Criteria specifying fairness for minority groups within a country focus on the electoral outcome, rather than the process, of redistricting. Electoral systems that rely on single-member districts, however, cannot guarantee proportional representation or even some minimal percentage of seats for ethnic, racial, religious or other minority groups in the population. This is particularly true of electoral systems that rely solely on single-member districts for the election of representatives (i.e., FPTP and AV systems). On the other hand, List PR and Mixed systems – such as Parallel and MMP systems – can accommodate requirements for minority representation within the context of the party lists if so desired.

In districted systems, voters of a specific minority group will find it very difficult to elect members of their group to legislative office if voting is polarized along majority-minority lines. Only if separate seats are reserved for this minority group, or if special electoral districts are drawn for the group, will minority voters succeed in electing minority representatives. A few countries have made such special provisions to ensure that racial, ethnic, or religious minorities are represented in the legislature. Examples of these countries include Croatia, Fiji, India, Mauritius, New Zealand, Pakistan, the Palestinian Territories, Papua New Guinea, Singapore, and the United States.

Croatia, which has a List PR electoral system with electoral districts that are not typically redrawn, reserves specific districts for members of the (1) Hungarian, (2) Czech and Slovak, and (3) Ruthenian and Ukrainian and German and Austrian minorities. In addition, three seats are specifically reserved for the Serbian minority within the Republic of Croatia.

In the Block Vote (or Party Block Vote) systems of Mauritius, Singapore, and the Palestinian Territories, a number of seats are reserved for minorities:

• Singapore – Most members of parliament are elected through a “Party Block Vote” in multimember Group Representative Constituencies (GRCs). Parties contesting a GRC must propose a slate that includes at least one member of an official minority (listed as Indian, Malay, Eurasian, or Other). Within the GRCs, voters select from among closed party lists, with the party receiving a plurality of votes winning all seats in the district.
• Mauritius – In addition to the 62 representatives elected from 21 multimember constituencies, there are a maximum of eight additional seats allocated to the “best losers.” These “best loser” seats are apportioned among four constitutionally recognized ethnic or religions communities (Hindus, Muslims, Chinese, and “Creole”) to ensure some representation for each of these minority groups.
• Palestinian Territories – The West Bank and Gaza Strip are divided into 16 multimember electoral districts. In the 1996 elections, the political party obtaining the greatest number of votes in each district took all the seats allocated to the district. Six seats across four districts (Jerusalem, Bethlehem, Ramallah, and Gaza) were reserved for the Christian population; one seat (in the Nablus district) was set aside for the Samaritans.

India and Pakistan, both with FPTP electoral systems, have specifically reserved single-member districts to ensure the representation of certain minorities:

• Pakistan – There are three categories of seats in the National Assembly: (1) 272 general seats; (2) 60 seats reserved for women; and (3) 10 seats reserved for non-Muslims (Hindus, Christians, and others). Representatives of the general seats are elected by simple majority on the basis of 272 single-member constituencies. The seats reserved for women are filled on the basis of a proportional representation system based on the number of general seats won by each political party by province. The seats reserved for non-Muslims are filled under the same proportional representation system, except that the entire country constitutes a single constituency. Both women and non-Muslim candidates are chosen from closed lists filed by the political parties.
• India – A certain number of parliamentary constituencies in each state are reserved for members of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes based on their proportion of the total state population. In reserved constituencies, only candidates from these communities can stand for election. These reserved constituencies shift from one election to the next. In total, there are 79 parliamentary seats reserved for scheduled Castes, and 41 seats for Scheduled Tribes.

Fiji and Papua New Guinea, each with Alternative Vote systems, have separate sets of communal seats to guarantee representation of the major ethnic groups. In Fiji, for example, the 71 legislative constituencies are comprised of 46 “communal” constituencies and 25 “open” constituencies (where all eligible voters, regardless of race/ethnicity, caste votes), with the “communal” members elected as follows:

• 23 elected from a roll of voters registered as indigenous Fijians, 19 elected from a roll of voters registered as Indians, one elected from a roll of voters registered as Rotumans, and * three elected from a roll of voters not registered as Fijians, Indians, or Rotumans (this is the “general voters” roll).

Minority Representation in the United States

The United States, because of its sizeable racial and ethnic minority population and its history of discrimination against certain minority groups, has had to address the issue of fairness to minorities in promulgating redistricting plans. The Voting Rights Act of 1965 and its amendments in 1982 have established that a redistricting plan that dilutes the voting strength of minority voters by dividing the minority community among different districts may be invalid. Protected minority groups (blacks, Hispanics, Asians, and Native Americans) must meet three conditions to qualify for this protection:

• the group must be sufficiently large and geographically compact to form a majority in a single-member district; the group must be politically cohesive (they must share common political interests); the group must be able to demonstrate that the majority population votes as a bloc against the minority community's preferred candidates and that the minority-preferred candidates usually lose.

If a minority group is able to satisfy all three of these conditions, a redistricting plan must be fashioned such that minority voters constitute a majority of voters in one or more districts. The minority community must demonstrate that these conditions are satisfied in a court proceeding. In fact, in a series of recent court decisions, the U.S. Supreme Court held that several jurisdictions that created "majority minority" districts voluntarily--that is, without being required by a court to do so--must redraw these "majority minority" districts without taking race or ethnicity into account.

The Voting Rights Act guarantees racial and ethnic fairness in some minimal sense in the United States. It is minimal because only minority communities that are able to satisfy all three of the conditions are given an opportunity to form the majority of a district and elect a candidate of choice. Blacks, Hispanics, Asians, and Native Americans are far from proportionally represented in the United States Congress. The minority community in New Zealand is better represented in the legislature because of a more effective provision.

Minority Representation in New Zealand

A unique feature of New Zealand's electoral system is a provision for representation of the descendants of New Zealand's aboriginal Maori population. In addition to sixty general legislative districts, the Representation Commission creates several Maori districts (five Maori districts were created in 1993, six in 1998, and seven in 2001, for example). These Maori districts are geographically defined and overlay the general electoral districts. To vote in a Maori district, rather than a general election district, a Maori voter must register on the Maori roll. Registration on this roll is optional; Maoris can choose to register on the general roll instead. Because of this electoral feature, Maoris have been represented in the legislature roughly in proportion to their percentage of the population for more than a decade. (See the case study on New Zealand, Electoral Redistribution in New Zealand, for a more detailed description of this provision.)

Conclusion

Countries that delimit single-member districts cannot guarantee proportional representation to minority political parties or to minority groups within their borders, at least not without special provisions or additional seats elected by a party list vote. Instead, redistricting criteria may be adopted to ensure a fair and impartial redistricting process. Although this will not necessarily produce proportional, or even minimal, representation for minority parties or groups, it does guarantee that any bias is unintentional.

Countries with deep racial, ethnic or religious divisions usually opt for some form of proportional representation rather than relying on single-member districts to elect representatives. Unless the minority group is geographically concentrated or special provisions for minority representation are adopted, the election outcome produced by single-member districts will benefit some groups at the expense of others. In a deeply divided country, this fact may well lead to instability rather than foster strong and stable governments.