The Model  Proposals for the New Electoral Process that have been Long Overdue for the Sri Lankan People 

1.     The New Electoral Process should be Based on 2004 Parliament Select Committee Headed by Hon. Dinesh Gunawardene on Electoral Process.

2.     70% should be absolutely on First Past the Post System, (FPPS) that enables the voter to clearly identify the candidate through the ballot paper itself rather than by just numbers. The voter clearly identifying the candidate is an important part of the universal franchise, in which the voter clearly, sum up the candidate’s suitability as a persona to represent the voter to an Electorate. This should never be considered as preference voting, instead the voter is given a broad opportunity to elect a correct person as the voter marks the ballot paper just by one mark only. Since there is never a practice of one vote for a party and second marking for a candidate of another party an elective candidate should not hide behind the numbers, a hallmark of franchise system, and appropriate way to abolish the Preference Voting where marking up to 3 are allowed. If the candidature is honest and bold there is no need for candidates to hide behind the numbers.

3.     The above described absolute FPPS allows an individual to field his candidature on his own without relying on a political party or a group, and seek a membership in a local council / parliament to serve her/his own electorate people, in which likes of Dahanayakes, Mudiyanse Thennakoones, Navaratnams, Sunthralingams and some Islamic members have emerged and had done yeoman service got their opportunities through the system to serve their own people in the era before 1977. This is another characteristic of the Universal Franchise, in which people of an electorate electing their own individual woman/man had been deprived of by the present and I understand in the proposed system as well. This must be corrected in the proposed new sew system that should not be hurried upon for the sake of just fulfilling of the election promises. The inability of an individual being field herself/himself as candidate for councils have paved way forming of undesired groups and sprouting of numerous short-sighted political parties. 70% FPPS never hinders Independence Groups fielding their candidate in an election.

4.    The Balance 30% of members of a councils/ Parliament should be derived from vote casted for a political party through a candidate of that political party or an Independence Group, which makes the mixed electoral process simple and smart, easy to be understood by the voter, - most important factor in seeking public mandate. Political parties will hand over two applications one for individual candidate representing that political party in a particular electorate and list of names that will represent the party in the council or in the Parliament for the balance 30%, and such 30% list should be properly advertised enabling the voter to decide on a political party or on the individual the party fielded as a candidate or on an Independence Candidate.  

5.     The characteristics of a franchise system should not be compromised for the bad/criminal activities of politically oriented supporters at all cost, or for the cost of Electoral Franchise.

6.     Such a system of 30% members deriving allow the political parties and independence groups to elect most demanding women representation and professional experts to municipal councils and Parliament. It also can be effectively used for justifiably elect members from minorities of an area or of an electoral district.

7.      This kind of Mixed Electoral System (MES) becomes best effective when total number of members of a local government body is considered as basic unit and for Provincial Council and Parliament Election number of members carried by an Electoral District becomes basic unit. Though for Provincial council and Parliament total number of members can be considered as basic unit, it is not recommended as it will deprive or limit the appropriate representation of different ethnic groups. E.g. if Jaffna Municipal Council carries 40 members, 28 members will be elected through wards wise FPPS and 12 will be derived through Proportional Representation System (PRS).  In a Parliament election If Jaffna Electoral District carries 10 members 7 electorates will elect seven members through FPPS, the balance 3 will be allocated to political parties mustering over 7.5% of the total valid votes cast of the electoral district/local council for gaining representation. All electoral Districts having less than 7 members for parliament should be duly adjusted to appropriate 70% :30% Mixed Representation or the percentage itself may be slightly shifted.
 
 8.    Merit for Qualification.
 There was a proposal to have a floating number of members to Parliament, Provincial councils, and local councils to accommodate all those contesters attaining stipulated percentage of total valid votes.  This shouldn’t be the case; all elected governing bodies must have fixed numbers to be elected and there should be a merit system to accommodate the best only to attain the fixed number of members that has been already stipulated among  qualified- all those who attained more than 7.5% of the total valid votes for the electoral district or for the Local government; this 7.5% can be further  reduced to if this merit system is introduced for the benefit of  minor political  parties and Independence Groups.

A Merit Value of MES qualification (Q) for membership system can be easily derived by calculating the distance of deviation from average polled to attain membership, against the Total Valid votes polled amongst all who attained 7.5%. E.g.   
In a Parliament Election if Colombo Electoral District carries 20 members, total valid votes polled is divided by 20 to arrive at average votes needed to attain the one member.  If it is the value of 35000 (X) and If a qualified Party A has polled 8000it needed 27000 (Ad), more votes to qualify. If another Party B has polled 8950 B party requires 26050 (Bd)more votes to qualify which is 950 votes less than Party A required.  Therefore, obviously Party B will have to qualify than Party A.
 This is presented here as a formula to obtain a Merit Value of MES qualification by finding the percentage distance against the Total Valid votes Cast(Z) for the Electoral District.

Likewise, a merit list can be prepared for queuing up qualified political parties and least Q value parties are disqualified one by one to accommodate the best polled parties in the 30% allocation seats. Such merit list can be used to arrive at stipulated number of winners for all elected governing bodies.

 9.      A situation will arise where an Independent candidate in an electorate polls substantial amount of vote, but fails to win in the FPPS, but still mustered very much more than 7.5% electoral district cut out point. Therefore, the Merit Value of MES qualification (Q) of every losing candidates should be calculated and another list prepared that differs from Political Party Merit list referred in 8 above. If that candidate is above in the merit of any political party, She/he be considered duly for membership.