Pub Date : 2023-12-15DOI: 10.1177/18681034231219460
Sebastian Dettman
In authoritarian systems, ethnic power-sharing arrangements include important ethnic groups in government and decision-making while putting restraints on political competition. However, under conditions of democratization, we might expect power-sharing arrangements to fragment as political parties seize opportunities to expand their base and appeal across ethnic lines. This article draws from the case of Malaysia, where multiethnic coalitions built around ethnic parties ruled for 61 years but where increasing electoral competitiveness has destabilized coalition politics. I focus on the Democratic Action Party (DAP), one of the country's most successful parties, which has sought to build a more multiethnic support base. I show that its attempts have been stymied by enduring norms of ethnically informed coalition building and efforts to protect existing ethnic bases by both rivals and allies. The findings shed light on the barriers to ethnic party adaptation and on why power-sharing practices remain so enduring, even in more fluid and democratic political environments.
{"title":"Challenges of Ethnic Party Adaptation in Power-Sharing Systems: Evidence from Malaysia","authors":"Sebastian Dettman","doi":"10.1177/18681034231219460","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/18681034231219460","url":null,"abstract":"In authoritarian systems, ethnic power-sharing arrangements include important ethnic groups in government and decision-making while putting restraints on political competition. However, under conditions of democratization, we might expect power-sharing arrangements to fragment as political parties seize opportunities to expand their base and appeal across ethnic lines. This article draws from the case of Malaysia, where multiethnic coalitions built around ethnic parties ruled for 61 years but where increasing electoral competitiveness has destabilized coalition politics. I focus on the Democratic Action Party (DAP), one of the country's most successful parties, which has sought to build a more multiethnic support base. I show that its attempts have been stymied by enduring norms of ethnically informed coalition building and efforts to protect existing ethnic bases by both rivals and allies. The findings shed light on the barriers to ethnic party adaptation and on why power-sharing practices remain so enduring, even in more fluid and democratic political environments.","PeriodicalId":15424,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Current Southeast Asian Affairs","volume":"8 8","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.5,"publicationDate":"2023-12-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"139001184","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-11-26DOI: 10.1177/18681034231215813
Ki-Hyun Bae
This paper complements the limited scholarly interest in the case of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN)'s consistent practice of word–deed gaps, or “hypocrisy” according to some scholars, by employing the insights of organisational sociology. Specifically, it introduces a claim that the gap between ASEAN's words and deeds can be understood as an organisational response to its material and political vulnerability in relation to its major external stakeholders, aiming to ensure its survival and adaptability. Accommodating multiple, or sometimes even conflicting, demands from various external actors, ASEAN may be able to secure its material and diplomatic engagement in developmental and political regionalism within Southeast Asia. However, ASEAN also wants to protect its local identity and practices; or it may want to avoid forced internal reforms at an undesirable scale and pace. In this context, organised hypocrisy would likely become a vital consideration for the complex institution. For ASEAN, this paper notes, these word–deed gaps reflect the way it wants to manage conflicting external demands as an international social agency.
{"title":"Enduring Hypocrisy as an ASEAN's Organisational Problem?","authors":"Ki-Hyun Bae","doi":"10.1177/18681034231215813","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/18681034231215813","url":null,"abstract":"This paper complements the limited scholarly interest in the case of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN)'s consistent practice of word–deed gaps, or “hypocrisy” according to some scholars, by employing the insights of organisational sociology. Specifically, it introduces a claim that the gap between ASEAN's words and deeds can be understood as an organisational response to its material and political vulnerability in relation to its major external stakeholders, aiming to ensure its survival and adaptability. Accommodating multiple, or sometimes even conflicting, demands from various external actors, ASEAN may be able to secure its material and diplomatic engagement in developmental and political regionalism within Southeast Asia. However, ASEAN also wants to protect its local identity and practices; or it may want to avoid forced internal reforms at an undesirable scale and pace. In this context, organised hypocrisy would likely become a vital consideration for the complex institution. For ASEAN, this paper notes, these word–deed gaps reflect the way it wants to manage conflicting external demands as an international social agency.","PeriodicalId":15424,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Current Southeast Asian Affairs","volume":"1 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.5,"publicationDate":"2023-11-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"139235069","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-11-24DOI: 10.1177/18681034231214397
Jasmin Lorch
Scholarship on autocratisation has investigated the strategies of cooptation and repression that autocratic and autocratising regimes employ to maintain and enhance their power. However, it has barely explored how civil society reacts to these strategies. Concurrently, the existing research on civil society and social movements mostly suggests that civil society organisations (CSOs) will either resist autocratic repression or disband because of it, thereby often neglecting the possibility of CSOs’ adaptation to autocratic constraints. In this article, I seek to bridge these theoretical gaps with empirical evidence from Cambodia. I argue that for CSOs that operate in autocratic and autocratising regimes allowing themselves to become coopted by the regime can constitute a deliberate strategy to avoid repression, secure their survival, and exert social and political influence. However, while this strategy often seems to be effective in allowing CSOs to survive and escape large-scale repression, its success in enabling civil society to exert social and political influence remains limited, owing to structural limitations embedded in the autocratic context. Moreover, CSOs’ acceptance of cooptation often enhances divisions within civil society.
{"title":"Civil Society Between Repression and Cooptation: Adjusting to Shrinking Space in Cambodia","authors":"Jasmin Lorch","doi":"10.1177/18681034231214397","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/18681034231214397","url":null,"abstract":"Scholarship on autocratisation has investigated the strategies of cooptation and repression that autocratic and autocratising regimes employ to maintain and enhance their power. However, it has barely explored how civil society reacts to these strategies. Concurrently, the existing research on civil society and social movements mostly suggests that civil society organisations (CSOs) will either resist autocratic repression or disband because of it, thereby often neglecting the possibility of CSOs’ adaptation to autocratic constraints. In this article, I seek to bridge these theoretical gaps with empirical evidence from Cambodia. I argue that for CSOs that operate in autocratic and autocratising regimes allowing themselves to become coopted by the regime can constitute a deliberate strategy to avoid repression, secure their survival, and exert social and political influence. However, while this strategy often seems to be effective in allowing CSOs to survive and escape large-scale repression, its success in enabling civil society to exert social and political influence remains limited, owing to structural limitations embedded in the autocratic context. Moreover, CSOs’ acceptance of cooptation often enhances divisions within civil society.","PeriodicalId":15424,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Current Southeast Asian Affairs","volume":"87 6","pages":"395 - 420"},"PeriodicalIF":2.5,"publicationDate":"2023-11-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"139239129","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-11-07DOI: 10.1177/18681034231212488
Marco Bünte, Meredith L. Weiss
This paper introduces a special issue that examines civil society and democratic decline in Southeast Asia. Using the Philippines, Indonesia, Thailand, Myanmar, Malaysia, and Cambodia as case studies, the articles in the special issue examine often divergent reactions in civil society to increasing authoritarian pressures, diminishing political space, and increased repression. The paper at hand reviews the literature on concepts at the core of this inquiry, including civil society, backsliding, and diagonal accountability, and summarises the main findings of the special issue for Southeast Asia specifically and more broadly.
{"title":"Civil Society and Democratic Decline in Southeast Asia","authors":"Marco Bünte, Meredith L. Weiss","doi":"10.1177/18681034231212488","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/18681034231212488","url":null,"abstract":"This paper introduces a special issue that examines civil society and democratic decline in Southeast Asia. Using the Philippines, Indonesia, Thailand, Myanmar, Malaysia, and Cambodia as case studies, the articles in the special issue examine often divergent reactions in civil society to increasing authoritarian pressures, diminishing political space, and increased repression. The paper at hand reviews the literature on concepts at the core of this inquiry, including civil society, backsliding, and diagonal accountability, and summarises the main findings of the special issue for Southeast Asia specifically and more broadly.","PeriodicalId":15424,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Current Southeast Asian Affairs","volume":"23 11","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-11-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"135477557","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-11-01DOI: 10.1177/18681034231210313
Ilaiya Barathi Panneerselvam, Azmil Tayeb
This article argues that there are four conditions that create a conducive political climate allowing civil society and the media to hold the government accountable during the time of pandemic (2020–2021) i.e., the diagonal accountability: 1) the undemocratic formation of the Muhyiddin Yassin's government that lacked public mandate, which in turn made the government unstable and prone to political pressures; 2) the relative freedom of print and online media in reporting negative news concerning the government; 3) civil society's ability to find creative ways around pandemic restrictions to protest; and 4) socio-economic fallout from strict pandemic measures built up public resentment against the government and contributed to its unpopularity. Analyzed through the lens of political process model, and augmented by interviews with protest participants, the four conditions enable civil society and media to take advantage of the unstable political situation, namely in carving up democratic spaces amidst various restrictions imposed by the pandemic.
{"title":"Protesting in the Time of Pandemic: Diagonal Accountability, #KerajaanGagal, and Democratic Regression in Malaysia","authors":"Ilaiya Barathi Panneerselvam, Azmil Tayeb","doi":"10.1177/18681034231210313","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/18681034231210313","url":null,"abstract":"This article argues that there are four conditions that create a conducive political climate allowing civil society and the media to hold the government accountable during the time of pandemic (2020–2021) i.e., the diagonal accountability: 1) the undemocratic formation of the Muhyiddin Yassin's government that lacked public mandate, which in turn made the government unstable and prone to political pressures; 2) the relative freedom of print and online media in reporting negative news concerning the government; 3) civil society's ability to find creative ways around pandemic restrictions to protest; and 4) socio-economic fallout from strict pandemic measures built up public resentment against the government and contributed to its unpopularity. Analyzed through the lens of political process model, and augmented by interviews with protest participants, the four conditions enable civil society and media to take advantage of the unstable political situation, namely in carving up democratic spaces amidst various restrictions imposed by the pandemic.","PeriodicalId":15424,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Current Southeast Asian Affairs","volume":"54 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"135321286","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-10-30DOI: 10.1177/18681034231209504
Aries A Arugay, Justin Keith A Baquisal
The Philippines has historically been known to have one of the most robust and politically active civil societies in the world. With a deep affinity with democracy, civil society became a reliable bulwark against abuses of power and endemic corruption. However, it came under attack under the populist, illiberal Duterte administration (2016–2022) through intimidation, persecution, massive disinformation, and even outright violence. This article examines why Philippine civil society – despite its attempted pushback against democratic erosion – was generally neutralized by Duterte. Apart from its weakened state given polarizing elite conflicts in the 2000s, Duterte engaged in executive assaults against civil society through the four strategies of exploiting divisions within civil society; securitizing public; regulating civic space to weed out opposition voices; and controlling the media environment. This article concludes by examining the implications of a weakened civil society and prospects for its reinvigoration under a restored Marcos dynasty, which won the 2022 Philippine presidential elections.
{"title":"Bowed, Bent, & Broken: Duterte's Assaults on Civil Society in the Philippines","authors":"Aries A Arugay, Justin Keith A Baquisal","doi":"10.1177/18681034231209504","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/18681034231209504","url":null,"abstract":"The Philippines has historically been known to have one of the most robust and politically active civil societies in the world. With a deep affinity with democracy, civil society became a reliable bulwark against abuses of power and endemic corruption. However, it came under attack under the populist, illiberal Duterte administration (2016–2022) through intimidation, persecution, massive disinformation, and even outright violence. This article examines why Philippine civil society – despite its attempted pushback against democratic erosion – was generally neutralized by Duterte. Apart from its weakened state given polarizing elite conflicts in the 2000s, Duterte engaged in executive assaults against civil society through the four strategies of exploiting divisions within civil society; securitizing public; regulating civic space to weed out opposition voices; and controlling the media environment. This article concludes by examining the implications of a weakened civil society and prospects for its reinvigoration under a restored Marcos dynasty, which won the 2022 Philippine presidential elections.","PeriodicalId":15424,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Current Southeast Asian Affairs","volume":"239 ","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-10-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"136102859","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-10-26DOI: 10.1177/18681034231208467
Marco Bünte
Civil society scholarship has repeatedly warned of the dangers of uncivil society for young democracies. However, it remains unclear when and how uncivil society becomes an instrument of democratic backsliding. Using Thailand and Myanmar as its case studies, the article discusses the origins, ideology, and impact of several uncivil society groups, deepening our knowledge on the latter's role in democratic backsliding/breakdown. It argues that uncivil society can act as useful resource for conservative elites seeking to derail democratisation processes. Particularly in times of a perceived or manufactured national crisis, uncivil society successfully pursues illiberal agendas – often in tandem with established elites of the former regime. Also highlighted are the core mechanisms through which uncivil society leads to democratic backsliding/breakdown, as well as the long-term effects these movements have on the erosion of social trust and civility and the poisoning of inter-class or inter-religious relations.
{"title":"Uncivil Society and Democracy's Fate in Southeast Asia: Democratic Breakdown in Thailand, Increasing Illiberalism and Ethnic Cleansing in Myanmar","authors":"Marco Bünte","doi":"10.1177/18681034231208467","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/18681034231208467","url":null,"abstract":"Civil society scholarship has repeatedly warned of the dangers of uncivil society for young democracies. However, it remains unclear when and how uncivil society becomes an instrument of democratic backsliding. Using Thailand and Myanmar as its case studies, the article discusses the origins, ideology, and impact of several uncivil society groups, deepening our knowledge on the latter's role in democratic backsliding/breakdown. It argues that uncivil society can act as useful resource for conservative elites seeking to derail democratisation processes. Particularly in times of a perceived or manufactured national crisis, uncivil society successfully pursues illiberal agendas – often in tandem with established elites of the former regime. Also highlighted are the core mechanisms through which uncivil society leads to democratic backsliding/breakdown, as well as the long-term effects these movements have on the erosion of social trust and civility and the poisoning of inter-class or inter-religious relations.","PeriodicalId":15424,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Current Southeast Asian Affairs","volume":"131 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-10-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"135017574","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-10-23DOI: 10.1177/18681034231209058
Ken M. P. Setiawan, Dirk Tomsa
For the first two decades after the end of the authoritarian New Order regime, Indonesian civil society was widely hailed as a bulwark against elite attempts to roll back the country's democratic achievements. More recent assessments, however, have highlighted how polarisation, socio-religious conservatism and growing state repression have increasingly restricted civil society's ability to defend Indonesian democracy against further backsliding. In the face of these growing pressures, political activists have nonetheless demonstrated adaptability, resourcefulness and resilience, and, despite the narrowing space for dissent and protest, occasionally succeeded in halting and even reversing anti-democratic trends. In this article, we focus on two segments of civil society – women's rights groups and environmental activists – to illustrate under what circumstances progressive political activism in contemporary Indonesia can still be effective in upholding diagonal accountability and defending human rights.
{"title":"Defending a Vulnerable yet Resilient Democracy: Civil Society Activism in Jokowi's Indonesia","authors":"Ken M. P. Setiawan, Dirk Tomsa","doi":"10.1177/18681034231209058","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/18681034231209058","url":null,"abstract":"For the first two decades after the end of the authoritarian New Order regime, Indonesian civil society was widely hailed as a bulwark against elite attempts to roll back the country's democratic achievements. More recent assessments, however, have highlighted how polarisation, socio-religious conservatism and growing state repression have increasingly restricted civil society's ability to defend Indonesian democracy against further backsliding. In the face of these growing pressures, political activists have nonetheless demonstrated adaptability, resourcefulness and resilience, and, despite the narrowing space for dissent and protest, occasionally succeeded in halting and even reversing anti-democratic trends. In this article, we focus on two segments of civil society – women's rights groups and environmental activists – to illustrate under what circumstances progressive political activism in contemporary Indonesia can still be effective in upholding diagonal accountability and defending human rights.","PeriodicalId":15424,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Current Southeast Asian Affairs","volume":"53 9","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-10-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"135322739","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-10-19DOI: 10.1177/18681034231208021
Meredith L. Weiss
Predating but intensifying with the public health and economic crises COVID-19 sparked has been a political one, of democratic decline or autocratic consolidation, across much of Southeast Asia. Concerned actors and organisations from civil society have acted as firewalls against democratic decline or autocratisation, even as fellow civil society organisations (CSOs) have exerted countervailing, anti-democratic pressure. Indeed, CSOs may be no more progressive than the state, nor fully autonomous from it, and may be debilitatingly fragmented or polarised. And yet across the region, CSOs still disrupt regimes’ would-be panoptic scrutiny and authority, by presenting alternative spaces and premises for mobilisation and voice, through a range of modalities. Regardless of their ideological stance, CSOs’ political engagement represents the promise or exercise of diagonal accountability. This check interacts with vertical and horizontal dimensions and retains the potential for meaningful intervention – but need not pull in a liberal direction.
{"title":"Civil Society's Inconsistent Liberalism in Southeast Asia: Exercising Accountability Along Differing Diagonals","authors":"Meredith L. Weiss","doi":"10.1177/18681034231208021","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/18681034231208021","url":null,"abstract":"Predating but intensifying with the public health and economic crises COVID-19 sparked has been a political one, of democratic decline or autocratic consolidation, across much of Southeast Asia. Concerned actors and organisations from civil society have acted as firewalls against democratic decline or autocratisation, even as fellow civil society organisations (CSOs) have exerted countervailing, anti-democratic pressure. Indeed, CSOs may be no more progressive than the state, nor fully autonomous from it, and may be debilitatingly fragmented or polarised. And yet across the region, CSOs still disrupt regimes’ would-be panoptic scrutiny and authority, by presenting alternative spaces and premises for mobilisation and voice, through a range of modalities. Regardless of their ideological stance, CSOs’ political engagement represents the promise or exercise of diagonal accountability. This check interacts with vertical and horizontal dimensions and retains the potential for meaningful intervention – but need not pull in a liberal direction.","PeriodicalId":15424,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Current Southeast Asian Affairs","volume":"87 12 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-10-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"135780156","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-07-30DOI: 10.1177/18681034231190940
Petra Alderman
How can we ensure quality elections when the key institutions responsible for the organisation of polls are openly partisan and anti-democratic? In their 2017 paper, Birch and van Ham suggest that partisan electoral management bodies (EMBs) do not matter for the quality of polls so long as effective alternative oversight institutions exist, are active and independent. These institutions can make up for the EMBs’ shortcomings and ensure that a relatively high-quality election is still achieved. I argue that the notion of active and independent alternative oversight institutions leaves us guessing under which conditions it works. Adopting James’s network-based approach to electoral management, I show on the example of the 2019 Thai election that electoral governance networks that are characterised by high levels of political polarisation, the presence of entrenched authoritarian elites and formally independent EMBs that are too powerful make substitution untenable.
{"title":"Autocratic Electoral Management: Lessons From Thailand","authors":"Petra Alderman","doi":"10.1177/18681034231190940","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/18681034231190940","url":null,"abstract":"How can we ensure quality elections when the key institutions responsible for the organisation of polls are openly partisan and anti-democratic? In their 2017 paper, Birch and van Ham suggest that partisan electoral management bodies (EMBs) do not matter for the quality of polls so long as effective alternative oversight institutions exist, are active and independent. These institutions can make up for the EMBs’ shortcomings and ensure that a relatively high-quality election is still achieved. I argue that the notion of active and independent alternative oversight institutions leaves us guessing under which conditions it works. Adopting James’s network-based approach to electoral management, I show on the example of the 2019 Thai election that electoral governance networks that are characterised by high levels of political polarisation, the presence of entrenched authoritarian elites and formally independent EMBs that are too powerful make substitution untenable.","PeriodicalId":15424,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Current Southeast Asian Affairs","volume":"1 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.5,"publicationDate":"2023-07-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"43332335","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：