Indonesia vs Zimbabwe: Men's universal right to vote

Indonesia
1
in 2025
Zimbabwe
1
in 2025
Indonesia rank
1st
Zimbabwe rank
1st

Men's universal right to vote over time

  • Indonesia
  • Zimbabwe
00.20.40.60.81180019122025

How they compare

Indonesia currently reports 1 against 1 in Zimbabwe, a difference of 0.

The two have swapped places 2 times across 131 shared years of data; in 1895 it was Zimbabwe ahead.

Indonesia ranks 1st and Zimbabwe ranks 1st of 197 countries.

Indonesia has averaged higher in every one of the 14 decades both report.

Head to head by decade

Decade Indonesia Zimbabwe Difference Ahead
1890s 0 0 0 β€”
1900s 0 0 0 β€”
1910s 0 0 0 β€”
1920s 0 0 0 β€”
1930s 0 0 0 β€”
1940s 0 0 0 β€”
1950s 0.7 0 0.7 Indonesia
1960s 1 0 1 Indonesia
1970s 1 0.1 0.9 Indonesia
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, Indonesia or Zimbabwe?
Indonesia, at 1 against 1 in Zimbabwe as of 2025.
What is the difference in men's universal right to vote between Indonesia and Zimbabwe?
0, with Indonesia ahead.
How many years of comparable data are there for Indonesia and Zimbabwe?
131 years are reported by both, from 1895 to 2025.
How do Indonesia and Zimbabwe rank globally for men's universal right to vote?
Indonesia ranks 1st and Zimbabwe 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.