Rwanda vs Sao Tome and Principe: Men's universal right to vote
Rwanda
1
in 2025
Sao Tome and Principe
1
in 2025
Rwanda rank
1st
Sao Tome and Principe rank
1st
Men's universal right to vote over time
- Rwanda
- Sao Tome and Principe
How they compare
Rwanda currently reports 1 against 1 in Sao Tome and Principe, a difference of 0.
The two have swapped places 2 times across 110 shared years of data; in 1916 it was Sao Tome and Principe ahead.
Rwanda ranks 1st and Sao Tome and Principe ranks 1st of 197 countries.
Rwanda has averaged higher in every one of the 12 decades both report.
Head to head by decade
| Decade | Rwanda | Sao Tome and Principe | Difference | Ahead |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1910s | 0 | 0 | 0 | — |
| 1920s | 0 | 0 | 0 | — |
| 1930s | 0 | 0 | 0 | — |
| 1940s | 0 | 0 | 0 | — |
| 1950s | 0 | 0 | 0 | — |
| 1960s | 0.9 | 0 | 0.9 | Rwanda |
| 1970s | 1 | 0.5 | 0.5 | Rwanda |
| 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, Rwanda or Sao Tome and Principe?
- Rwanda, at 1 against 1 in Sao Tome and Principe as of 2025.
- What is the difference in men's universal right to vote between Rwanda and Sao Tome and Principe?
- 0, with Rwanda ahead.
- How many years of comparable data are there for Rwanda and Sao Tome and Principe?
- 110 years are reported by both, from 1916 to 2025.
- How do Rwanda and Sao Tome and Principe rank globally for men's universal right to vote?
- Rwanda ranks 1st and Sao Tome and Principe 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.