Autocratic Electoral Management: Lessons From Thailand

Petra Alderman*

*Corresponding author for this work

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

18 Downloads (Pure)

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.
Original languageEnglish
JournalJournal of Current Southeast Asian Affairs
Early online date30 Jul 2023
DOIs
Publication statusE-pub ahead of print - 30 Jul 2023

Keywords

  • electoral management
  • authoritarianism
  • election commissions
  • networks
  • Thailand

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'Autocratic Electoral Management: Lessons From Thailand'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this