Central African Republic vs Israel: Men's universal right to vote

Central African Republic
1
in 2025
Israel
1
in 2025
Central African Republic rank
1st
Israel rank
1st

Men's universal right to vote over time

  • Central African Republic
  • Israel
00.20.40.60.81189419592025

How they compare

Central African Republic currently reports 1 against 1 in Israel, a difference of 0.

Across all 78 years both countries report, Israel has been ahead every year.

Central African Republic ranks 1st and Israel ranks 1st of 197 countries.

Israel has averaged higher in every one of the 9 decades both report.

Head to head by decade

Decade Central African Republic Israel Difference Ahead
1940s 0 0.5 0.5 Israel
1950s 0.3 1 0.7 Israel
1960s 1 1 0 β€”
1970s 1 1 0 β€”
1980s 1 1 0 β€”
1990s 1 1 0 β€”
2000s 1 1 0 β€”
2010s 1 1 0 β€”
2020s 1 1 0 β€”

Averages of every year both report within each decade.

Frequently asked questions

Which has higher men's universal right to vote, Central African Republic or Israel?
Central African Republic, at 1 against 1 in Israel as of 2025.
What is the difference in men's universal right to vote between Central African Republic and Israel?
0, with Central African Republic ahead.
How many years of comparable data are there for Central African Republic and Israel?
78 years are reported by both, from 1948 to 2025.
How do Central African Republic and Israel rank globally for men's universal right to vote?
Central African Republic ranks 1st and Israel 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

Indicator
Men's universal right to vote
Source
Lexical Index (2026) – processed by Our World in Data
Licence
CC BY 4.0 (Our World in Data)
Coverage
198 places, 32,485 data points, 1789–2025
Last refreshed

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.