1. DIRECT AND INDIRECT ELECTIONS
Political science
(Prof. Ijaz Butt)

2. ELECTIONS:
• An election is a formal decision
making process by which a
population chooses an individual to
hold public office.

3. TYPES OF ELECTIONS:
• Direct elections
• Indirect elections

4. DIRECT ELECTIONS:
• Direct election is a term describing a system of
choosing political officeholders in which the
voters directly cast ballots for the person,
persons or political party that they desire to see
elected.
• Examples of directly elected bodies are the
European parliament (since 1979) and
the United States Senate (since 1917).

5. ADVANTAGES OF DIRECT ELECTIONS:
• The major advantage of direct election of
representatives is that it guarantees the
people have the ultimate choice in who is
going to represent their voice. This helps
ensure that the citizens know exactly who
is representing them.

6. INDIRECT ELECTIONS:
• An indirect election is an election in which
individual citizen’s vote for electors who will
select a candidate. In other words, they don't
vote for the candidate directly, choosing instead
to put the decision in the hands of others.
Indirect elections are used in a number of ways
in nations around the world, and, historically,
indirect elections were extremely common.

7. • Several nations elect their heads of state through the process of
indirect election, including
•  Pakistan
•  India
•  Turkey
•  Hungary,
•  Israel,
•  Switzerland,
•  Germany,
•  Italy,

8. ADVANTAGES OF INDIRECT ELECTIONS:
• It is generally argued that comparatively better
persons can be returned through indirect election,
• As the ultimate and the direct responsibility of elections
lies in few selected persons , best fitted to this task
while indirect election, clever politician can exploit the
masses through making emotional appeals . it is
difficult to mislead few wise people who feel full sense
of responsibility and consider them accountable
popular will .

9. DISADVANTAGES OF INDIRECT ELECTIONS:
• Indirect system of election is regarded contradictory to the spirit of democracy . the arguments
presented in its support are unsound and mainly theoretical . the success of the whole
electorate process , in fact , depends on the attitude of the primary voters . even if it is
assumed that primary voters are incapable in respect of the correct use of right . logically it
would also be incorrect to rely on their choice regarding the election of members of electorate
college. If the members of electorate college are elected through the usTo deprived of the
electorate of directly electing their representatives , carries more dangers.It is more difficult to
mobilize all people in regard to their choice of candidates on unsound basis whereas a small
group of persons can easily be pressurized to cast vote in favor of particular candidate. In case
of electorate college is formed for the specific and temporary task of merely electing the
candidates. The chances of political corruption are increased. Misuse of this right would cost
them nothing except the risk that the voters may not elect them in future, for which they care a
little.
• The arguments presented by the critics of direct election, regarding the incapability of the
primary voters, are not valid. At present , political parties educate the masses and are most
effective channel of political socialization .
• e of foul methods , the very purpose of indirect elections gets flopped.

10. • More over , under a system of indirect democracy . the emergence of political parties is
inevitable.
• People generally cast their votes in the favour of political parties and not that of individual
candidates. The very purpose of putting any intermediary body between the voters and
their deputies, therefor , gives no sense.
• Indirect elections have the flaw of impairing the self-respect and sense of responsibility of
the voters .