Are the Suggested Changes of the Parliamentary Election Act in Conformity with the Constitution?

The suggested electoral system, absurdly called “balancing” d’Hondt formula and 35 small districts, which would produce disproportional results, is considered by its authors to be a type of proportional representation. The comparison shows this system is more disproportional than the British plurality formula. But such electoral system is inconsistent with the Constitution. The Constitutional court issued some judgments which prefer the principle of natural differentiation over the principle of purposeful integration because the first one is a matter of Art. 22 of The Charter of fundamental rights and liberties. The governmental bill contradicts the principle of natural differentiation, opposes the system of proportional representation and limits the free competition of political powers. In my opinion and with regard to the upper mentioned judgments the suggested integrative stimuli will be considered to be repugnant to the Constitution.