2007 elections (46.6% to 49.9%) it lost 15 seats at the parliament (341 to 326), said:

"There are three underlying factors for this outcome: first, the gap between the first party (the AKP) and the second party (the CHP) narrowed since the latter enjoyed a larger improvement in votes. Because of the distribution method, this narrowing has a negative effect on the number of seats held by the leader party. The second factor is that the AKP was (almost) the only rival in regions where the BDP got high shares from votes and that the BDP increased its share in votes compared to the 2007 elections. For instance, the AKP which had 2 members of parliament (MP) in Hakkari in 2007 elections had non in 2011 elections. The third factor is the regulation introduced by the Higher Election Board (YSK) on the regional distribution of MPs. This note analysis the extent to which this regulation affected the election results. The note concludes that if this regulation had not been introduced, the AKP would have had 5 more MPs."

Without the threshold, the SP could have get in the parliament with 6 MPs

The note also addressed some assessments on the basis of a survey conducted by the A&G Research Company, which asked the respondents "which party would you vote for if there was no election threshold, that is, in the case that they do not have concerns about whether or not the party they support can exceed the threshold".  According to this, the note maintained, if the election threshold had been abolished, the AKP and the CHP would have missed 5 and 1 seats respectively whereas the SP would have won 6 seats in the parliament. Stating that thus the fairness of representation would be improved as the rate of unrepresented votes decreased, the note maintained: "Although it appears as if the lowering of the election threshold would have had a small impact on the results of the 2011 election, it should be noted that a significantly high threshold at 10% have had a long term cumulative impact."

The AKP would have 331 seats without the YSK regulation

The note also evaluated the impact of the amendments introduced by YSK between 2007 elections and 2011 elections with the aim to improve the fairness on the basis of the population per a MP and stated that if the YSK had not introduced the amendment devoted to ensure a fairer distribution of MPs, the AKP would have had 331 seats instead of 326 seats in the parliament. The note added that in that case the MHP would have had 3 seats more while the CHP and the independents would have had 5 and 3 seats less, respectively (Table 1).

Unfairness prevail concerning the size of population per MP

The study also addressed an analysis about the parliamentary structure that would have been achieved if a fairer method of distribution of MPs that enables higher convergence between election zones in terms of the size of population per MP is established. According to this, under a fairer setting, the votes of the AKP would not change while the independent MPs lose 6 seats, shared equally by the CHP and the MHP (Table 2). The study in this context said: "The proposed regulation does not bring a large difference in the composition of the parliament in comparison with the current situation whereas it ensures a fairer outlook with respect to the distribution of MPs among election zones on the basis of population."

"Fairness in Representation" deteriorates

The note stressed that even though the 2011 election appears to be fairer on the basis of the disproportionality index compared to the 2002 and 2007 elections, the cumulative impact of the election threshold as high as 10% turned small parties into signboard parties forcing voters to shift away from the parties of their primary choice. Stressing in this context that fairness in representation is damaged, the note concluded:

"Under these circumstances, it can be concluded that the arrangements in the opposite direction (reducing or abolishing the election threshold) will improve the fairness of representation while having no significant impact on the power of the winning party.

On the other hand, the results revealed that the allocation of MPs among regions was critically important. Although the YSK regulation caused the AKP lose only 5 seats in the parliament, this difference proves significant as it deprived the AKP of the 3/5 majority necessary to craft the constitutional amendments to referendum."

Table 1. Distribution of Seats in the Current Situation and in the Case without the YSK Amendment

Table 2. Composition of the Seats in the Current Situation and under the Proposed Situation