Cambodia vs Kyrgyzstan: Men's universal right to vote
Cambodia
1
in 2025
Kyrgyzstan
1
in 2025
Cambodia rank
1st
Kyrgyzstan rank
1st
Men's universal right to vote over time
- Cambodia
- Kyrgyzstan
How they compare
Cambodia currently reports 1 against 1 in Kyrgyzstan, a difference of 0.
Across all 158 years both countries report, Kyrgyzstan has been ahead every year.
Cambodia ranks 1st and Kyrgyzstan ranks 1st of 197 countries.
Kyrgyzstan has averaged higher in every one of the 17 decades both report.
Head to head by decade
| Decade | Cambodia | Kyrgyzstan | Difference | Ahead |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1860s | 0 | 0 | 0 | — |
| 1870s | 0 | 0 | 0 | — |
| 1880s | 0 | 0 | 0 | — |
| 1890s | 0 | 0 | 0 | — |
| 1900s | 0 | 0.5 | 0.5 | Kyrgyzstan |
| 1910s | 0 | 1 | 1 | Kyrgyzstan |
| 1920s | 0 | 1 | 1 | Kyrgyzstan |
| 1930s | 0 | 1 | 1 | Kyrgyzstan |
| 1940s | 0 | 1 | 1 | Kyrgyzstan |
| 1950s | 0.4 | 1 | 0.6 | Kyrgyzstan |
| 1960s | 1 | 1 | 0 | — |
| 1970s | 1 | 1 | 0 | — |
| 1980s | 1 | 1 | 0 | — |
| 1990s | 1 | 1 | 0 | — |
| 2000s | 1 | 1 | 0 | — |
| 2010s | 1 | 1 | 0 | — |
| 2020s | 1 | 1 | 0 | — |
Averages of every year both report within each decade.
Frequently asked questions
- Which has higher men's universal right to vote, Cambodia or Kyrgyzstan?
- Cambodia, at 1 against 1 in Kyrgyzstan as of 2025.
- What is the difference in men's universal right to vote between Cambodia and Kyrgyzstan?
- 0, with Cambodia ahead.
- How many years of comparable data are there for Cambodia and Kyrgyzstan?
- 158 years are reported by both, from 1868 to 2025.
- How do Cambodia and Kyrgyzstan rank globally for men's universal right to vote?
- Cambodia ranks 1st and Kyrgyzstan ranks 1st of 197 countries.
- Where does this data come from?
- Lexical Index (2026) – processed by Our World in Data, published as Men's universal right to vote. Statizoid refreshes it automatically from the source and publishes the full history for both places.
Individual pages
About this data
Indicates whether all men are allowed to vote in national elections. It neither considers informal restrictions nor legal restrictions based on age, criminal conviction, disability, and local residency.