Talk:2013 Djiboutian parliamentary election

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Elections and Referendums, an ongoing effort to improve the quality of, expand upon and create new articles relating to elections, electoral reform and other aspects of democratic decision-making. For more information, visit our project page.Elections and ReferendumsWikipedia:WikiProject Elections and ReferendumsTemplate:WikiProject Elections and ReferendumsElections and Referendums articles

Africa: Djibouti

	Africa portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Africa, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Africa on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.AfricaWikipedia:WikiProject AfricaTemplate:WikiProject AfricaAfrica articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by WikiProject Djibouti.

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Djiboutian parliamentary election, 2013. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

Added archive https://archive.is/20130410043211/http://www.africatime.com/djibouti/nouvelle.asp?no_nouvelle=728061&no_categorie= to http://www.africatime.com/djibouti/nouvelle.asp?no_nouvelle=728061&no_categorie=

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 17:59, 11 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Electoral system and correct seat distribution

I think the seat distribution of the latest Djibouti parliamentary elections is wrong. (These wrong figures are also reported by Adam Carr and by IFES)

In 2013 they abandoned winner-takes-all party block vote and for the first time the government didn’t win all the seats. The electoral formula was however not proportional : 80% of seats (rounded to the nearest integer) goes to the first placed list, 20% goes to other lists if they get over a 10% local threshold. (If more than one minority list would have had >10% then seats would have been distributed by D’Hondt.) If no other party reaches 10%, then the first placed list wins all the seats (which was the case in Dikhil and Obock constituencies according to Adam Carr).

The 2012 amendment to art. 33 of their electoral law can be found at [1]. The system is correctly described by IFES and by IPU.

If I can rely on Adam Carr for the apportionment of seats over the 6 districts and for the vote distribution in every district, the result should be:

constituency	seats total	80% of seats	1st list	other lists	UMP	USN	remarks
Alisabieh	6	4.8	5	1	5	1
Arta	3	2.4	2	1	2	1
Dikhil	11	8.8	9	2	11	-	USN<10%
Djibouti ville	35	28	28	7	28	7
Obock	4	3.2	3	1	4	-	USN<10%
Tadjourah	6	4.8	5	1	5	1
National total	65	52	52	13	55	10

Then it also makes more sense for the opposition to complain about 8% of votes in the capital district : in the wrongly reported proportional distribution it only makes 4 seats change hands, while 2 lists changing places would displace 21 seats and the opposition would have had 31/65 seats.

IPU reports the same distribution of seats (55-10).----Bancki (talk) 10:28, 12 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]