Human rights and the 1976 presidential election

Author(s):  
Umberto Tulli
2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Nina Kolarzik ◽  
◽  
Aram Terzyan

The rule of Alexander Lukashenko in Belarus has created one of the most resilient authoritarian regimes in post-communist Europe. Meanwhile, the turmoil triggered by the 2020 presidential election has put in the spotlight the mounting challenges facing Lukashenko’s authoritarian rule. This paper investigates the state of human rights and political freedoms in Belarus, focusing on the main rationale behind the turmoil surrounding the 2020 presidential election. It concludes that the political crisis following the elections is the unsurprising consequence of Lukashenko’s diminishing ability to maintain power or concentrate political control by preserving elite unity, controlling elections, and/or using force against opponents.


Subject Costa Rica's presidential election. Significance A shock result in the February 4 election has triggered a run-off between two diametrically opposed candidates of the same name (but not related) -- evangelical politician Fabricio Alvarado Munoz and former Labour Minister Carlos Alvarado Quesada. Neither candidate looked like a realistic prospect until the closing weeks of the campaign, when a controversial ruling on same-sex marriage polarised a substantial section of the electorate on that single issue. With just under two months until the second round, both candidates will now focus on shoring up their support and appealing to a large pool of undecided voters. Impacts A move towards the centre would likely see Alvarado Quesada pick up undecided voters put off by Alvarado Munoz’s evangelical support base. Alvarado Munoz would struggle to remove Costa Rica from the Inter-American Court of Human Rights. The Court's headquarters would have to move if Costa Rica did leave its jurisdiction. Whoever wins the run-off, Costa Rica’s relationship with the Court will be debated, potentially undermining its ability to enforce rulings.


2018 ◽  
Vol 32 (3) ◽  
pp. 283-292 ◽  
Author(s):  
Cécile Fabre

AbstractIt is widely alleged that President Putin's regime attempted to exercise influence on the 2016 U.S. presidential election. It is known that its Soviet predecessors funded Western communist parties for decades as a means to undermine noncommunist regimes. Similarly, the United States has a long history of interfering in the institutions and elections of its Latin American neighbors, as well as (at the height of the Cold War) its European allies. More recently, many believe that, absent U.S.-driven assistance, the Democratic Opposition of Serbia would have lost the 2000 Yugoslavian presidential election to Slobodan Milošević. As those examples suggest, attempting to subvert the democratic elections of a putatively sovereign country is a time-honored way of bending the latter's domestic and foreign policy to one's will. In this paper, I focus on the state-sponsored, nonviolent, nonkinetic subversion of nationwide elections (for short, subversion) through campaign and party financing, tampering with electoral registers, and conducting disinformation campaigns about candidates. I argue that, under certain conditions and subject to certain constraints, subversion is pro tanto justified as a means to prevent or end large-scale human rights violations.


2021 ◽  
Vol 2(163) ◽  
pp. 243-265
Author(s):  
Dariusz Dudek

The author presents a constitutional regulation of the Polish model of presidential election and states of emergency and relates them to the specific situation of the COVID-19 pandemic in 2020. Then, he analyses in detail the content of the recommendations of the European Commission for Democracy through Law (Venice Commission) of 26 May 2020 (Respect for Democracy, Human Rights and the Rule of Law during States of Emergency – Reflections), regarding the elections in states of emergency and its significance for the presidential election in Poland in 2020. The opinion positively evaluates all the Commission’s recommendations and considers that the existing and new exceptional Polish electoral law regulations respecting the principles of democracy and rule of law are fully complaint with them.


Asian Survey ◽  
2005 ◽  
Vol 45 (1) ◽  
pp. 14-20
Author(s):  
Kyung-Ae Park

North Korea marked the beginning of 2004 with a flurry of diplomatic offensives, which led to its participation in two six-party talks, two summit meetings with China and Japan, and its first-ever military talks with South Korea. However, this brisk diplomacy went into a holding pattern in the second half of the year with no substantial progress in the nuclear talks. The stalemate was reinforced by passage of the U.S. North Korean Human Rights Act, South Korea's nuclear experiments, and hostile rhetoric toward North Korea voiced in the U.S. presidential election campaigns.


2018 ◽  
Vol 5 (3) ◽  
pp. 205316801879475 ◽  
Author(s):  
Joshua Holzer

I argue that when presidents are able (or forced) to cobble together broad-based coalitions to win an absolute majority, their administrations are less likely (and less able) to violate human rights, in comparison to presidential administrations whose victories are the result of a narrow plurality. Consistent with this argument, I find cabinets comprised of a higher percentage of individuals from parties other than that of the president to be associated with greater government respect for human rights. Additionally, I find that in the years after a presidential election won by an absolute majority, states are more likely to experience an increase in government respect for human rights, in comparison to the years after a presidential election won by a mere plurality. Utilizing an original dataset of cabinet composition for 35 presidential democracies spanning from 2001 to 2011, this study concludes that it may prudent for non-majoritarian systems to consider adopting a mandatory majority rule so to encourage the types of conciliatory alliances that appear to promote high human rights respect.


Legal Studies ◽  
2009 ◽  
Vol 29 (1) ◽  
pp. 127-158 ◽  
Author(s):  
Edwin Odhiambo Abuya

This paper evaluates the impact of a substandard presidential election. Using Kenya as a case study, it reviews the 2007 vote. The paper contends that there is a link between free and fair elections and the enjoyment of human rights. It argues that in order for states in Africa to walk the (desired) democratic path, sitting governments must comply with internationally recognised standards. While focusing on the violence that rocked the country, the paper analyses the causes and implications of the much-disputed presidential poll. Also evaluated is the role the international community can play in resolving a crisis. The paper concludes by asserting that a rule of law culture must be embraced if human rights and democracy are to flourish in Africa.


2013 ◽  
Vol 55 (2) ◽  
pp. 26-51 ◽  
Author(s):  
Randy Sunwin Uang

AbstractCrime and violence have made public security a major concern to voters throughout Latin America. Existing research predicts that such widespread concerns should make public security a consistently successful issue in presidential election campaigns. Yet recent empirical reality in Latin America has been more varied. This study argues that success on public security is not so automatic. Human rights concerns combine with low trust in security forces to make success on security contingent on the correct conditions. Two key conditions affect the use of the issue: the degree to which security threats are organized and the degree to which recent repression has occurred. Then, winning votes depends on two further conditions: having a civilian background and a campaign that balances security with other issues. Together, these factors explain the dramatic variation in success, and suggest a key change from Latin America's past.


2017 ◽  
Vol 27 (2) ◽  
Author(s):  
S M Khodaei

I was born in 1985 in Tehran, Iran. I started my political and human rights activism at university by founding a secular student association and publishing student magazines. Because of this, the university disciplinary committee did not allow me to study for two semesters. I was arrested by intelligence officials in 2008 and spent 38 days in solitary confinement in Evin prison (Tehran). That was the first time I was faced with psychological torture. During the repression after the presidential election in 2009, I was arrested for a second time. It was by the Revolutionary Guards (‘Sepah-e- Pasdaran’) and this time I spent about nine months in solitary confinement. This time marked me in many senses. Finally, because of those two incidents, I was convicted by the Revolutionary Court and sentenced to prison. After about six years in Section 350, Evin Prison, I was freed in 2014.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document