non ECC 2550

Morten Reistad

I've heard lawyers talking about how to get concise and precise wording in statutes where what is really needed is a mathematical formula - i.e where the code *is* the law. We have actually come quite close to this. The NZ Electoral Act contains good algorithmic language. We use an MMP system of Proportional Representation, very similar to Germany.

Here's an extract from the legislaton:

(2)The Chief Electoral Officer shall first ascertain from the information given under section 179(1)(a) the total number of all the party votes received by each of the parties listed on the part of the ballot paper that relates to the party vote. (3)The Chief Electoral Officer shall enter those totals in separate columns under the name of each party in a working sheet in the manner prescribed in form 15.

snip of part relating to disregarding minor parties who don't make the threshold

(5)The Chief Electoral Officer shall then proceed to divide each of the remaining totals successively by a series of numbers beginning with 1, 3, 5, 7, 9, 11, 13 and thereafter by every odd number as may be necessary to ensure that the number of seats required to be allocated by this section and sections 192 and 193 of this Act are allocated. (6)The quotient of each successive division shall be recorded on the working sheet. (7)Once the quotient of each successive division is entered on the working sheet, the Chief Electoral Officer shall then proceed to ascertain from a comparison of all the figures in the working sheet in form 15 listed under the heading ``Quotients of Divisions'', the highest 120 quotients or such lower number as is required by subsection (8) of this section.

There is more, dealing with unusual cases and with ties. This is quite readable, and yet apparently unambiguous.

--brian

-- "What's life? Life's easy. A quirk of matter. Nature's way of keeping meat fresh."