The constitutionalization of administrative law as a remedy for authoritarian rule: The case of Poland and the case of Germany

The continuity of the administrative apparatus is an indispensable element of any state, be it a democracy or an authoritarian regime. Given that permanency is an attribute of administration, any change from authoritarianism to democracy must therefore be followed by finding adequate corrective measures to transform public administration accordingly. In post-war Germany, it was the constitutionalisation of administrative law that had the pivotal role in attaining this goal. The paper aims at shedding more light on how to view and critique the Polish departure from the administration of the PRL-era authoritarian system in the context of the path followed by Germany.

Authoritarian Regime Stability in Uzbekistan under Patronal President Islam Karimov

This paper investigates the nature of Uzbekistan’s political system under President Islam Karimov through the lenses of patronal presidentialism to explain the factors conducive to the durability of the current regime. The paper argues that the longevity of the authoritarian regime in Uzbekistan can be best understood by a methodology that reconciles the propositions of institutional analysis of authoritarian rule with conventional methods of maintaining power such as coercion and patronage. Revealing the limitation of mainstream literature that overemphasizes neopatrimonialism and informality to understand domestic politics, the paper asserts that patronal president Islam Karimov assumed multiple instruments of power at the intersection of state and economy, which ensured regime stability in Uzbekistan until his death in 2016.

Wprowadzenie dyktatury wojskowej w wyniku zamachu stanu a kwestia międzynarodowego uznania rządu na przykładzie przewrotu wojskowego w Mjanmie z 1 lutego 2021 roku

The article reflects on the question of recognizing a government in international law in relation to the coup that took place in Myanmar on 1 February 2021. First, the author defines the recognition of a government, emphasizing that the institution of recognition applies exclusively to unconstitutional changes of governments. The circumstances of the coup in Myanmar are recounted, exhibiting that the authoritarian regime of the junta has been established in a manifest violation of provisions established in the Constitution adopted in 2008. Second, the competing criteria for recognition of a government in international law are discussed with reference to Tobar (favoring legitimacy) and Estrada doctrines (according to which effectiveness shall prevail). The author presents the evolution of opinions in scholarship and in the practice of states that occurred over the course of decades and led to the dominance of the latter concept. It is demonstrated that upon the application of the criterium of effectiveness with regard to the junta in Myanmar, it should be recognized as a body entitled to represent the state. Finally, acknowledging the tendency that originated in the 1990s to take into account the democratic norm as an alternative basis for recognition of a government or its denial, the author claims that in the lack of coherent and uniform state practice in that field, such a norm cannot create a normative obligation as a norm of customary international law, and therefore does not justify nonrecognition of junta.

Jaime Wright (1929-1999) e a defesa dos direitos humanos no contexto da resistência à ditadura militar no brasil | Jaime Wright (1929-1999) and the defense of human rights in the context of the military dictatorship resistance in Brazil

Este texto tem como objetivo analisar a vida e a obra de Jaime Nelson Wright (1927-1999), pastor presbiteriano, opositor do regime militar no Brasil e intelectual engajado na luta pela defesa dos direitos humanos. Foi uma das vozes que mais combateu a ditadura militar no interior do protestantismo brasileiro. Desde a deflagração do golpe em 1964, fez a opção político/religiosa de não aderir ao regime autoritário. Wright se vinculou ao movimento estudantil e dedicou-se ao amparo religioso/pastoral dos perseguidos políticos. Sua contribuição como intelectual, perpassa o campo religioso. Ele atuou junto aos organismos internacionais voltados para a defesa dos direitos humanos e fundamentais à vida e denunciou as atrocidades do regime militar no Brasil. Para a efetivação da pesquisa foram utilizadas as seguintes fontes: documentos e imagens disponibilizados pelo projeto Brasil: Nunca Mais; jornais da época: entrevistas e matérias; decretos e leis. Os dados revelados pelas fontes indicam que a vida e obra de Jaime Wright contribuíram decisivamente para o processo de redemocratização do Brasil. This text analyzes the life and work of Jaime Nelson Wright (1927-1999), a Presbyterian pastor, a fierce opponent of the military regime in Brazil, and intellectually engaged in the struggle for the defense of human rights. He was one of the voices that most fought the military dictatorship in the Brazilian Protestant movement. Since the outbreak of the coup in 1964, he made the political and religious choice of not joining the authoritarian regime. Wright joined the student movement and dedicated himself to the religious support of the politically persecuted. His contribution as a committed intellectual goes beyond the clerical field. He was involved with international organizations dedicated to the defense of human rights and the fundamental rights to life. He also exposed the military regime's atrocities. For the realization of the research were used the following sources: documents and images made available by the Project Brazil: Never Again; newspapers of the time: interviews and stories; decrees and laws. The data revealed by the sources, indicate the life and work of Jaime Wright contributed in a decisive way to the re-democratization process in the Brazilian society.

Authoritarian consolidation in Belarus: What role for the EU?

The aim of this article is to review the EU’s relations with Belarus over recent decades; to examine the patterns, opportunities and limitations of the EU’s policies vis-à-vis the authoritarian regime; and to evaluate the effectiveness of the EU’s responses to the brutal crackdown on civil society and political opposition following the flawed presidential elections in August 2020. It is argued that, despite its careful balancing act between principled approach and pragmatic engagement, the EU’s perception of the Belarusian regime has been overly optimistic and often influenced by the appeal of short-term geopolitical and economic gains. How should the EU deal with a consolidating and increasingly ruthless dictatorship at the heart of Europe? By way of conclusion, the article maps a number of ‘lessons learned’ and suggestions for future EU policy towards Belarus.

More than just a regime type: how Southeast Asian countries respond to COVID-19

As early as the pandemic has spread to Southeast Asian countries and elsewhere, observers have been tempted to associate regime type with COVID-19 responses. This trend encompasses the debate between democratic vs. authoritarian regimes that has been particularly helpful in identifying the normative basis to global pandemic responses. However, it leads into an inquiry whether the comparison of regime as part of variable isolation is scientifically viable in assessing the public policy, given the fact that the comparative matrix is vague. The comparison between democracy and the authoritarian regime will not bring a fair debate, but only to insinuate epistemological obstacle due to socially constructed dichotomy between the two even if the authoritarian regime has done any good practice. Furthermore, such a dichotomy only reflects a binary oversimplification of reality, which neglects an alternative explanation. Drawing on the framework of typology of COVID-19 responses by Greer et. al. (2020)–which includes four key foci, i.e., social policies and crisis management, regime type, formal political institutions, state capacity–this article will extend the framework by applying to the case of Southeast Asian countries, where these countries share similar structure and challenges, yet some countries arguably have been more successful.

Policing Protest in Russia

As Russia’s post-communist regime descends deeper into authoritarianism, protest politics has become a regular feature of the political landscape. As such, President Putin increasingly faces the “dictator’s dilemma”: How much coercion to deploy against protesters without incurring a social backlash against the regime? That question more generally is now part of analytical consideration in comparative scholarship on social movements and contentious politics. This article contributes to the comparative discussion, first, through an elaboration of an original conceptual typology of protest-policing strategies, applicable to democratic and authoritarian regime types. Second, the article applies this conceptual scheme to Russia to illustrate the variant protest-policing strategies employed during the post-communist period. The research explains how Putin’s authoritarian regime responded to the challenge of the dictator’s dilemma by enacting protest-policing reforms. Inspired by policing trends in the Western democracies, these reforms entail a shift from confrontation-based to containment-based tactics. The article shows variation and adaptation in the way protesters were policed across Russia’s transition from unconsolidated democracy to consolidated authoritarianism. Finally, the article suggests the consequences of protest-policing reform for the ruling regime.

The Political Economy of Autocratization

In competitive authoritarian systems, aspiring autocrats must win elections and marginalize the political opposition. In Belarus, President Alexander Lukashenko’s strategy for political hegemony heavily relied on socioeconomic co-optation, offering privileges to supporters and imposing sanctions on dissenters. In an economy dominated by the state, co-optation had a coercive effect on behavior. Without sizable areas of activity autonomous from the government, citizens could not defy or mitigate the cost of reprisals for openly supporting the political opposition. Through co-optation, Lukashenko weakened the opposition and built an authoritarian regime without resorting to extensive political violence, which could have undermined his claim of public legitimacy.

Authoritarianism from Above and Below: Exclusive Nationalism and the Turkish-Kurdish Conflict

The persistence of the Kurdish conflict in the Middle East has created deadly outcomes for Turkey’s democratization process and facilitated the emergence of an authoritarian coalition promoting exclusive nationalism from above. While consolidation of the authoritarian rule in Turkey occurred in parallel to the rise of exclusive nationalism and regional militarism, the electoral authoritarian regime is currently facing multiple challenges. As the economic recession deepens, a new wave of ethnonationalism targeting the Kurds and immigrants is in the making, but this time from below. The possibility of democratic change in the future seems to depend on to what extent main opposition parties will be able to distance themselves from exclusive nationalism and build a pro-democracy alliance including the People’s Democratic Party (HDP).