The Role of Emigrants in Shaping Home Country Legislation on Voting Rights for Non-resident Citizens: A Bottom up Approach

Within the growing global trend towards the extension of voting rights to non-resident citizens or ‘expatriates’, some states are introducing ‘special representation’ for emigrant voters through extra-territorial constituencies. This type of representation contrasts with the more common model of incorporating emigrant votes into existing national constituencies. Normative debate has highlighted the relative merits of both approaches and their potential for influencing electoral outcomes. Empirical research suggests that the choice of model by enfranchising states is determined largely by anticipated political gains by dominant parties, as well as economic interests. The question of how emigrant citizens may be best represented from their perspective is marginalised in this ‘top down’ approach. Yet given the documented decline in turnout amongst expatriate populations, this question surely deserves attention: individuals’ perceptions of a vote’s utility are important in determining voter participation and can be significantly conditioned by electoral systems. This paper proposes a ‘bottom up’ analysis of the perceived advantages and disadvantages of both models for non-resident citizens, through a case study of British and French citizens resident abroad, responding to on-line surveys and semi-structured interviews. Whereas France grants ‘votes for life’ and has 11 extra-territorial constituencies, the UK currently has a time-restricted franchise with votes counting in the previous constituency of registration. However, a proposed reform of ‘overseas’ voting offers opportunities for British expatriates to express their views: already, activists in France are lobbying for the French model. This model will however itself be re-evaluated in the context of forthcoming elections, when the new extra-territorial deputies reach the end of their first mandate. What role might emigrant citizens play in shaping policy outcomes on either side of the Channel?