That doesn't solve the issue of a Malicious party threatening the governance of the network... What do makes sense to me is that one party is capable of voting for a non determinant number of witnesses... What non determinant means? Well for preventing a hardfork you need 4/20, then each account must not be able to vote more than 3 witnesses to prevent that in the scenario some urgent update on the code is necessary no party could hold the network at ransom as the Koreans did.
Also, this voting proportion make it more expensive to push 11 witnesses into top 20 spots (I was told that this is the number needed to run a softfork).
Yes, I picked 10 because it is a nice number, but anything between 4 and 16 makes an attack quite expensive.