Ascertaining of Election Results at the Local Government Councils Elections

The procedure for the ascertaining of election results depends on whether the rural municipality or city has one or more electoral districts.

Political parties, citizens’ election coalitions and independent candidates may participate in the elections. A party may nominate candidates in all rural municipalities or cities. A citizens’ election coalition is formed in one rural municipality or city and may participate in the elections in that rural municipality or city only. 

In most cases one rural municipality or city has one electoral district, but there may be more. The size of the elected council varies depending on the number of population of the rural municipality or city.

 

A Ascertaining of election results in a rural municipality or city with one electoral district

1. Distribution of personal mandates in an electoral district

The manner of distribution 

First the number of voters in an electoral district (or a rural municipality or city) is divided by the number of mandates. This gives the simple quota of the district. The candidate who received more votes than the simple quota or equally to it, shall be elected, i.e. receives a personal mandate. 

Formula: number of voters/number of mandates = simple quota

Example

There are 10,000 voters who cast their vote in the district. There are 5 mandates. The simple quota is thus 10,000/5=2000 votes. Every candidate who received at least 2000 votes shall be elected.

Who shall be elected?

The candidate who received more votes than the simple quota of the district or equally to it (regardless of whether he or she is an independent or a party or election coalition candidate) shall be elected. There are no additional requirements.

2. The distribution of mandates of electoral lists in a rural municipality or city

After the distribution of personal mandates the remaining mandates are divided according to the d’Hondt distribution method.

D’Hondt distribution series runs as 1, 2, 3, 4, etc. 

Only the parties and election coalitions which received at least 5% of the valid votes in the rural municipality or city shall participate in the distribution of electoral list mandates. 

The manner of distribution

When distributing mandates on the D’Hondt distribution method, comparative figures are first calculated for every party and election coalition – the number of comparative figures corresponds to the number of candidates on the party list. The comparative figures are reached when the number of votes for a party or election coalition is divided by every element of the distribution series. 

Next, the comparative figures of parties and election coalitions are compared. A mandate shall be accorded to the party or election coalition with the highest comparative figure, the next mandate goes to the party or election coalition with the second highest comparative figure, etc. In such a way all undistributed mandates are distributed.

Example

3 mandates are divided between two lists. 

Party A: The number of votes 3000

Comparative figures: 
1) 3000/1=3000
2) 3000/2=1500 
3) 3000/3=1000 
etc. 

Election coalition B: The number of votes 2700

Comparative figures: 
1) 2700/1=2700 
2) 2700/2=1350 
3) 2700/3=900 
etc. 

The three electoral list mandates are thus divided as follows: 
1 – party A – comparative figure 3000 
2 – election coalition B – comparative figure 2700 
3 – party A – comparative figure 1500

If a party or election coalition has already received a personal mandate, as many elements of the series as the number of mandates the party or election coalition received are passed while calculating the comparative figures.

Example

Supposing that the party A has received one district personal in the previous example. In this case the calculation of the comparative figures for the party A shall be started from element 2 of the series.

Party A: The number of votes 3000

Comparative figures: 
1) 3000/2=1500 
2) 3000/3=1000 
3) 3000/4=750 
etc. 

Election coalition B: The number of votes 2700

Comparative figures: 
1) 2700/1=2700 
2) 2700/2=1350 
3) 2700/3=900 
etc. 

The three electoral list mandates are thus divided as follows: 
1 – party B – comparative figure 2700 
2 – party A – comparative figure 1500 
3 – party B – comparative figure 1350

Who shall be elected? 

Electoral list mandates are divided according to the district list of the candidates of a party or election coalition. For the distribution of electoral list mandates the candidates in the district list shall be re-ranked according to the number of votes received by each candidate and the mandate shall be given to the candidate who higher up in the list. In distributing the mandates, the candidates who have already received a personal mandate shall be passed.

 

B The distribution of mandates in a rural municipality or city with several electoral districts

1. Distribution of personal mandates in an electoral district

The distribution of personal mandates shall take place the same way as in a rural municipality or city with one electoral district.

2. Distribution of district mandates in an electoral district

Only the parties and election coalitions which received at least 5% of the valid votes in the rural municipality or city shall participate in the distribution of district mandates. This is called an electoral threshold. 

The manner of distribution 

The votes cast for the candidates of a party or election coalition at the district level are added up and the total is compared to the simple quota. The party or election coalition shall receive as many mandates as many times the number of the summed up votes exceeds the simple quota.

If a party or election coalition has already received personal mandates in a district, these are subtracted from the number of district mandates. 

Formula: Number of votes for a party (election coalition)/district quota=number of mandates for a party (election coalition) in the district

Example

Simple quota is 2000. A party or election coalition received 5000 votes. The party or election coalition thus has a right to 2 district mandates, as 5000/2000=2.5. But if the party or election coalition has already received one personal mandate, it has the right to only one additional district mandate.

Who shall be elected? 

In the district list of the party or election coalition, the candidates are ranked according to the votes received. The candidate who is higher up in the updated list shall be elected.

3. The distribution of compensation mandates in a rural municipality or city

After the mandates are distributed in the districts, the undistributed mandates are divided on the rural municipality or city level, using the d’Hondt distribution method. D’Hondt distribution series runs as 1, 2, 3, 4, etc. Only the parties which received at least 5% of the valid votes in the rural municipality or city shall participate in the distribution of compensation mandates. 

The manner of distribution

When distributing mandates according to the d’Hondt distribution method, comparative figures are first calculated for every party and election coalition – the number of comparative figures corresponds to the number of candidates on the party or election coalition general list. The comparative figures are reached when the number of votes for a party or election coalition is divided by every element of the distribution series. 

Next, the comparative figures of parties and election coalitions are compared. A mandate shall be accorded to the party or election coalition with the highest comparative figure, the next mandate goes to the party or election coalition with the second highest comparative figure, etc. In such a way all undistributed mandates are distributed.

Example

3 mandates are divided between two lists.

Party A: The number of votes 3000

Comparative figures: 
1) 3000/1=3000
2) 3000/2=1500 
3) 3000/3=1000 
etc. 

Election coalition B: The number of votes 2700

Comparative figures: 
1) 2700/1=2700 
2) 2700/2=1350 
3) 2700/3=900 
etc. 

The three mandates are thus divided as follows: 
1 – party A – comparative figure 3000 
2 – election coalition B – comparative figure 2700 
3 – party A – comparative figure 1500

If a party or election coalition has already received a personal mandate or a district mandate, as many elements of the series are passed while calculating the comparative figures as the number of mandates the party or election coalition received.

Example 

Supposing that in the previous example the party A has received one district mandate. In this case the calculation of the comparative figures for the party A shall be started from element 2 of the series. 

Party A: The number of votes 3000

Comparative figures: 
1) 3000/2=1500 
2) 3000/3=1000 
3) 3000/4=750 
etc. 

Election coalition B: The number of votes 2700

Comparative figures: 
1) 2700/1=2700 
2) 2700/2=1350 
3) 2700/3=900 
etc. 

The three mandates are thus divided as follows: 
1 – party B – comparative figure 2700 
2 – party A – comparative figure 1500 
3 – party B – comparative figure 1350

Who shall be elected?

Compensation mandates are divided according to the list of the candidates of a party or election coalition. The candidate who is higher up in the rural municipality or city list shall receive the mandate. While distributing the mandates, the candidates who have already received a personal or a district mandate shall be passed.