The electoral frameworks of France and Japan are comparative on how they handle the settlements amongst decency, legitimacy, and workability. Their electoral systems are run and administrated by independent electoral bodies; both oversee the vote casting via secret ballot and embrace the existence of many political parties. The complexity of their systems, however, is, that Japan has three classifications of electoral decisions while France has two. This work will expound on these countries and their effects on the governance. Japan's Electoral Administration Commission is the constitutionally approved committee that oversees the electoral process; this includes enlistment of constituent voters, race administration, and voter education, (Osaka City, 2005).
France's Electoral Management Body has the same responsibilities as its Japanese counterpart. According to the textbook, Japan and France are reported to support multi-party democracy as the political landscape is made up of various entities backed by the constitution. The contrast, however, is that Japan has three categories of elections, while France has two. Japan hosts elections for the general races to the House of Representatives, and this is held every four years (unless the lower house breaks down before). The races to the House of Councilors are held at regular intervals to pick one portion of its individuals, and the local poll conducted at regular intervals for workplaces in prefectures, urban communities, and towns. Conversely, France holds elections for the presidential race and the legislative assemblies; and each of these electoral bodies conducts in two rounds for elimination purposes.
Delegate your assignment to our experts and they will do the rest.
In France, the multi-party system is concerned, and therefore the minority cannot have adequate representation because of the many parties. This misrepresentation then means that they get outnumbered in the race for the popularity of the parties participating in an electoral process. The known two- ballot electoral system which France uses has made it unattainable for the small parties to win the elections, bringing about unfairness. However, France, as a country that has a very solid governorship due to its electoral system, has facilitated keeping the political fronts out of parliament notwithstanding its increased impressive vote share. Also, the electoral system in Japan has led to the exceptional level of balanced representation in administrative portrayal. It as well facilitated the distribution of the resources of the country through the provision of the municipal-level Japanese data. For instance, there is the division of aid from the national government to the municipal government.
The French administrative issues show somewhere in the range of propensities, describing a two-party framework in which control exchanges between generally stable coalitions, each being driven by a unique gathering. The left side has the Socialist Party, the right, Les Republicans and its antecedents and at the end what comes clear is the number of representations in the parliament facilitating the passing of legislative laws and enacting policies. In Japan as well, simple majority rule is paramount and it comes out clear and just, like France that the will of the people is highly regarded and this has highly favored larger parties in these countries and their leaders end up enjoying the support of the majority in the parliament.
The policy of proportional representation in both the electoral system has however favored both the minority parties in France and Japan. This framework depends on equity since all sides get due representation and it does not back off the improvement of new political parties. In France, all political parties were allowed to contest for political posts giving fair opportunities for all the political parties in the country regardless of the popularity in the nation. Another arrangement of the corresponding portrayal is the List System. As per it, the whole country gets separated into substantial voting public, and sometimes the entire nation is considered as one electorate. As indicated by this arrangement all competitors are assembled in the rundowns as shown by their gathering marks and each group offers a rundown of hopefuls up to the total number of seats to fill in for every voting demographic. The numbers of votes which are secured by the individual applicants get moderate consideration as votes for the rundown, and this has worked to favor the minority. In Japan, a subsidy system for political parties where the government would allocate 250 yen per person supported the parties with minority population as it enhanced their funding during campaigns as well as encouraging transparency in these parties. The electoral systems in both countries give a chance for free and fair elections that mean one with majority votes wins and this benefits the political parties with majority support. However, the different frameworks in place consider the minority too.
In summation then, the countries in discussion both have stable electoral processes that uphold principles of democracy needed to govern their constituents. There is an actual difference in the structures of government. Japan is the dynasty head which approves the involvement of its citizens in electing leaders while France both have a president and a prime minister as heads of state and government. The political arena is a free space that accommodates parties to represent their members regardless of size and popularity.
References
Osaka City, Election Administration Commission. (2005). City.osaka.lg.jp. Retrieved 5 March 2017, from http://www.city.osaka.lg.jp/contents/wdu020/senkyo/english/
