• Romeo ASIMINEI PhD, Teaching Assistant, “Alexandru Ioan Cuza” University of Iasi, Faculty of Philosophy and Social-Political Sciences, Department of Sociology and Social Work, Iasi, Bd. Carol I, Nr. 11, 700506


Electoral representation, Electoral System, Systemic disproportionality, Fabricated majority, Artificial minority


Since 2003 and especially in 2007 and 2008, civil society and political parties launches extensive discussions aimed at reforming the electoral system. The stake of reform is to strengthen the ties between MPs and the communities they represent. Discussions and negotiations taking place in a frmawork describeed by the public perception that MPs not really stand for the community that has given the mandate, the MPs being formally elected on party closed lists proposed at constituency level (county). In this context, the article aims to conduct a brief analysis of the results achieved by the first two elections of “uninominal” (actually a Mixed Member Proportional with an absolute majority in first stage and a proportional compensate system for the remaining seats in proportion to the compensation, with voting constituencies) on parliamentary elections in November 2008 and parliamentary elections in December 2012. Article assesses the impact of the new electoral system by following three dimensions: (1) the rank from which parliamentary seats were won, (2) the degree of systemic disproportionality and (3) the distribution of of MPs in the proportion of newly elected MPs, distribution categories according to their age and gender. The article is based on a secondary analysis of data available to the Central Electoral Commission, the Institute for National Statistics, the Institute for Public Policy, Lower House and Upper House. One of the conclusions is that although changing the electoral system, with the adoption “uninominal” vote brought a renewal of parliament, however, the most important positions have been filled in both legislative by re-elected MPs.


Central Electoral Bureau (2007). Referendumul national privind introducerea votului uninominal, www.becreferendum2007vu.ro [accessed February 12, 2013].

Central Electoral Bureau (2008). Alegeri pentru Lower House si Upper House,www.becparlamentare2008.ro [accessed February 12, 2013].

Central Electoral Bureau (2012). Alegeri pentru autoritãtile administratiei publice locale. www.beclocale2012.ro [accessed February 12, 2013].

Coman, C. (2004). Comportamentul de vot: sondajele de opinie si gestiunea campaniilor electorale. Bucuresti: Editura Economicã.

Institute for National Statistics (2013). Baza de date statistice TEMPO-Online.www.insse.ro [accessed February 24, 2013].

Institute for Public Policy (2009). Pe cine am ales „uninominal”? www.ipp.ro [accessed February 25, 2013]

International Institute for Democracy and Electoral Assistance (2008). Electoral System Design: The New International IDEA Handbook. www.idea.int [accessed January 19, 2013].

Lijphart, A. (2006). Modele ale democratiei. Forme de guvernare si functionare în treizeci si sase de tãri, Iasi: Polirom.

Lower House, Romanian Parliament. www.cdep.ro [accessed February 15, 2013].

Popa, C. (2009). „Distributia mandatelor la alegerile parlamentare din noiembrie 2008” în Perspective politice, No. Decembrie 2009.

Pro Democracy Association (2008). Istoria unui dezacord: Uninominalul. www.apd.ro [accessed January 18, 2013].

Teodorescu, G. (Ed.) (2009). Alegeri 2008: Continuitate si schimbare. Volumul 2. Iasi: Polirom.

Upper House, Romanian Parliament. www.senat.ro [accessed January 15, 2013].

Additional Files