The National Assembly approves changes to electoral laws amid political tensions and internal negotiations.
The National Assembly of Ecuador, convening in Quito on June 20, 2025, passed significant reforms to the Code of Democracy. The changes, which included alterations to the electoral process and party regulations, were approved with 125 votes in favor, drawing support from the ruling National Democratic Action (ADN) party, Correísmo, and the Pachakutik faction. The reforms come at a critical time for the Ecuadorian political landscape as the country seeks to address ongoing electoral challenges.
Controversial Change in Seat Allocation
One of the most contentious aspects of the reforms was the proposed change in the method for allocating seats in the National Assembly. The new legislation proposes replacing the Webster method with the D’Hondt system, a move that has sparked heated debate within Ecuador’s political sphere.
The Webster method, used in the last Ecuadorian elections, is a mathematical formula designed to allocate seats in proportion to the votes each party receives. In simple terms, it works by dividing the total number of votes for each party by a series of divisors, aiming to distribute seats more equitably among parties based on their actual vote share. While it is intended to ensure fairness, the method can sometimes lead to underrepresentation of smaller parties, especially when the electoral threshold is high.
In contrast, the D’Hondt system, which was proposed in the new reforms, also allocates seats proportionally but favors larger parties. It does so by dividing the total number of votes by a set of divisors in a way that gives larger parties a better chance of securing additional seats. This system is often criticized for strengthening the position of hegemonic parties, as it disproportionately rewards parties with more substantial vote shares. The D’Hondt method has been widely used in many European countries and is often seen as less favorable to smaller political groups.
The switch from Webster to D’Hondt has generated considerable backlash, particularly from smaller political organizations. The Social Christian Party (PSC), among others, voiced strong opposition, arguing that the D’Hondt system would severely limit the representation of smaller parties and consolidate power within the larger political blocs, such as Correísmo and the ruling ADN faction.
The debate over the seat allocation mechanism sparked significant tension, even within the majority bloc. Legislators from Pachakutik, who typically align with the government, expressed concerns that the D’Hondt method would exacerbate their party’s declining support in the electorate, potentially leading to their exclusion from future Assemblies.
Political Reforms and Further Provisions
Following a three-hour recess, marked by behind-the-scenes negotiations between ADN and the Pachakutik faction, the Assembly ultimately passed the reforms. Rosa Torres, an ADN legislator who chairs the Justice Committee, defended the changes, arguing that the reforms were necessary to “cleanse” Ecuador’s political landscape. Torres stated that the proposed amendments would address the proliferation of “paper parties,” movements that fail to garner sufficient electoral support and do not contribute meaningfully to the political process.
Under the new rules, any political party or movement that fails to secure at least 5% of the valid votes in an election will be dissolved. Torres also highlighted the strengthened mechanisms for political financing controls, including the establishment of an anti-money laundering unit to collaborate with the Ecuadorian Financial Analysis Unit (UAFE). These provisions aim to improve transparency and reduce the influence of illicit money in the political system.
The Road to Approval
The voting process was not without its challenges. The bill was initially proposed in two blocs, with one bloc addressing the majority of the reforms and another dealing with the more contentious articles. Articles 13 and 35, which would have allowed elected officials to seek other political positions without resigning and reduced penalties for certain electoral violations, faced opposition. Neither Correísmo nor ADN supported these articles, prompting Assemblywoman Torres to call for a suspension in order to amend the proposal.
Despite these setbacks, the final vote went ahead, and the reforms were passed, with both ADN and Correísmo maintaining their alignment on the key changes to the electoral system. The passing of the reforms represents a significant victory for the ruling parties, but it also highlights the ongoing tensions within the Assembly as political factions seek to solidify their influence in Ecuador’s rapidly changing electoral environment.
So, Corresimos loose the election so they figure out another way to control parts of the government by getting rid of choice among voters.