TEPAV's study revealed that an election threshold at 4 percent improves "fair representation" without making large concessions from the "consistency in administration" and calculated how the MPs by parties would have changed if 2007 elections had been held with a threshold at 4 percent.

ANKARA- TEPAV, declared that the optimal level of election threshold for Turkey was 4 percent. The study revealed that if the election threshold, which became a major issue on the agenda along with the constitution debates, is lowered from 10 percent to 4 percent, the fairness of representation can be improved without making large concessions from the "consistency in administration".

The policy note "Is it Possible to Lower the Election Threshold to a Level that Maintains the Consistency in Administration?" prepared for TEPAV by Türkmen Göksel (PhD) and Yetkin Çınar (PhD) of Ankara University Faculty of Political Sciences was published.

The note stressed that lowering the election threshold was a long-debated issue on Turkey's agenda, and said: "however, we believe that the key question to answer is as follows: "Does the election threshold as high as 10% actually ensures great gains in terms of the "consistency in administration" while making concessions from the fair representation principle? Or to put it differently; is it possible to (substantially) improve the fair representation with no (or small) concessions from consistency in administration?

To be able to answer this question, the note calculated objectively the principles "fair representation" and "consistency in administration" on the basis of the latest four general elections (in 1995, 1999, 2002 and 2007) in which the 10% threshold was implemented and which are similar as well in terms of the other elements of the election system. Then, it investigated the optimal level of election threshold that reconciles the mentioned two principles for alternative threshold levels (0-10%).  The analysis suggested that the optimal level of election threshold was 4%. To put it differently, the study concluded that 4% election threshold can improve "fair representation" without making large concessions from the "consistency in administration".

DP could have entered the Parliament in 2007

If the latest elections in 2007 had been held with a threshold at 4%, the Justice and Development Party (AKP) and the Nationalist Movement Party (MHP) would have had 3 fewer seats, the CHP 2 fewer seats and the independents 1 fewer seat in the Parliament. On the other hand, the DP would have been represented with 9 MPs, reducing the ratio of unrepresented votes by 5.42 points.

Seats by Parties in 2007 General Elections: Comparison of Election Threshold at 4% and 10%

Small parties have no chance to live with the current level of threshold

TEPAV's study drew attention to an important issue regarding the cumulative impact of the election threshold. Stating that under the dynamic results of the 10% election threshold that is in effect for a long period now, no party out of four could exceed even 4% threshold in the 2007 elections, the study maintained: "This can be read as a sign that the dynamic impact of the 10% election threshold has started to make small parties become "signboard" parties."

Studies on this subject by Göksel and Çınar will be published by TEPAV with the title "Türkiye'de Seçim Barajına ve Seçim Sistemi Değişikliklerine Yönelik Analizler ve Politika Önerileri - Analyses and Policy Recommendations for Changing the Election Threshold and Election System in Turkey".