With parliamentary elections coming up in 2013, most politicians have started the age-old debate on what next year's electoral law will be. With little agreement on an appropriate electoral law for the country, Lebanese politicians engage in political bickering every election cycle until they finally reach a political settlement on the type of law that will be adopted. Next year, it seems, will be no different.

In late 2011, discussion began in parliament surrounding a new electoral law that would see Lebanon's parliamentary elections shift from a winner-takes-all to a proportional representation system. The discussion came at the behest of Interior Minister Marwan Charbel and gained the support of President Michel Suleiman and Prime Minister Najib Mikati. It is different from the law put forward by the Butrus Committee in 2005, however, in that it allows preferential voting and doesn't mandate an independent election committee necessary to ensure the integrity of elections. It is not clear, at this point, whether this law will gain enough support to be adopted next year.

For one, Progressive Socialist Party chief Walid Jumblatt vehemently opposed it, threatening to withdraw his ministers from the cabinet if a system of proportional representation is approved. Jumblatt leans toward the current winner-takes-all system, an amended version of the pre-civil war 1960 legislation, similar to the one used in 2009. The 1960 version adopts the administrative unit of the qada, diving the country into small electoral districts which give more weight to the country's minority communities. Under Charbel's law, however, Lebanon would be divided into 10 to 14 medium sized districts that are larger than the current qada system.

Opponents of the 1960 law have claimed that political parties have used the winner takes all system to impose their political will, while a system of proportional representation would be more democratic. Sources indicate that President Suleiman is supporting the law as it would allow his candidates in Jbeil and Kesrouan a chance to defeat candidates loyal to Michel Aoun, head of the Free Patriotic Movement. Indeed, Suleiman's son in law has reportedly begun campaigning in the northern district of Kesrouan.

While not a supporter of the 1960 law, Hezbollah has not pushed the issue in the cabinet. Given the divisive nature of the debate even among March 8 allies themselves, Hezbollah chose to take the back seat in order to avoid a potential collapse of the government over this law.

The March 14 coalition said that it is engaged in "internal discussions" and hinted that it will not endorse the Charbel draft if it curbs the influence of Jumblatt, a political attempt to strengthen relationships between the two parties. March 14 leaders are also hesitant to see its Shia adversaries gain seats in it their traditional areas of control. The Future Movement has states that it is opposed to proportional representation as long as Hezbollah maintains its weapons, as they believe Hezbollah will dominate the Shia vote, whereas the Sunni vote will be splintered.

In light of these political allegiances and despite the heated debate, it is unlikely that the conversation will amount to any real reform. At this time, too few politicians are committed to a process that would reflect honest, just representation of the Lebanese people. Advocates of a secular system are few and far between, and that fight is often too politically costly for most politicians (especially before election time). Until leaders demonstrate leadership and will to take on the issue and fight for a just and secular system that is not subject to partisan interests, all the new laws will bring to Lebanon more of the same.