Quotas for Electing Women: Path to Empowerment or Peril? Part 1

The United Nations Development Fund for Women (UNIFEM) released a report last month titled, “Progress of the World’s Women 2008/2009: Who Answers to Women? Gender and Accountability.” The report, in part, examined how countries have implemented their obligations under the Millennium Development Goals to increase the number of women in public office. The good news is that more women serve in governments today than ever before. Further, eleven women serve in the highest positions of their governments. Most recently, two African countries made significant gains in September 2008. Rwanda became the first country in the world to have a women majority in parliament. Two weeks later, elections in Angola nearly tripled the number of women in parliament. Yet, the report found that women largely remain outnumbered 4 to 1 in legislatures around the world and, on average, constitute a scant 18.4% of national assemblies, up from 11.6% in 1995. The report asserts that the increasing rate of representation likely is unsustainable and, even if continued, will be insufficient to achieve gender equity in many developing countries until 2045. For these reasons, the report recommends three affirmative actions to increase women’s political representation in legislatures: voluntary political party and media codes of conduct, campaign finance controls to level the playing field for women candidates, and quota systems. To elect more women to leadership positions is a worthy goal, but should legally mandated quotas be the answer?

The discussion explores the advantages of legally mandated quotas systems used in 46 countries, the perils of quotas, and whether quota systems could be considered discriminatory under international human rights law.

Types of Quota Systems

Nearly half the world’s countries have some form of gender quota systems for political representation, either voluntary or compulsory. Forty-six countries mandate gender quotas under their constitutions or laws. Fourteen of those countries also have voluntary quota systems by political parties. An additional 55 countries rely solely on voluntary quota systems by political parties. The quota systems vary greatly in who decides to impose the quotas, how the quotas are determined, what quantitative values are specified, whether the quotas are enforceable, and how long quotas should be used. Even when compulsory, more than half those countries lack enforcement mechanisms.

As to the required quantity of women, some national laws establish a minimum, generally 30% (Belgium, Macedonia, Rwanda, Burundi). In other countries, some political parties voluntarily impose quotas as high as 50% minimum for women candidates (Austria, Germany). Increasingly, one trend is towards “gender parity,” by which neither males nor females can comprise more than 60% of the national legislature (Spain). Such gender parity systems establish a minimum floor of 40% and a maximum ceiling of 60% for both genders. The goal of gender parity quotas as a policy instrument is to promote ongoing nondiscriminatory requirements for participatory input by both men and women on key political issues and actions.

Quotas also may be applied to different stages of the electoral process. Three common stages include: (a) selection for the “short lists;” (b) nominations to be placed on the official ballot as candidates; and (c) reserved seats in legislatures. Constitutional quotas tend to reserve seats for women (Rwanda, Uganda), whereas voluntary party quotas favor selection and nominations. Electoral laws divide on gender rules and requirements for the three stages (Bolivia, Jordan, Liberia, South Africa).

To simplify the complexity of the varying quota systems for analysis purposes, the 2008-2009 Report divides quotas into five categories: (1) constitutional, (2) election law with legally enforceable sanctions and without legally enforceable sanctions, (3) sub-national level, (4) political party, and (5) no quota.

Sub-national level quotas are beyond the scope of this discussion. Similarly, voluntary quotas by political parties are not addressed here, but such affirmative action is seen in 55 countries with no mandated quotas. These voluntary quotas provide the greatest flexibility for removal or adaptation when no longer necessary to correct historic trends of under representation of women in elected political offices.

The focus of the discussion here is on legally mandated constitutional or electoral law quotas because they are compulsory and are recommended by the 2008-2009 Report as the “strongest means of increasing women’s engagement in political competition regardless of political system.” One or both of these mechanisms are used in 46 countries.