Qatar vs South Sudan: Free and Fair Elections Index

Qatar
0
in 2025
South Sudan
0
in 2025
Qatar rank
157th
South Sudan rank
157th

Free and Fair Elections Index over time

  • Qatar
  • South Sudan
00.10.20.30.40.5182119232025

How they compare

Qatar currently reports 0 against 0 in South Sudan, a difference of 0.

The two have swapped places 2 times across 126 shared years of data; in 1900 it was South Sudan ahead.

Qatar ranks 157th and South Sudan ranks 157th of 176 countries.

Across the 13 decades both report, Qatar averaged higher in 1 and South Sudan in 8.

Head to head by decade

Decade Qatar South Sudan Difference Ahead
1900s 0 0 0 β€”
1910s 0 0 0 β€”
1920s 0 0 0 β€”
1930s 0 0 0 β€”
1940s 0 0.0121 0.0121 South Sudan
1950s 0 0.174 0.174 South Sudan
1960s 0 0.0199 0.0199 South Sudan
1970s 0 0.1148 0.1148 South Sudan
1980s 0 0.159 0.159 South Sudan
1990s 0 0.021 0.021 South Sudan
2000s 0 0.0551 0.0551 South Sudan
2010s 0 0.0104 0.0104 South Sudan
2020s 0.223 0 0.223 Qatar

Averages of every year both report within each decade.

Frequently asked questions

Which has higher free and fair elections index, Qatar or South Sudan?
Qatar, at 0 against 0 in South Sudan as of 2025.
What is the difference in free and fair elections index between Qatar and South Sudan?
0, with Qatar ahead.
How many years of comparable data are there for Qatar and South Sudan?
126 years are reported by both, from 1900 to 2025.
How do Qatar and South Sudan rank globally for free and fair elections index?
Qatar ranks 157th and South Sudan ranks 157th of 176 countries.
Where does this data come from?
V-Dem (2026) – processed by Our World in Data, published as Free and Fair Elections Index. Statizoid refreshes it automatically from the source and publishes the full history for both places.

Individual pages

About this data

Indicator
Free and Fair Elections Index
Source
V-Dem (2026) – processed by Our World in Data
Licence
CC BY 4.0 (Our World in Data)
Coverage
176 places, 30,402 data points, 1789–2025
Last refreshed

Central estimate of the extent to which registration fraud, systematic irregularities, government intimidation of the opposition, vote buying, and election violence are absent, and the election management body is autonomous and has enough staff and resources.