Javascript must be enabled to continue!
Regional elections in Russia: instruments of authoritarian legitimacy or instability?
View through CrossRef
AbstractThis study examines three rounds of regional assembly and gubernatorial elections in Russia that took place in September 2015, 2016 and 2017. In particular, it examines the ways in which the regime has manipulated the elections to guarantee the victory of United Russia. The study shows that the Kremlin has adopted a new electoral strategy. Rather than engaging in the risky business of outright fraud during the vote count, which was an important factor in sparking mass protests against the regime, in the wake of the 2011 elections to the State Duma, the authorities have decided to concentrate their efforts on preventing opposition parties and candidates from registering for the elections. Whilst other forms of electoral malpractice have continued to be practiced, such as coercing or bribing voters to turn out and vote for United Russia, promoting “carousel voting” (multiple voting by groups of mobilised citizens), or ballot stuffing, much more focus has been paid in these elections on manipulating the registration process in favour of United Russia. As is clearly demonstrated, scores of opposition candidates and party lists, have been prevented from competing because of problems with their registration documents. However, whilst this strategy has helped United Russia win large majorities in all of the gubernatorial and assembly elections, it has also created lacklustre and predictable contests, and this in turn has led to a sharp decline in turnout, particularly in the gubernatorial elections. There is a real danger that these low levels of turnout may gradually erode the legitimacy of United Russia, embolden the opposition, and threaten the stability of the regime.
Title: Regional elections in Russia: instruments of authoritarian legitimacy or instability?
Description:
AbstractThis study examines three rounds of regional assembly and gubernatorial elections in Russia that took place in September 2015, 2016 and 2017.
In particular, it examines the ways in which the regime has manipulated the elections to guarantee the victory of United Russia.
The study shows that the Kremlin has adopted a new electoral strategy.
Rather than engaging in the risky business of outright fraud during the vote count, which was an important factor in sparking mass protests against the regime, in the wake of the 2011 elections to the State Duma, the authorities have decided to concentrate their efforts on preventing opposition parties and candidates from registering for the elections.
Whilst other forms of electoral malpractice have continued to be practiced, such as coercing or bribing voters to turn out and vote for United Russia, promoting “carousel voting” (multiple voting by groups of mobilised citizens), or ballot stuffing, much more focus has been paid in these elections on manipulating the registration process in favour of United Russia.
As is clearly demonstrated, scores of opposition candidates and party lists, have been prevented from competing because of problems with their registration documents.
However, whilst this strategy has helped United Russia win large majorities in all of the gubernatorial and assembly elections, it has also created lacklustre and predictable contests, and this in turn has led to a sharp decline in turnout, particularly in the gubernatorial elections.
There is a real danger that these low levels of turnout may gradually erode the legitimacy of United Russia, embolden the opposition, and threaten the stability of the regime.
Related Results
Close Relationships in Close Elections
Close Relationships in Close Elections
Abstract
Close elections are rare, but most Americans have experienced a close election at least once in their lifetime. How does intense politicization in close ele...
Elections and political legitimacy in Kenya
Elections and political legitimacy in Kenya
AbstractThough it began independence as a deeply divided society after the trauma of Mau Mau, Kenya maintained one of the open political systems in Africa despite its formal one-pa...
Elections and election fraud in Georgia and Armenia
Elections and election fraud in Georgia and Armenia
Elections on unfair playing fields are common. Yet election day fraud can result in authoritarians losing office. The freer the environment, the more an authoritarian must rely on ...
The Nigerian elections of 1983
The Nigerian elections of 1983
AbstractIn 1979 Nigeria's military government held the first general elections for fifteen years. The politicians then resumed power under a republican constitution. The National P...
Trust in Elections
Trust in Elections
Abstract
The sometimes violent movement to reject the outcome of the 2020 U.S. presidential election draws our attention to the topic of trust in the institution of ...
The 1972 Elections
The 1972 Elections
Elections satisfy both the practical and the theoretical requirements of classical democratic theory if they answer one question only: Who shall rule? Judged by this test the Ameri...
Change in or of global governance?
Change in or of global governance?
AbstractMichael Zürn'sTheory of Global Governanceis an original, bold, and compelling argument regarding the causes of change in global governance. A core argument is that legitima...
How homophobic propaganda produces vernacular prejudice in authoritarian states
How homophobic propaganda produces vernacular prejudice in authoritarian states
An understanding of gendered homophobia in authoritarian states like Russia provides insights into intolerance as a function of propaganda. What is the effect on ordinary attitudes...