Police Accountability and Citizen Oversight in Emerging Democracies in Asia

2015 ◽  
pp. 139-158
Author(s):  
MAHESH NALLA
Keyword(s):  
Emerging Democracies ◽  
Police Accountability

Dictators and Democrats

2016 ◽  
Author(s):  
Stephan Haggard ◽  
Robert R. Kaufman
Keyword(s):  
First Century ◽  
Organizational Capabilities ◽  
Mass Mobilization ◽  
Democratic Transitions ◽  
Authoritarian Rule ◽  
Emerging Democracies ◽  
Regime Changes ◽  
Political Landscape ◽  
Transitions To Democracy ◽  
Multiple Routes

From the 1980s through the first decade of the twenty-first century, the spread of democracy across the developing and postcommunist worlds transformed the global political landscape. What drove these changes and what determined whether the emerging democracies would stabilize or revert to authoritarian rule? This book takes a comprehensive look at the transitions to and from democracy in recent decades. Deploying both statistical and qualitative analysis, the book engages with theories of democratic change and advocates approaches that emphasize political and institutional factors. While inequality has been a prominent explanation for democratic transitions, the book argues that its role has been limited, and elites as well as masses can drive regime change. Examining seventy-eight cases of democratic transition and twenty-five cases of reversion to autocracy since 1980, the book shows how differences in authoritarian regimes and organizational capabilities shape popular protest and elite initiatives in transitions to democracy, and how institutional weaknesses cause some democracies to fail. The determinants of democracy lie in the strength of existing institutions and the public's capacity to engage in collective action. There are multiple routes to democracy, but those growing out of mass mobilization may provide more checks on incumbents than those emerging from intra-elite bargains. Moving beyond well-known beliefs regarding regime changes, this book explores the conditions under which transitions to democracy are likely to arise.

Role Model or Role Expansion? Popular Perceptions of the Military in Tunisia

2021 ◽  
pp. 106591292110014
Author(s):  
Holger Albrecht ◽  
Michael Bufano ◽  
Kevin Koehler
Keyword(s):  
Role Model ◽  
Public Support ◽  
Democratic Consolidation ◽  
Transition To Democracy ◽  
Emerging Democracies ◽  
Civil Military Relations ◽  
Role Expansion ◽  
Nationally Representative ◽  
Military Relations ◽  
The Military

This article introduces a theory on military role expansion in emerging democracies and poses a broad question: who wants the military to adopt which role in society and politics? Drawing on an original, nationally representative survey conducted in Tunisia, the article explores people’s preferences for the military to remain a security provider or serve in government and contribute to policing protests. Findings reveal that public support for military role expansion is substantial and varies across political cleavages. We test hypotheses to account for cleavages driven by the country’s authoritarian past versus partisan divides during Tunisia’s transition to democracy. Findings indicate that popular support for military role expansion is driven by anti-system sentiments prevalent in contemporary Tunisian politics: while voters prefer the military as a role model for security provision, non-voters support its enhanced role in politics. These observations have ample implications for the research programs on civil–military relations and the dynamics of democratic consolidation. Tunisia’s experience warrants greater attention to anti-system attitudes caused by people’s disillusionment with democratic procedures. In turn, authoritarian legacies do not appear to play a prominent role during such challenging transitions toward democratic consolidation.

Safeguarding Democracy: Powersharing and Democratic Survival

2017 ◽  
Vol 111 (4) ◽  
pp. 686-704 ◽  
Author(s):  
BENJAMIN A.T. GRAHAM ◽  
MICHAEL K. MILLER ◽  
KAARE W. STRØM
Keyword(s):  
Minority Group ◽  
Armed Forces ◽  
Civil Conflict ◽  
Civilian Control ◽  
Electoral Accountability ◽  
Emerging Democracies ◽  
Post Conflict ◽  
Ethnic Quotas ◽  
Democratic Survival ◽  
Constitutional Protections

Democracy is often fragile, especially in states recovering from civil conflict. To protect emerging democracies, many scholars and practitioners recommend political powersharing institutions, which aim to safeguard minority group interests. Yet there is little empirical research on whether powersharing promotes democratic survival, and some concern that it limits electoral accountability. To fill this gap, we differentiate between inclusive, dispersive, and constraining powersharing institutions and analyze their effects on democratic survival from 1975 to 2015 using a global dataset. We find sharp distinctions across types of powersharing and political context. Inclusive powersharing, such as ethnic quotas, promotes democratic survival only in post-conflict settings. In contrast, dispersive institutions such as federalism tend to destabilize post-conflict democracies. Only constraining powersharing consistently facilitates democratic survival regardless of recent conflict. Institution-builders and international organizations should therefore prioritize institutions that constrain leaders, including independent judiciaries, civilian control of the armed forces, and constitutional protections of individual and group rights.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document